Kane Cornes | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • If you are having trouble logging in to the forum please contact admin@puntroadend.com // When reseting your password or awaiting confirmation please check that your email is correct and also your junk/spam emails.
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Kane Cornes

Number8

Tiger Matchwinner
Oct 12, 2010
519
1,054
Melbourne
One of the things Cornes is normally pretty good at is stating his piece without fervour.

You mightn't always agree with him (I certainly don't) but at least he doesn't get on his soapbox and overdramatise.

HOWEVER, his analysis of the Hartlett deliberate out-of-bounds is way off beam. He has let his emotions take over on this occasion.

Cleary, Edmund, Lloyd and Whateley have all been direct in their support for the decision. Even Taylor in commentary on the night was unreserved in his criticism of Hartlett's act.

Cornes reckons there were two (not one, but two!) Power players 'in the vicinity' of Hartlett. Well, Jonas may have been adjacent but he was nowhere near the boundary line when Hartlett slapped the ball out. Rockliff was nearer but was not close enough to even bother putting out a hand to accept the ball.

But the real indictment on Hartlett comes when you consider his options.

Take possession then aim to dish off a controlled handball. Hit the ball with one hand to either side where players were positioned. Knock the ball down to try and force a stoppage. He could even have better disguised a deliberate attempt to get the ball out by taking possession and allowing his momentum to take him over the line.

But no. He panicked and chose to slap the ball in a direct line to the boundary.

Don't worry about the technicality of players in the vicinity; they are irrelevant in this case. There was no effort to get the ball to them!

Deliberate every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

King Kong

Tiger Superstar
Aug 26, 2016
2,418
825
The best bit of Friday nights win was how much it has burnt fireman Kane. Karma for all his hate, vitriol and biased BS directed at us this year.

Their flog that does the bow and arrow can GAGF'd also. Who the hell does he think he is giving Lynch a gob full? He has done nothing with a nothing team so far. Lynch is a club captain, premiership player and won a prelim final on his own back. Have some respect you man bun wearing bogan clown.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 8 users

waiting

Tiger Legend
Apr 15, 2007
9,627
4,101
melbourne, victoria
One of the things Cornes is normally pretty good at is stating his piece without fervour.

You mightn't always agree with him (I certainly don't) but at least he doesn't get on his soapbox and overdramatise.

HOWEVER, his analysis of the Hartlett deliberate out-of-bounds is way off beam. He has let his emotions take over on this occasion.

Cleary, Edmund, Lloyd and Whateley have all been direct in their support for the decision. Even Taylor in commentary on the night was unreserved in his criticism of Hartlett's act.

Cornes reckons there were two (not one, but two!) Power players 'in the vicinity' of Hartlett. Well, Jonas may have been adjacent but he was nowhere near the boundary line when Hartlett slapped the ball out. Rockliff was nearer but was not close enough to even bother putting out a hand to accept the ball.

But the real indictment on Hartlett comes when you consider his options.

Take possession then aim to dish off a controlled handball. Hit the ball with one hand to either side where players were positioned. Knock the ball down to try and force a stoppage. He could even have better disguised a deliberate attempt to get the ball out by taking possession and allowing his momentum to take him over the line.

But no. He panicked and chose to slap the ball in a direct line to the boundary.

Don't worry about the technicality of players in the vicinity; they are irrelevant in this case. There was no effort to get the ball to them!

Deliberate every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.
200 %.
Throwing motion. No attempt. The other DOOB where somewhat harsh considering the conditions but that was blatant free.
Consistency is what we got Cornes. Take those PA glasses off.
PA were fortunate they were within 6 points because really it was a 3-4 goal loss as ours was earlier in the year a 5 goal loss.
That’s a massive turnaround in my eyes.

And oh, he picked us....to win the GF.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

tigermouseau

Tiger Superstar
Apr 19, 2004
1,180
300
How about Hartlett drawing a free kick for being cleaned up by his teammate? (OK Marshall was pushed into him by Graham, but the umpire clearly announced the free was for high contact.) Look at the replay and there is no high contact, yet Hartlett lay on the ground with his hands over his head. Bruce called it courageous; someone else might label it staging.

Hartlett the plastic tough guy came unstuck in a big way.
I thought the same but on replaying it it could possibly have been Grimes (hip). The tv footage was obscured by port player. That’s the only Richmond player it could’ve been otherwise it was his own player.
 

tigerman

It's Tiger Time
Mar 17, 2003
13,274
4,471
The best bit of Friday nights win was how much it has burnt fireman Kane. Karma for all his hate, vitriol and biased BS directed at us this year.
Not only is he dirty about Hartlett's deliberate out of bounds, he's putting the boots into Hinkley for not tagging Dusty.
Cornes hurt, is my joy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

LeeToRainesToRoach

Tiger Legend
Jun 4, 2006
28,800
6,635
Melbourne
I thought the same but on replaying it it could possibly have been Grimes (hip). The tv footage was obscured by port player. That’s the only Richmond player it could’ve been otherwise it was his own player.
Yeah I guess it could've been Grimes. But no head contact. Hartlett had turned side on and the contact was to the shoulder and spun him around. A head knock from Grimes at full steam would've ended him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Mr Brightside

Tiger Legend
Jul 1, 2005
20,599
3,638
Wang
Surley KaneO would have made comment of the *smile* weak flog who threw his Bundy over Lynch ? don’t anyone tell me Kaneo didn’t jump at the chance to condem a Port supporter
 
  • Angry
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

seven

Super Tiger
Apr 20, 2004
21,842
4,416
Not only is he dirty about Hartlett's deliberate out of bounds, he's putting the boots into Hinkley for not tagging Dusty.
Cornes hurt, is my joy.
He is certain that Port we’re going to win the flag. Port and him got ahead of themselves just like the crows 2017
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

leon

Tiger Legend
Apr 6, 2014
6,330
1,724
Can’t believe there has been zero comment on when McKenzie walked the ball over the boundary immediately after the Ebert incident in the same spot (Lambert pocket) later in the last quarter. Not one comment either on here and certainly not on broadcast, too busy extolling the (very) courageous act by Ebert ..... but it was the most deliberate OOB of the night.
Astute comment, T44. DOB by McKenzie by how the rule was applied on the night, and especially against us virtually all year e.g. the one paid against Balta. Was it in the Saints' final?
On KK's bulldust opinion, my view is that if you are going to dispute any one decision, then go back and examine all of them for the whole game. You will find many missed, several wrongly paid, for/against both sides. Each is equally important - that is just obvious - and why you cannot apply the rules all game and then suddenly ignore them at the death. Isn't it enough for Cornes that PA got 5 more frees on the night!? They got a major advantage anyway.

It was a DOB and throw without a shadow of doubt by Hartlett. One-eyed, sour-grape bias; no sportsmanship by KK. Just how fitting was it that it was Hartlett after he mouthed off pre-game at Tom. He shat himself, had plenty of time for a legit HB to either of two team-mates.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users

waiting

Tiger Legend
Apr 15, 2007
9,627
4,101
melbourne, victoria
Astute comment, T44. DOB by McKenzie by how the rule was applied on the night, and especially against us virtually all year e.g. the one paid against Balta. Was it in the Saints' final.
On KK's bulldust opinion, my view is that if you are going to dispute any one decision, then go back and examine all of them for the whole game. You will find many missed, several wrongly paid, for/against both sides. Each is equally important - that is just obvious - and why you cannot apply the rules all game and then suddenly ignore it at the death. Isn't it enough for Cornes that PA got 5 more frees on the night!? They got a major advantage anyway.

It was a DOB and throw without a shadow of doubt by Hartlett. One-eyed, sour-grape bias; no sportsmanship. Just how fitting was it that it was Hartlett after he mouthed off pre-game at Tom. He shat himself, had plenty of time for a legit HB to either of two team-mates.
Karma at work again..
 

tiger76

Tiger Matchwinner
Mar 26, 2014
708
699
Surley KaneO would have made comment of the *smile* weak flog who threw his Bundy over Lynch ? don’t anyone tell me Kaneo didn’t jump at the chance to condem a Port supporter
Give him a break, he's not going to have a pop at family
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users

123kid

Tiger Superstar
May 1, 2016
2,014
1,241
Why is Kane Cornes the number one topic on Grand Final week?

His opinions are as real as a wrestling match between Santa and the tooth fairy.
 

leon

Tiger Legend
Apr 6, 2014
6,330
1,724
Why is Kane Cornes the number one topic on Grand Final week?

His opinions are as real as a wrestling match between Santa and the tooth fairy.
Because everyone is enjoying sticking it up him! Oh! Hang on. Maybe I'll rephrase that.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 user

CarnTheTiges

This is a REAL tiger
Mar 8, 2004
19,888
2,581
Victoria
How about Hartlett drawing a free kick for being cleaned up by his teammate? (OK Marshall was pushed into him by Graham, but the umpire clearly announced the free was for high contact.) Look at the replay and there is no high contact, yet Hartlett lay on the ground with his hands over his head. Bruce called it courageous; someone else might label it staging.

Hartlett the plastic tough guy came unstuck in a big way.
I’ve seen that incident a few times and it’s pretty obvious that the high contact was between 2 Port players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users