Game Day - Tigers v Swans

[tigerlove]

I reckon that was the most obvious one in a while. When he received the handball there was no direct pressure on him, he paused and invited the pressure etc. If that was HTB it would have been paid as having prior opportunity. He had ample time to handball or kick it long, just because they had no-one out there, shouldn't mean that he can choose that the safest thing is to take it over. The focus has to be on keeping the ball in play IMO.

He wasn't tackled so I'm not sure what HTB has to do with it. As long as they consistently start paying it I'm fine with it but I thought it was extremely lucky based on history. He was technically pushed over the line. I see that on the boundary line all the time and a throw in.

 

[craig]

Arse goal from a couple of poor decisions from Tigers there

 

[craig]

The Chol good work lad

 

[tigerlove]

The Chol good work lad

Killing it atm

 

[MD Jazz]

WTF was Kam doing?

 

[JimJessTorp]

Kennedy out for the game. Knee.

 

[tigerlove]

We seem to have a lot of time. Swans pressure looks poor.

 

[MD Jazz]

Cmon Jack kill this fraud

 

[mrposhman]

He wasn't tackled so I'm not sure what HTB has to do with it. As long as they consistently start paying it I'm fine with it but I thought it was extremely lucky based on history. He was technically pushed over the line. I see that on the boundary line all the time and a throw in.

I wasn't saying it was HTB, but if anywhere on the ground someone had as much time as he had there, and was then tackled then it would be HTB and no-one would have any issue as there was a prior opportunity to keep the ball in. Should be no different to where you are on the ground, if there is an alternative to keep the ball in you should be expected to take it.

 

[craig]

Ah FFS

 

[craig]

Hamish the pro Afl Anti Richmond ..........clown.

 

[tigerlove]

I wasn't saying it was HTB, but if anywhere on the ground someone had as much time as he had there, and was then tackled then it would be HTB and no-one would have any issue as there was a prior opportunity to keep the ball in. Should be no different to where you are on the ground, if there is an alternative to keep the ball in you should be expected to take it.

Agree but they never pay it, that's my point. See a few cases like that every game. Anyway it's done, let's see how they adjudicate in the future.

 

[tigerlove]

This holding the ball thing sucks. They shouldn't be able to change the interpretations at their whim during a season.

 

[craig]

Here come the Umps .........what a *smile* rule that is, all its gonna create is tacks on once someone gets the footy and the opposition will keep the ball in to get an easy free.

 

[craig]

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

 

[eddazol]

Holding the ball is a joke.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Hamish the pro Afl Anti Richmond ..........clown.

He’s the king of the useless thought bubble. Does not belong.

 

[mrposhman]

This holding the ball thing sucks. They shouldn't be able to change the interpretations at their whim during a season.

and right on quarter time, one of the swans does the same thing, but pushes it between his legs, it was in possession so shouldn't be able to tap it on, has to be disposed of correctly, all thats said is "its out, it's out". Yes INCORRECT DISPOSAL

 

[JimJessTorp]

C'mon @eZyT - Lift!!!!

 

[Rfc4Ever]

We seem to have a lot of time. Swans pressure looks poor.

Time and space is what we didn't have in our losses and the 1st half against Collingwood.