Richmond VS Purple Frocks GAME DAY

[tigerlove]

I reckon if it hits the post and comes back into play it should be play on. Theoretically the ball hasn't left the field of play/ How much more exciting would that potentially make it?

 

[YinnarTiger]

I reckon if it hits the post and comes back into play it should be play on. Theoretically the ball hasn't left the field of play/ How much more exciting would that potentially make it?

They trialled that in one of the pre-season comps a while back. Can't recall why it got the thumbs down.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

I post on it every year. I reckon this the first time I've got a positive response. ;D

 

[Baloo]

The only reason I can think that it's not in place is for kicks higher than the posts. But I'm a fan of the rugby/soccer/NFL/Gaelic etc rule where if the ball hits the post and comes back out it's play on, if it hits and goes through the goals, it's a goal,, etc.

 

[Tigertough1974]

Two things i truly hate

1. Games like the Melbourne one
2. Games that we win but lose on the scoreboard

This game really hurt both my getting over it factor and our top 4.

On a side note had a good day at an Aussie pub in Chiangmai with Changy Tiger

 

[jb03]

The only reason I can think that it's not in place is for kicks higher than the posts. But I'm a fan of the rugby/soccer/NFL/Gaelic etc rule where if the ball hits the post and comes back out it's play on, if it hits and goes through the goals, it's a goal,, etc.

Most games do not have a score for missing but we do. You can't hit the post and not at least get a point when a worse kick would give you that.

 

[Baloo]

Most games do not have a score for missing but we do. You can't hit the post and not at least get a point when a worse kick would give you that.

Of course you can. It's just another minor rule change that we've grown used to having. I actually see a change like that to be less of a change to the fabric/culture of our game than reducing the quarter length or reducing the players to 16 per side.

 

[jb03]

Of course you can. It's just another minor rule change that we've grown used to having. I actually see a change like that to be less of a change to the fabric/culture of our game than reducing the quarter length or reducing the players to 16 per side.

You'd be pretty stiff to need a point to win with a kick after the siren and you hit the post and it bounced back into play.

 

[Baloo]

You'd be pretty stiff to need a point to win with a kick after the siren and you hit the post and it bounced back into play.

it'd add to the theatre. If this rule was in place a decade or two ago you can bet that scenario would have happened to Richo plenty of times

 

[evo]

Just to rub salt into the wound, Fyfe is taking this week off.

 

[TOT70]

Just to rub salt into the wound, Fyfe is taking this week off.

It wasn't that long ago that a game against Richmond would have been the perfect opportunity for a star in similar circumstances to take the week off. He played, which is a sign of growing respect for the team.


And they needed all hands on deck too.

 

[CarnTheTiges]

If they allowed more points for a poster because of degree of difficulty what would Schulz's double poster against Carlton earlier this year be worth?

 

[JimJessTorp]

If they allowed more points for a poster because of degree of difficulty what would Schulz's double poster against Carlton earlier this year be worth?

Excellent point.

If the only way a footy can hit both posts is if the angle of the first collision is on the inside of the first goal post, then; given the width of a goal post half way up is 12cm and the width of the goal itself is 640cm then the chances of a 14cm wide footy colliding with a goal post and having a chance to then go onto the second is (2*12cm/((2*12cm)+640cm)/100/1) = 3.6144%. Now given that there is porabably only a 1degree arc where teh bouce off the first post can result in a collision with the second post then we get a 1 in 180 chance that the ball can hit the second post. So our liklihood becomes 1/180*3.6144% = 0.0002%. So if Jack R kicking from directly in front (85% conversion), leaving 15% for the ball to hit a post or to miss completely... the chance that the shot will hit both posts is 0.00003%. Now that does not take into account the more likely event that the missed shot will be a behind after missing the goal post. So that is another 3.6144% which gives us a chance that Jack will hit both posts of 0.00001084%.

So if my calcualtations are correct...

A goal is worth 6 points. A poster (with the chance to hit the post measured at 7.2288% (double the chance to hit the post with the bounce on the side towards the other post)) is worth 100%/7.2288%*6 points = 83 points.

That means that a double poster is then worth 7.2288%/0.00001084%*6 points = 4,001,180 points.

Seems legit.

;D

 

[Stylo]

Excellent point.

If the only way a footy can hit both posts is if the angle of the first collision is on the inside of the first goal post, then; given the width of a goal post half way up is 12cm and the width of the goal itself is 640cm then the chances of a 14cm wide footy colliding with a goal post and having a chance to then go onto the second is (2*12cm/((2*12cm)+640cm)/100/1) = 3.6144%. Now given that there is porabably only a 1degree arc where teh bouce off the first post can result in a collision with the second post then we get a 1 in 180 chance that the ball can hit the second post. So our liklihood becomes 1/180*3.6144% = 0.0002%. So if Jack R kicking from directly in front (85% conversion), leaving 15% for the ball to hit a post or to miss completely... the chance that the shot will hit both posts is 0.00003%. Now that does not take into account the more likely event that the missed shot will be a behind after missing the goal post. So that is another 3.6144% which gives us a chance that Jack will hit both posts of 0.00001084%.

So if my calcualtations are correct...

A goal is worth 6 points. A poster (with the chance to hit the post measured at 7.2288% (double the chance to hit the post with the bounce on the side towards the other post)) is worth 100%/7.2288%*6 points = 83 points.

That means that a double poster is then worth 7.2288%/0.00001084%*6 points = 4,001,180 points.

Seems legit.

;D

:clap

It'd be the footballing equivalent of catching the golden snitch

 

[YinnarTiger]

Jack Dyer once remarked that some bloke was on such an acute angle the ball was in danger of getting wedged between the goalposts before it sailed through.

 

[DLR]

If we had picked Pavlich instead of Fiora we would have won

Not if the two things we have in bucket-loads had happened

[list type=decimal]
[*]Bad Luck
Bad Management
[*]
[/list]

 

[ninjahaha]

Taken this long just to be calm enough to post.

:veryupset

Golakicking!
Umpires! That free to Pavlich was right in front of us. There was 10000 tiger fans about to jump the fence!
Houli took the cheese!

:veryupset

Massive loss! Gutted! :frustration

 

[AngryAnt]

A very disappointing result
We should have won that game
Some players continually let us down in big games n some just not up to it
Until they are upgraded we will not be a top 4 contender

Wrong.