When did an oppo player waking over the mark not incur a 50M penalty? Twice last night, and nothing happened. Why have new rules when you can't get the old ones right! Poor Jimmy Stynes would rolling in his grave!
-
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.
Round 2 - Other Games
- Thread starter craig
- Start date
The freeze on the mark rule is so *smile*.
The players hate it. the fans hate it. and the umpires cant umpire it.
they dont call play on consistently. Often the frozen player is at right angles to the player with the ball. some players freeze instantly, some dont freeze at all, they just amble about.
it basically makes 18 V 17 for 10 seconds.
I hate it and cant wait till a coach works out how to scam it and expose it for the farce that it is.
oh, and brad Scott is complete *smile* a parody of himself.
Yes, it does make it 18 v 17 for 5 seconds each time...x about 100 times.
That is 500 seconds..so around 8 minutes each game.
This is the problem defensively and why it will benefit chip and mark teams ..ie Cats.
We will need a suitable response to counter it.
That is 500 seconds..so around 8 minutes each game.
This is the problem defensively and why it will benefit chip and mark teams ..ie Cats.
We will need a suitable response to counter it.
I know it's been said ad nauseum but regardless I feel the need to say it again..Chris Scott is a complete *smile*.
That's the big problem. Should be changed to "the player with the ball is deemed to have played on as soon as he departs from his line", not when the umpire is able to get the words out. Just as the quarter ends when the umpire hears the siren, not when he signals. Would allow the player on the mark to follow his instincts and relieve pressure on the umpires.
Might end up just as messy but players standing like statues while the opponent scoots away is not in the spirit of the game.
A crap bi-product of the freeze rule,
is the players and the umps have no idea where the line of approach is,
so the players or the umps have no idea when they've come off the line
and when to anticipate or call "play ON"
and we are getting a farcical mixed bag of outcomes.
like when the ruthless old capitalist at the milk bar would load up your 20c worth of lollies with musk sticks, freckles and pineapple lumps.
is the players and the umps have no idea where the line of approach is,
so the players or the umps have no idea when they've come off the line
and when to anticipate or call "play ON"
and we are getting a farcical mixed bag of outcomes.
like when the ruthless old capitalist at the milk bar would load up your 20c worth of lollies with musk sticks, freckles and pineapple lumps.
Last edited:
The freeze rule is a complete farce. The holding the ball 'rules' are a complete joke. Sack sHocking.
I'm still annoyed this morning. Last night's display underlined what most of us already thought, Geelong stink, their culture is horrible, Chris Scott is like a petulant spoilt kid, he actually said 'they started it!'. That is what infants say when challenged. The AFL and the umps also stink. AFL headlines hosing it down only looking at the free not paid at the death, but was far more to it. Umpiring was generally terrible across the board, but so many pivotal frees not paid to Brisbane and paid to Geelong.
I'm struggling to remember a game when the umps had a bigger influence. Umps got them up the ground from defence to kick the winner, all those frees were barely there or not there, then didn't pay THE blatant free at the death. That is a 12 point turnaround at the death! That is not taking into account the rest of the terrible decisions throughout the night, Guthrie handing it to Selwood for a goal after being spun 720 degrees in a tackle, Hawkins dropping it cold after a fantastic tackle and spilling for another goal, Selwood rugby league pass, still scratching my head about that one...
Terrible.
I'm struggling to remember a game when the umps had a bigger influence. Umps got them up the ground from defence to kick the winner, all those frees were barely there or not there, then didn't pay THE blatant free at the death. That is a 12 point turnaround at the death! That is not taking into account the rest of the terrible decisions throughout the night, Guthrie handing it to Selwood for a goal after being spun 720 degrees in a tackle, Hawkins dropping it cold after a fantastic tackle and spilling for another goal, Selwood rugby league pass, still scratching my head about that one...
Terrible.
Selwood has spent his whole career initiating contact with opponents using his head. That’s why he is always bleeding from the forehead. The skin there must be wafer thin by now.
He also bullies the umpires. Watch him closely. He never stands on the spot that the umpire points to as the mark, if he thinks he should have a free kick, he just stops and sets up to take it, he sneaks in cheap shots on opponents, dares the ump to challenge him on it and runs away so he can’t be pinged, he argues the toss on every free against his team and he verbals umpires non-stop.
Good luck to him for being able to do it and get away with it but no other player ever gets away with any of this stuff. He has basically made the umpires his servants.
The umpires get caught up in the celebrity of the game and make allowances for certain players. Buddy has a “kicking arc” which is never called play-on. They even let him run around after the siren and shoot for goal. Hawkins can push anybody he likes in the back and it is just a show of strength. Dangerfield‘s hits are always “accidental.” Chris Scott can openly criticise umpires and try to influence tribunal decisions. And Selwood gets to play by his own rules.
Isn‘t it funny how most of these examples involve Geelong?
can't say much beyond what has already been said about last night -
Chris Scott ? what an imbecile, what a non-example.. and the Cats a reflection of their coach ..
the game itself was a low point in AFL history for me, across the board.
A shambles verging on fraudulent
Chris Scott ? what an imbecile, what a non-example.. and the Cats a reflection of their coach ..
the game itself was a low point in AFL history for me, across the board.
A shambles verging on fraudulent
Don't worry the fawning over Cheatbong is coming to an end. So is their time in top half of the ladder.
The only positive is that Geelong were poor. Brisbane were woeful in the first half, bereft of confidence and goalkicking yips, but were within 20 points, I couldn't believe it at the time. Brisbane were woeful in the first half, patchy in the second, crucified by the umps, away from home, and Geelong only won by a point.
Brisbane didn’t adapt quickly enough to Geelongs mark and kick style of play. Slow build up from the back. It was only in the last quarter where they closed down the space and destroyed Geelong on the outside with pace.
