But he never could. The master of the glorious behind when it comes to goal-kicking. Lets the team down.
-
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 4: the root canal games.
- Thread starter Redford
- Start date
Geez...even Catrick Priccs reckons they should've reviewed. There's one less kiss on the arse from a flog. Naughty boy.
Since it didn't involve a score, I don't think they can check if the kick was touched
Is it just me or are there more hangers on in the rooms after an AFL win than ever ? Chicks galore, family members, kids, friends, mates, agents…suppliers ? (just sayin). It’s endless.
On Thursday night Windsor sang the Toorak song after the game holding a baby. WTF ? He’s 18 !
Where are all these people when they lose ?
On Thursday night Windsor sang the Toorak song after the game holding a baby. WTF ? He’s 18 !
Where are all these people when they lose ?
Would've been a few Blues fans celebrating in the Umpires rooms after the game today surely
There's cheating and then there's Carlton cheating. Talk about being ripped off. Disgusting umpiring and they cost freo the game. Carlton did not win that game by any good play.
When it suits them the players want the place to be treated as a workplace. In What other job do your parents turn up and pat you on the back when you clock off?
Freo won the free kick count 16-12. The touch wasn't obvious and can't be reviewed. There should have been a 50 for dissent to Cottrell.
Freo handed the game to the blue.
If we thought Cartoon got kissed on the arse by their loverboy flogs, get ready for the Pussies!!!!
is it a double header or two games in close proximity?
do the freo and blues file out to let the cat dogs in?
do the freo and blues file out to let the cat dogs in?
Double header. Donate to South Australia. Funny hearing the Paddle Pops played their game and went home quick today.....you would've thought they'd hang around a bit. This Gather Round is really nothing but a night out at Macca's.
Like a night at Maccas it always leaves you full of regret the next day.
Reacharound.................... not everyones a winner .........................
I watched the 2nd half of the Purple Blues V Cartoon and, not for the first time, the match was just continually determined by dubious and, in my eyes, soft free kicks. Both teams were gifted these, and in a grinding, fairly tedious match with very few bursts of flowing, creative play. Yep, cue the 'war of attrition' or 'like watching paint dry' cliches.
But if you didn't do something miraculous with the ball in a split-second playing down back you were pinged unmercifully for an easy opposition shot at goal from near directly in front 15-25m out. The ridiculous inconsistency of what constitutes 'prior opportunity' is just a blight on the game. IMHO, historically, and in essence, these free kicks are often not in the tradition or spirit of the game period. Goals in the true spirit of the game were earned by great marking, team-play or individual brilliance from Royce Hart to Eddie Betts.
Now, if you're smart, you just wait to pounce on an opponent that has to attempt to take possession in order to clear the ball from defence. You can even knock it out of their hands but, under these absurd modern rules, if he's arbitrated by this modern iteration of what goes for rules and umpiring you get an easy goal kick. Sometimes a player is called for HTB after taking possession for a slit-second; but often it's arbitrated as a ball-up. The umpires are the gods of the game now and they decide so much about results.
This game is another that was determined by umpires. Most games now are heavily affected by these arbitrary, inconsistent and all-powerful decisions - don't dare dispute the power of the AFL's officials. Players are expected to behave like complacent choir-boys, totally unlike previous generations of AFL players who were given far more scope to dispute or vent, because in other times the umps used to understand them and the difficulties and stresses of playing this game, they had probably played themselves at least when young. Unlike the modern clones who seem to really lack much empathy with players or the spirit of it being a tough contest ... between the teams playing, not about their own egos.
Not for one moment do I think there was bias to either team; it was just all about the umps running the game their way, no matter what - determining the outcome with their excessive powers. The first thing players learn and are trained to do is they must gain possession of the ball. But one free awarded to Freo was for a Bloos player who did, as the charge-sheet says, 'drag the ball in' - instead of knocking it out for maybe a quick possession and goal for Freo! He then tunneled the ball out behind himself, or it ended up there, but this is still defined as in possession and he's penalised for a soft goal. Hasn't he actually got it out from under himself, no longer in possession? It's often absurd the decisions made. Both teams received easy goals from such harshly defined decisions.
Then, at the end, a most likely touched ball is determined to be play-on for a Bloos' goal with no review. That was the game, but another goal gifted for dissent. Just to confirm who is in charge of the game. Who are the game's all-powerful controllers and determiners (on behalf of the AFL and the totalitarian code of rules and penalties implemented over the Gil and Shocking era of power}.
I can't believe fans are going to keep watching, following and paying significant money for this abuse of a true sporting contest. In it's great eras, players' performances, and coaches', determined outcomes far more that this travesty of our true AFL code.
When are people going to wake up and stop paying to go watch the little men in fluorescent-green decide a game that used to be about skill, courage and team endeavour, rather than a motley set of pathetic 'rules' which has produced more and more repetitive and mundane, same-same games that are their's to control?
Rant over ... but I'm finding it hard to persist following a game I used to think the world's best.
But if you didn't do something miraculous with the ball in a split-second playing down back you were pinged unmercifully for an easy opposition shot at goal from near directly in front 15-25m out. The ridiculous inconsistency of what constitutes 'prior opportunity' is just a blight on the game. IMHO, historically, and in essence, these free kicks are often not in the tradition or spirit of the game period. Goals in the true spirit of the game were earned by great marking, team-play or individual brilliance from Royce Hart to Eddie Betts.
Now, if you're smart, you just wait to pounce on an opponent that has to attempt to take possession in order to clear the ball from defence. You can even knock it out of their hands but, under these absurd modern rules, if he's arbitrated by this modern iteration of what goes for rules and umpiring you get an easy goal kick. Sometimes a player is called for HTB after taking possession for a slit-second; but often it's arbitrated as a ball-up. The umpires are the gods of the game now and they decide so much about results.
This game is another that was determined by umpires. Most games now are heavily affected by these arbitrary, inconsistent and all-powerful decisions - don't dare dispute the power of the AFL's officials. Players are expected to behave like complacent choir-boys, totally unlike previous generations of AFL players who were given far more scope to dispute or vent, because in other times the umps used to understand them and the difficulties and stresses of playing this game, they had probably played themselves at least when young. Unlike the modern clones who seem to really lack much empathy with players or the spirit of it being a tough contest ... between the teams playing, not about their own egos.
Not for one moment do I think there was bias to either team; it was just all about the umps running the game their way, no matter what - determining the outcome with their excessive powers. The first thing players learn and are trained to do is they must gain possession of the ball. But one free awarded to Freo was for a Bloos player who did, as the charge-sheet says, 'drag the ball in' - instead of knocking it out for maybe a quick possession and goal for Freo! He then tunneled the ball out behind himself, or it ended up there, but this is still defined as in possession and he's penalised for a soft goal. Hasn't he actually got it out from under himself, no longer in possession? It's often absurd the decisions made. Both teams received easy goals from such harshly defined decisions.
Then, at the end, a most likely touched ball is determined to be play-on for a Bloos' goal with no review. That was the game, but another goal gifted for dissent. Just to confirm who is in charge of the game. Who are the game's all-powerful controllers and determiners (on behalf of the AFL and the totalitarian code of rules and penalties implemented over the Gil and Shocking era of power}.
I can't believe fans are going to keep watching, following and paying significant money for this abuse of a true sporting contest. In it's great eras, players' performances, and coaches', determined outcomes far more that this travesty of our true AFL code.
When are people going to wake up and stop paying to go watch the little men in fluorescent-green decide a game that used to be about skill, courage and team endeavour, rather than a motley set of pathetic 'rules' which has produced more and more repetitive and mundane, same-same games that are their's to control?
Rant over ... but I'm finding it hard to persist following a game I used to think the world's best.
Last edited:
