Round Whatever. The Other Games.

[RoarEmotion]

Yes, the name is definitely misleading and confusing. The purpose of the rule is nothing like it was originally whe it was dealing with backman scrubbing the ball 10 metres sideways over the line.

It should be called Putting the ball out of bounds without a reasonable excuse or something similar.

Can you get a permit for putting it out of bounds?

 

[eddazol]

Yes, the name is definitely misleading and confusing. The purpose of the rule is nothing like it was originally whe it was dealing with backman scrubbing the ball 10 metres sideways over the line.

It should be called Putting the ball out of bounds without a reasonable excuse or something similar.

The problem is the AFL make the rules up as they go.

 

[royce67]

Drag Stanton out b y the hair from Carkton!!!

Should this be in the drunken posts thread?

Some of your best work is featured there, BB!

 

[AstuteTiger]

So if the crows win which is looking likely, they will leapfrog the pies and thus hand GWS pick 2

 

[mrposhman]

Didn't watch the game, Ezy so I have no idea what happened but I'll give you the general criteria for a DOOB.

Firstly, only judge the result. Not whether it was a skill error or under pressure. We don't adjudicate ideas, we adjudicate results.

So if you cause the ball to cross the boundary, there has to be a legitimate alternate option you were trying to execute. That can really only be scoring or having a team mate in the vicinity of the ball who legitimately could have received it.

If you apply those criteria then you'll have your answer as to the correctness of the decision.

I didn't see the end of the game, but when I was flicking back to the footy, it was the final quarter. Melbourne inside Geelongs D50. Atkins gets the ball, looks forward, decides not to play the ball, turns around and tries to move towards the boundary line, is tackled by at Brayshaw. Realises he is going to be pinned HTB (it was pretty blatant), so as he's facing the boundary, he just drops the ball on the boot and kicks it out.

For me, was probably the most blatant DOOB I've seen this season. Umpire called for it to be thrown in.

I'm not sure about the 2 in the last minute but it was obvious that the umps were not paying this for both sides.

 

[craig]

Geez footy without a crowd is sheizen.

Theres a message there for the AFL in regard to how they are disenfranchising the fans.

 

[Bill Haverchuck]

Whats so scary about melbourne is how young they are.

7 players in last nights side 21 or under and most of their other quality in their mid 20s...

Very good chance they are the next dynasty , given how much i hate them hopefully i am wrong!

 

[craig]

Drugs using Redman and Ridley as their Broad and Vlastuin types across the back half.

Not the same players but playing similar roles.

I hope the Dogs brain them.

Back to the NRL for me close fiish Broncos and Warriors 18 each 14 to go

Just cant be interested in the AFL

 

[AngryAnt]

As I keep saying, AFL is a rort. It's a rigged competition. What further proof needed? How can this be allowed? How could it happen - just this week and match?
I saw a poster saying Q4 went for 40 mins. Thought he must have been totally joking. How long did it really go for, anyone know at hand?

Yep. We owe our last three flags this rigged competition. Thanks Gil!!!

 

[Ridley]

So if the crows win which is looking likely, they will leapfrog the pies and thus hand GWS pick 2

They’re going from pick 2 to pick 4 if they win. Very interesting as from all reports the 2nd best player in the draft is Jason Horne who is a South Aussie. Although it probably doesn’t matter as North have a pick before them so will get him if bid on Daicos and/or Darcy is matched.

 

[CarnTheTiges]

Whats so scary about melbourne is how young they are.

7 players in last nights side 21 or under and most of their other quality in their mid 20s...

Very good chance they are the next dynasty , given how much i hate them hopefully i am wrong!

If they do, wait and watch the AFL make up rules to stop them. The AFL don’t want dynasties.

 

[Tass]

Whats so scary about melbourne is how young they are.

7 players in last nights side 21 or under and most of their other quality in their mid 20s...

Very good chance they are the next dynasty , given how much i hate them hopefully i am wrong!

Who have had an unprecedented charmed run with injury this year. Let’s see how they go when some of their better players are afflicted with the injury curse.

 

[DavidSSS]

I see what you are saying and the answer to those questions is yes and no (although I'd prefer probably yes and probably no), but you are asking the wrong question.

We don't umpire intentions, we umpire outcomes. So you have to strip away everything apart from what actually happened. Both players kicked the ball and it went over the line. Only Selwood had a reasonable excuse in terms of a team mate there he could have been giving the ball to.

If the Brayshaw one isn't a free then we can say the next kick isn't a free either. He didn't mean to kick it out on the full, it just came off the side of his boot, so lets just throw it in to be fair. Or if a player grabs the ball in congestion and snaps a point then we need to give him a goal because he didn't mean to miss but the pressure forced him.

It really comes back to your yes/no matrix but with different questions.

Did the player cause the ball to go OOB? Both yes.

Did the player have a reasonable alternate option he was trying to execute? Selwood yes, Brayshaw no.

We don't umpire intent?

Nice sentiment but completely wrong.

The rule states:

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player who:
(a) Kicks the football Out of Bounds On the Full;
(b) Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Boundary Line and does not demonstrate sufficient intent to keep the football in play; or
(c) fails to immediately hand the football to the boundary Umpire or drop the football directly to the ground once the football is Out of Bounds.

We do umpire intent, it says so in the rules.

Out on the full is irrelevant because the word "intent" does not appear in that clause.

DS

 

[bigwow]

As I keep saying, AFL is a rort. It's a rigged competition. What further proof needed? How can this be allowed? How could it happen - just this week and match?
I saw a poster saying Q4 went for 40 mins. Thought he must have been totally joking. How long did it really go for, anyone know at hand

 

[DavidSSS]

So the AFL need to get their minions to stop calling it deliberate out of bounce.

Absolutely, the rule puts the onus on the player who forces the ball over the boundary line, but, the intent hurdle is lower - it isn't intent to put the ball out of bounds, it is insufficient intent to keep it in.

DS

 

[AngryAnt]

yep, the "insufficient intent" rule is an abomination of the same class as the "stand" rule.

 

[craig]

Who have had an unprecedented charmed run with injury this year. Let’s see how they go when some of their better players are afflicted with the injury curse.

Melbourne lose Gawn and they are gawn.

 

[Harry]

Gee the crows are gonna lose Horne the way they'e going.

 

[shad]

Melbourne lose Gawn and they are gawn.

Should be in the coincidence thread.

 

[eZyT]

Melbourne lose Gawn and they are gawn.

any side loses their No.1 ruck and theyre stuffed.

but melbourne less so,

luke jackson is a star