Yeah, you see plenty of players allowed their 30 seconds when more than 50m out. Saw one in the Sydney/Hawthorn and the goal was kicked.
I don’t think Gawn was in the protected zone though.
-
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.
Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!
- Thread starter iLoVeNeWmAn
- Start date
I don’t think Gawn was in the protected zone though.
The umpire's decision was absolute rubbish, or my explanation of why he called play on is rubbish?
Oh dear, my opinion is crap. Nice way to make sure that people feel belittled in making comments on a public forum.
ok, there are two things going on here. i don't visit this thread very often as I am not a conspiracy theorist.
1) the umps are wary of us. it's true. we have a reputation for nudging the line and got away with a lot 2017-19. it isn't conscious, there's no nefarious plot, the umps simply know we push the legal limits. whether that's true or not now is irrelevant. umps are human.
2) dimma said it himself - our tackling and contest technique is poor. this is a legacy of the successful 2017-19 period, where more rugged contact was allowed.
1) the umps are wary of us. it's true. we have a reputation for nudging the line and got away with a lot 2017-19. it isn't conscious, there's no nefarious plot, the umps simply know we push the legal limits. whether that's true or not now is irrelevant. umps are human.
2) dimma said it himself - our tackling and contest technique is poor. this is a legacy of the successful 2017-19 period, where more rugged contact was allowed.
Both.
You said:
Really?
I am watching the Ess v Coll game right now. 2 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter and an Essendon player is beyond 50 (just, like Balta was) and lining up for goal. He is afforded the opportunity to do so. Not 5 minutes earlier a Collingwood player was given the chance to kick for goal with the man on the mark on the 50 line.
So, why was Balta adjudicated differently?
In what way was the umpire correct to call play on, you have not made the case for the umpire's decision, yet you say he was right?
DS
I said that the umpire was right when he decided that Balta wasn't having a legitimate shot for goal. I have never said that his decision was right. In fact what I said was "The man on the mark was 55 out. I'm not justifying the umpire's decision, just replying to the OP who said that it couldn't have been play on. It was play on, according to the umpire"
Killing me. It a free you can’t control in most instances once you tackle. Again penalising a guy doing his job and rewarding a guys who drops the ball. Not in the spirit of the game.
Got away with a lot? Gee carter we still got murder in 17-19 mate. What’s the free kick differential 17-22? Nearly 500.
It's not a natural thing for an AFL player to do, just stand on the mark, *smile* rule. These blokes have been playing for years, they have been taught to man the mark from U12's, some junior coaches might of spend hours teaching this art and I believe it was an art, gone. The penalty for not standing or you could say statue on the mark, 50M and most cases a goal. It is a hard rule on players and the penalty is even harder.
Turned on the Anzac Day game today to see what the score was. Degoey had no prior opportunity, gets pinged with one arm held and tries his best to get rid of it. Holding the ball…goal.
Commentators had nothing to offer except that he should have just dropped it !! That’s what the game and rules has come to.
The other thing was Degoey put his arms out in amazement after being pinged. Should have been a 50 metre penalty under the Brad Scott rule
Turned it off then
Commentators had nothing to offer except that he should have just dropped it !! That’s what the game and rules has come to.
The other thing was Degoey put his arms out in amazement after being pinged. Should have been a 50 metre penalty under the Brad Scott rule
Turned it off then
Watched half the game, the no prior, HTB, HTM, dragged it in, incorrect disposal was all a raffle. As bowee posted above, the HTM has emerged as another big problem to add to the pile.
woeful
I'm impressed with the umpire's ability to read Balta's mind, I wasn't previously aware that umpires had this ability and I can only presume you have a similar ability. Noah Balta was within range and, as I have pointed out, towards the end of the 3rd quarter today there were 2 examples of a similar situation (in fact, the Essendon player was in pretty much the same spot) and both players were afforded the opportunity to kick for goal without hindrance. This is a clearly wrong decision. I don't understand how you can argue that somehow it could be deemed that Balta was not lining up for goal. Additionally, Gawn had already entered the protected zone and been warned rather than penalised. If you want to defend umpires choose your example more wisely.
Yep, that was a bad decision. No idea how DeGoey had prior opportunity there. The player who actually goes for the ball, rather than going for the tackle, should have some leeway, which is why the prior opportunity rule exists. That was a silly decision, the commentators effectively said it was silly, but their solution for a player in DeGoey's situation was pathetic.
DS
