Some quite obvious ones against May and Tomlinson today in our forward 50. One in the goal square.Just give me consistency ya *smile* pricks. HTB doesn’t exist when we tackle.
PLAY ON.
Nope, only against us
Some quite obvious ones against May and Tomlinson today in our forward 50. One in the goal square.Just give me consistency ya *smile* pricks. HTB doesn’t exist when we tackle.
The Hopper 50m penalty was especially disappointing.
Hopper didn't take control away from the player in an attempt to strategically waste time. He was guilty of choosing not to speed things along by assisting - but that's okay. You're allowed to opt out from assisting the opposition player in retrieving the ball.
It was an example of an umpire fixating on a simplified visual cue even when that visual cue was not an example of the deeper problem they were originally trying to solve. Happens all the time. We're seeing an illusion of consistency, and it's a natural consequence of forcing black and white interpretations on rules that were originally grey.
i.e. schizo moment. Happens too often against a team called Richmond. I'd love to hear what these scumbags hear in those earphones.The Hopper 50m penalty was especially disappointing.
Hopper didn't take control away from the player in an attempt to strategically waste time. He was guilty of choosing not to speed things along by assisting - but that's okay. You're allowed to opt out from assisting the opposition player in retrieving the ball.
It was an example of an umpire fixating on a simplified visual cue even when that visual cue was not an example of the deeper problem they were originally trying to solve. Happens all the time. We're seeing an illusion of consistency, and it's a natural consequence of forcing black and white interpretations on rules that were originally grey.
WTF?? There's been thousands of occasions where oppo places ball on ground for other team to pick up. Where's the law for obligation to hand over?Nope he took the all and then realised it was a free to them and dropped it
Youve had to give the ball back to the opposition on the full for 30 years or more
Once he grabbed it he had to give it back to them he cant get away with no knowing it was their kick because he wouldnt have let it go he would have handballed it to our players
WTF?? There's been thousands of occasions where oppo places ball on ground for other team to pick up. Where's the law for obligation to hand over?
I show you? Go and watch games....including suburban. Where have you been?You show me one where a player picks up the ball after a free is paid and just puts it on the ground
I show you? Go and watch games....including suburban. Where have you been?
This is not a case where Hopper held the ball long enough to pass it over. He only held it for 1 second.
25m a perfect compromiseIt would be great if the 50 was shelved as a ridiculous rule from the past, the game is not better for it even if it goes your way. Bring back the 15.
Even a 15m penalty can be telling. Remember the 1987 preliminary final?It would be great if the 50 was shelved as a ridiculous rule from the past, the game is not better for it even if it goes your way. Bring back the 15.
This was least of any poor decisions ten others in the last q for egYeah and he has to give the ball back to the right person on the full not put it on the ground
Do you seriously not realise that has been a rule since the 80s
I dont know what to tell you chief youve been watching with your eyes shut
If you love pedancy (must be TBR's ghost writer on here or something....) then it's your problem.Yeah and he has to give the ball back to the right person on the full not put it on the ground
Do you seriously not realise that has been a rule since the 80s
I dont know what to tell you chief youve been watching with your eyes shut
The most pedantic 50m penalty for an action that had no impact on the game you’ll ever see.The Hopper 50m penalty was especially disappointing.
Hopper didn't take control away from the player in an attempt to strategically waste time. He was guilty of choosing not to speed things along by assisting - but that's okay. You're allowed to opt out from assisting the opposition player in retrieving the ball.
It was an example of an umpire fixating on a simplified visual cue even when that visual cue was not an example of the deeper problem they were originally trying to solve. Happens all the time. We're seeing an illusion of consistency, and it's a natural consequence of forcing black and white interpretations on rules that were originally grey.
If you love pedancy (must be TBR's ghost writer on here or something....) then it's your problem.
Watch from 42secs, he barely touched it for 1 bloody second and the smug flog calling out "50 m, you dropped it" as it was an actual possession.
The most pedantic 50m penalty for an action that had no impact on the game you’ll ever see.
Then Gawn can take a step and kick the ball down the field after the whistles gone, but that’s ok.
Consistency yeah
Stuff all impact on the game.....bloody hell.90 per cent of 50s are pedantic and have stuff all impact on the game not an excuse for players doing dumb things though
Didnt stand there, do this fast enough, said something wrong, pointed somewhere and so on