Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 73 to 80 of 80

Thread: #AFL Round 9 Weekly Discussion Thread

  1. #73
    Senior Player Swansongster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St Kilda West
    Posts
    1,194
    Quote Originally Posted by dejavoodoo44 View Post
    Historically, my only real problem with the rule, was that they arbitrarily decided that it no longer existed, during the 2016 GF.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Oh, I probably wouldn't have paid the Talia one, given that he was sliding away from the Dogs player, and that should minimise the chance of injury.
    I can still picture myself in a bay of Swans fans all standing and screaming with our arms in the air in a collective "WTF" display at that one.

  2. #74
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,045
    Quote Originally Posted by stevoswan View Post
    While it was bought in with good intent after the Rohan injury, which admittedly was shocking, it was a knee jerk reaction and is now probably the worst rule in football IMO.....at least because of the way it is being adjudicated. Far too much, it penalises the player who arrives first for the ball, ie; who's object is the ball and rewards the slower (and suddenly conveniently clumsy) player arriving second, who can just fall over the top and receive his ill-earned free kick.

    Making the Talia decision worse, was that the two players were going in basically the same direction and Talia had no choice but too try and knock the ball out of the path of the approaching Bulldog player, who was attempting to kick the ball forward. My initial reaction was 'that's kicking in danger to Talia'.......

    It's a contact sport and players are going to fall over occasionally. It's a stupid interpretation of a rule which is 'hazy' at best. It should only be paid when the sliding player is coming in from front on and 'forcefully', as the rule states, like Thomas on Rohan......side on and same direction smothering or denying possession, like the Talia one, should be play on.

    The final insult is for the AFL to give the Talia decision the 'tick of approval' thereby setting a mindless precedent for the future......but the AFL are becoming very good at that.
    We can agree to disagree. Talia chose to go to ground and, in doing so, risked injury to the Webb's legs. Maybe I'm over sensitive having witnessed Rohan's injury but I've also seen Hannebery badly injure his PCL and Papley possibly lucky not to injure his after opponents chose to go to ground.

    The AFL DVD makes it quite clear that it wants players to remain on their feet wherever possible, and that by choosing to go to ground, they risk giving away a free.

    The only ones I think are silly is where both players are close to stationary such that the contact to the standing player's legs is minimal. In these cases the standing player is often the one who moves towards the contest. But the Talia one is, IMO (and the AFL agrees) a classic example of what players aren't allowed to do. I don't see the AFL giving it a tick of approval as setting a "mindless precedent for the future". Rather it is them confirming that an umpire correctly adjudicated the rule in this instance.

  3. #75
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Castlemaine, Vic.
    Posts
    2,031
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    We can agree to disagree. Talia chose to go to ground.
    I've also seen Hannebery badly injure his PCL and Papley possibly lucky not to injure his after opponents chose to go to ground.
    The AFL DVD makes it quite clear that it wants players to remain on their feet wherever possible, and that by choosing to go to ground, they risk giving away a free.
    He had to, to get to the ball first.....stay on his feet and Webb kicks the ball at least into the goal square or at best, through for a goal.

    Hanners and Paps were hit front on, where I agree the rule is correct (even though Hanners didn't receive the free.....but that's another story!).

    Also, players don't always 'choose to go to ground', sometimes they have to.

    The AFL DVD is just the AFL promoting what is wrong.

    As for agreeing to disagree, I think we actually agree that this rule is often misinterpreted and wrongly adjudicated......which, I think, makes it a bad rule. It's almost up there with the lunacy of the 'protected zone'.

  4. #76
    Senior Player dejavoodoo44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    2,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Swansongster View Post
    I can still picture myself in a bay of Swans fans all standing and screaming with our arms in the air in a collective "WTF" display at that one.
    One of those games, when watching at home, the neighbours probably thought that I was having a strange domestic with myself.

  5. #77
    Senior Player dejavoodoo44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    2,009
    One story that I thought was interesting, was an analysis of the tracking data, in regards to the running of the players for the season so far. For us, the guy who averages the most distance per game, is Nick Smith, with 14.2km. He's followed by Mills with 14.1km and Heeney at 14.0km per game. And in regards to the fastest pace recorded, Rohan tops the charts with a speed of 35.3km/h. He's followed by Rampe and Franklin, with respective speeds of 34.9 and 34.6km/h. While I would have had Rohan and Franklin up there, I was a little surprised that Rampe is so quick.
    Rohan had the second fastest recorded speed of the comp. The fastest surprised me. I thought that it may have been someone like Jetta, Saad or Hunt, but it was actually Majak Daw, with a top speed of 35.6km/h.

  6. #78
    Regular in the Side
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    802
    Quote Originally Posted by Swansongster View Post
    I can still picture myself in a bay of Swans fans all standing and screaming with our arms in the air in a collective "WTF" display at that one.
    I must admit that I turned the TV off in frustration at that point, despite it being a GF. I turned it back on about 5 minutes later after trying to compose myself (I bet the neighbours were wondering where the yelling was coming from).

  7. #79
    Which shows you can have blinding speed , size and athletic ability and still not be that good . Footy smarts are very difficult to teach.

  8. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by Swansongster View Post
    I can still picture myself in a bay of Swans fans all standing and screaming with our arms in the air in a collective "WTF" display at that one.
    I'll never forget that day. I was surrounded by heaps of Melbournians who were barracking for the "brave dogs".

    I've been disappointed with losses before, including grand finals. This match, however, was an entirely different scenario. The continuous ignoring of "handball" throws, the allowing of flicking the ball between the legs, the dangerous diving on the ball decisions (only against us) and the kicking in danger decisions (only against us) were indisputable and supported by the free kick ratio.

    In my 52 years of supporting the Swans, I've never seen a match umpired worse than this. The fact that it was a grand final, makes it even worse.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO