View Full Version : Why would a player go for the ball?
snowycats
22 Apr 2007, 16:59
After watching a lot of football this year you would believe that a player going for the ball in a tight situation - where there is a pack - is more likely than to get a free against him if he gets the ball and is then jumped on
There is a real problem emerging - with the umps now favouring the players that actually "sweat" on the hard nuts who go in and get it.
Evil Betty
22 Apr 2007, 17:02
**** lpayers get tackled before they ever get their hand on the ball and are given holding the ball against them
Not using it as an excuse because Hawthorn copped one or two themselves, but **** that last quarter especially Chappy's 2 holding the ball decisions against were nothing short of pathetic.
Don't worry about umpires ruining the game, they officially have
Wouldn't surprise me if we eventually see 2 or 3 blokes just standing around waiting for someone else to get the ball.
There is no reward under the current rule for players to put their ass on the line and get the thing.
Chappy was crucified for trying to get the ball.
cats2rise
22 Apr 2007, 17:07
The worst one was against Blake, I can't actually remember when it was but it was an absolute shocker. What do they want players to do? Stand around the ball in a circle and wait for someone to soccer it out. What the shit (just coz i can) is the game coming to?
nananana catman
22 Apr 2007, 17:08
The umpires dont make the rules, they have to apply them. Not their fault really.
catempire
22 Apr 2007, 17:09
The umpires dont make the rules, they have to apply them. Not their fault really.
It's the 4th game I've watched this weekend and the application of the rule today was extremely different from every other match I've watched.
It was a totally different interpretation by the umprires today.
nananana catman
22 Apr 2007, 17:13
It was a totally different interpretation by the umprires today.
Yep, they knew todays game was going to have plenty of stoppages, so they were probably told to crack down on it.
CatmanForever
22 Apr 2007, 17:26
It's the 4th game I've watched this weekend and the application of the rule today was extremely different from every other match I've watched.
It was a totally different interpretation by the umprires today.
they went a bit too far with it really. There were clear situations on both sides that had no prior opportunity that were paid holding the ball.
catempire
22 Apr 2007, 17:27
Yep, they knew todays game was going to have plenty of stoppages, so they were probably told to crack down on it.
There were probably 100% more stoppages yesterday at the MCG but they probably paid 20% of the holding the ball decisions.
TheTimeCometh
22 Apr 2007, 18:10
umprires
sorry, i was board after the lose.
catempire
22 Apr 2007, 18:20
Your an idyit
The umpires dont make the rules, they have to apply them. Not their fault really.
Exactly. If you want to blame someone, get on the radio tomorrow morning and have a go at silly old Kevin Bartlett. Someone who's so horribly out of touch with today's game should not be the head of the rules committee.
snowycats
22 Apr 2007, 18:42
Your an idyit
Well I really am impressed with that - well educated too.
My point is that the game has now become ridiculous witth umps favouring the players hanging back and sweating on a free by jumping on a player with the courage to go in hard and get it.
Put Sam Newman on the rules committee
TheTimeCometh
22 Apr 2007, 18:51
today's holding the ball/no prior opportunity decisions really challenged my love of this game.
Mooney_d'King
22 Apr 2007, 18:55
The umpires dont make the rules, they have to apply them. Not their fault really.
It's their fault when they pay free kicks WRONGLY.
catempire
22 Apr 2007, 18:57
Well I really am impressed with that - well educated too.]
I'm glad you got the point to that post. :rolleyes:
The umpires dont make the rules, they have to apply them. Not their fault really.
Their interpretation is the problem.
scottydeewah
22 Apr 2007, 21:39
I like it now how you can tackle a bloke, grab the ball and hold it and if you can do that and still hold the player you are tackling you get a free kick. Its like a reward for having big arms, wtf is that about?
I like it now how you can tackle a bloke, grab the ball and hold it and if you can do that and still hold the player you are tackling you get a free kick. Its like a reward for having big arms, wtf is that about?
Yeah, that is crap. The guy that drags it in to the bloke they're tackling should be the one penalised. Its bullshit.
TheTimeCometh
23 Apr 2007, 12:33
crawford at one point had the ball pinged in the gap between his ankles and knees, with him kneeling between the cats player and the ball while appealing for the free - this is a blight on the game as much as flooding.
funny thing is it might as well have been called 'holding the ball' with the way the decisions seemed to be randomly handed out.