Autopsy AFL 2024 Opening Round 0 - Suns v Tigers Sat March 9th 4:20pm AEDT (Heritage)

[Mister B]

Would be one of the hardest, bravest players in the comp
Slight frame and doesn't take a backward step ever

Sounds like he fits right into the category of opposition favourite. As long as he doesn't rip it up against my mob.

 

[SplintWhisky]

It’s was obvious it was deliberate but doesn’t the rule say under pressure?

I think all football fans know that the rules, as written, don't mean anything. Biggest example is the deliberate out of bounds

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

That's an insane call. Just wrong.

It's the correct decision. When he got the ball the nearest Gold Coast player was outside 9m. The Richmond player invited the pressure.

18.11.1 Spirit and Intention
Players shall be encouraged to keep the football in play.
18.11.2 Free Kicks - Deliberate Rushed Behinds
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who
intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line
or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:
(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;
(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;
(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or
(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line
on the full.
18.11.3 Taking Free Kick
A Free Kick awarded under Law 18.10.2 shall be taken from the middle of the Goal Line
if the football crossed the Goal...

Those two are why it's deliberate.

 

[Foucault1989]

It's the correct decision. When he got the ball the nearest Gold Coast player was outside 9m. The Richmond player invited the pressure.



Those two are why it's deliberate.

Good post. Great umpiring. Dumb football. That's Joel Bowden stuff Broad

 

[deck]

No. The rule is if you have someone as close as inside the box to you, and you are being pressured, you can put it back. It was that way all last year. It's a change of the rules (for the better) but do the players even know?

But the player wasn't when he got the ball. He sat back a waited for the tackler to do so and then ran it over.

 

[juss]

Lost this game in a few different ways, but hopefully some signs that Yze learns from mistakes, which I can deal with.

 

[SplintWhisky]

It's the correct decision. When he got the ball the nearest Gold Coast player was outside 9m. The Richmond player invited the pressure.



Those two are why it's deliberate.

Needs to he stickied as it will be a debate for the next few days

 

[YeoShuey]

It’s was obvious it was deliberate but doesn’t the rule say under pressure?

Wasn’t under pressure the whole time. Most non-deliberate calls require immediate pressure which was not seen in this case. So I am happy with that being paid.

 

[Struggle]

No. The rule is if you have someone as close as inside the box to you, and you are being pressured, you can put it back. It was that way all last year. It's a change of the rules (for the better) but do the players even know?

But under that interpretation you could just stand still for as long as you want on the line then step over once someone is within 9m and it's not deliberate?

 

[hawkman]

It’s was obvious it was deliberate but doesn’t the rule say under pressure?

He wasn't under pressure when he first had it. Otherwise a player could stand there for as long as they want until pressure comes and then rush it

 

[Rankine2Rachele]

This umpiring is absolutely diabolical

Situation normal, then?

 

[GoldbergsGold]

Really awful subjective rule, they need to make it more objective and clear. I would prefer all rush behinds just consequence in a ball up or throw in from the goal square.

 

[citizen-erased]

Hope that interpretation sticks all season but we know it won't

Exactly why the rule was brought in

Umpire read it perfectly

 

[St 07]

But the player wasn't when he got the ball. He sat back a waited for the tackler to do so and then ran it over.

He invited the pressure that allows him to make a rushed behind because that's how to exploit the rule. Which was a rule

 

[windyhill]

Love big Wittsy.

 

[YeoShuey]

I disagree. I think this would have been paid last year as well. He was under no pressure, waited for pressure then walked over.

Exactly. It’s situations like this where the rule works best.

 

[Foucault1989]

Really awful subjective rule, they need to make it more objective and clear. I would prefer all rush behinds just consequence in a ball up or throw in from the goal square.

I thought that was objectively a free kick according to the law

 

[dean33]

Exactly why the rule was brought in

Umpire read it perfectly

Rd 1 decision that won’t be paid again all year.

 

[The 747]

Great to see the Suns not fold under pressure and notch up a good win.

 

[Supersuns]

Have bookmarked, Grockadoc. Now what?

Oh you!!

 

[The 747]

Rd 1 decision that won’t be paid again all year.

Perhaps because no other player is going to try that.

 

[St 07]

But under that interpretation you could just stand still for as long as you want on the line then step over once someone is within 9m and it's not deliberate?

Yes but if you don't telegraph it to the entire world you would be fine with it. Based on last year

 

[Foucault1989]

He invited the pressure that allows him to make a rushed behind because that's how to exploit the rule. Which was a rule

It's not, read the actual rule

 

[GoldbergsGold]

It's a good decision but it's not the rule.

Apparently the rule is if they have time and space to get rid of the ball and they rush it, they will be penalized. It's a really bad subjective rule.

 

[Chism]

Scoreboard has flattered the Tigers.

Suns have smashed them all game.