Review Cats kennel Dogs by 28 points + win in JOEL SELWOOD'S 350th!!

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s not my imagination is it - his kicking has improved even within this year?
Nope not your imagination. It could be this year he is finding the pace of AFL easier to deal with making his kicking look smoother or maybe he put a crapton of kicking practice in during the off season. But what ever the reason is his kicking has improved especially in terms of penetration.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Noted an interesting umpiring decision on Saturday night when the Bulldogs player was not penalised for insufficient intent as the umpire claimed the player (Hawkins?) could have kept it in.

I have checked the rules and there is is no reference to this.

Anyone know if this is a known interpretation or the umpire just making it up?
Umpire was just making it up. The onus is on the last player who touched the ball to keep the ball in play and not to deliberately dispose of the ball causing it to go over the line. The bulldogs player went for the line, the onus is on him (and his team) to keep the ball in, not on Hawkins to.
Don’t know but I thought the ump was correct-Tom could have tried harder to keep it in play.
Again, the rule is plain as day. There is no onus on Tom to keep the ball in play, the wrong call was made if the umpire deemed that the bulldogs player had made insufficient attempt to keep the ball in bounds (which the umpire clearly did, by blaming hawkins for letting it go out).
 
Has Hello Kitty gone to bed lol, still not happy with Miers good when we are on top, very soft when we are not, and every game he stuffs up with his kicks
BLOCKED!!!
🤣 🤣 🤣
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top