Could Elliott win two awards and not really deserve either?

[Sloth]

I can't believe you post a video that proves it wasn't a mark. He lost control as he tried to bring it to his chest. \

And how could he have done that if he didn't have it in the first place? I'm saying it was a mark before he brought it to his chest. He had a two handed grip on the ball and didn't juggle it, he only fumbled once he switched positions.

 

[TW Sherrin]

just watched the replay twice and yep the umpire said it was a mark.

maybe he'll get suspended and then win the brownlow as well.

 

[wce4premiership]

And how could he have done that if he didn't have it in the first place? I'm saying it was a mark before he brought it to his chest. He had a two handed grip on the ball and didn't juggle it, he only fumbled once he switched positions.

He wasn't in control, hence he fumbled. If he had control he would have brought the ball to his chest and THEN it may have popped out on impact but it never had to pop out of anything, because he didn't have it. That's in slow motion as well, he almost had it for less than half a second in real time and lost it. If a player on a lead has the ball in his hands for that miniscule amount of time before dropping it then it's play on.

 

[Sloth]

He wasn't in control, hence he fumbled. If he had control he would have brought the ball to his chest and THEN it may have popped out on impact but it never had to pop out of anything, because he didn't have it. That's in slow motion as well, he almost had it for less than half a second in real time and lost it. If a player on a lead has the ball in his hands for that miniscule amount of time before dropping it then it's play on.

He clearly had control of it in the first instance, but for how long? That is the only question. I'm not sure the rules specify a time-frame, but the umpires agreed he held it long enough and that's all that matters.

 

[MarkT2]

A conspiracy would mean it's a secret.

A "natural outcome" would be a better description.

You actually believe it was paid a mark by the umpire because it was Collingwood?

 

[Adam H]

You actually believe it was paid a mark by the umpire because it was Collingwood?

Yes and the next 13 frees in a row.

 

[Smoky]

"Lots" in the sense Collingwood supporters have "lots" of teeth?

I count two.

Ahhaaahahahahaahaaa... Cough, splutter...

Two teeth!

Cracking joke!











Two teeth > One flag

 

[getgaff]

Elliott shouldn;t even win Goal of the Week let alone Goal of the Year. My vote's with Hartlett

 

[wce4premiership]

He clearly had control of it in the first instance, but for how long? That is the only question. I'm not sure the rules specify a time-frame, but the umpires agreed he held it long enough and that's all that matters.

The umpire believed he controlled it to the ground before it popped out, he made a mistake as happens sometimes when it's difficult to see.

 

[SterlingArcher]

1) Elliott did not win mark of the week. I think only 1 time has a mark of the week not won the yearly award, and that was the year Jurrah and Goddard both took absolute screamers in the same round and both could have deservedly won the week and year (as it was, Goddard won the week - voted by the public, and Jurrah won the yearly award)

2) Hartlett > Elliott. And for all the whinging about the umpiring, the boundary umpire was stuck behind, and 99% of the time fans cry about umpires guessing when they aren't sure, yet when they 'let play go' (as fans cry that they want) because they don't want to guess, they are slammed after we've watched the replay from a better angle a few times...

 

[Kappa]

Correct but if it happened against Collingwood you know what you'd be hearing Eddie whinge and moan about for the next week.

Would Eddie's whinging be anything like your constant whinging about Collingwood since 2010?

 

[TW Sherrin]

Yes and the next 13 frees in a row.

That's what happens when you're first in for the ball.

 

[Adam H]

That's what happens when you're first in for the ball.

Why didn't we get 13 to 0 in the first quarter if that's true,

 

[wce4premiership]

Agreed that Hartlett's was better given his body positioning and the way he had to hoist the ball to clear the defence, it was similar to Ablett's goal against the cats in trajectory, but a drop punt instead of a snap and slightly less pressure.

 

[Stopher]

If they can check whether the ball was touched off the boot, they should be able to check if the ball was in play, ie a legitimate kick!

I'm looking forward to the scenario where Team A is a point up and a player from Team B kicks a goal as the siren goes, from a very tight angle ala Elliott, but as he does a player from Team A dives across the kick and claims the ball was touched off the boot. Score review is called.

Imagine the 1,000 replays on the big screen at the ground showing the ball being CLEARLY out of bounds as it made contact with the boot, yet it apparently can't be used to overturn that decision (which would result in Team A winning), but only whether it was a point (resulting in a draw), or a goal (resulting in Team B winning).

Stay tuned!

 

[Mitchell54]

The goal was goal of the year material although it was outside the boundary. The mark was a good one but others have or will do better. He deserves the goal.

 

[Mitchell54]

If they can check whether the ball was touched off the boot, they should be able to check if the ball was in play, ie a legitimate kick!

I'm looking forward to the scenario where Team A is a point up and a player from Team B kicks a goal as the siren goes, from a very tight angle ala Elliott, but as he does a player from Team A dives across the kick and claims the ball was touched off the boot. Score review is called.

Imagine the 1,000 replays on the big screen at the ground showing the ball being CLEARLY out of bounds as it made contact with the boot, yet it apparently can't be used to overturn that decision (which would result in Team A winning), but only whether it was a point (resulting in a draw), or a goal (resulting in Team B winning).

Stay tuned!

that'd be interesting

 

[Hoops]

What about Garry Ablett Sr's mark of the year in '94 when he hardly touched it?

He brought it to ground

 

[Jones2ByrneJones]

Aaannd Hartlett wins anyway. 81% compared to Elliot's 14%.

https://goaloftheyear.afl.com.au/vote/round/4?nominee=3