AFL Canberra - Season 2011

[grimlock]

Everyone has been fairly quiet of late. Any practice matches played this week? Results?

Swans Reserves beat Belconnen by about 90 points. Belconnen were leading at the first quarter break but it was all Swans after that.

 

[LongHaul]

This rule was used in the old monaro days with send offs for serious offences. Young umpires are going to be hard pressed to send off some of the older players with reputations, not neccessarially reps for foul play but the well credentialled player that this kid may have heard of in the past for a temporary brain explosion, but a neville may not be afforded the same leniency. Leaves the whole thing open to interpretation and therefore very dangerous. At least with a report the umpire is not the judge and jury. What happens in the situation in a tight game with 20 minutes to go and a send off occurs team with less players loses and the player is then found not guilty at the tribuneral. Any takers.

Everything is open to interpretation anyway. A yellow card is issued for a reportable offence, same as the umpire blowing his whistle previously and pulling the pen out. Same goes for the send off. The umpire calls it as he sees it at the time. If the player gets off a visit to the tribunal, then so be it, means nothing and this sort of thing occurs now. Barry Hall 2005, punch to the stomach of Goose from Saints.

I think it may tidy up the game a touch. Umpires may be more inclined to just whip the card out, making players think twice. Will all dirty play ever cease? No, it won't, but the thought of getting a red and leaving your mates down a player for 15 may change the minds of some.

Just my 2c.

 

[Growling Ferret]

I have been lucky enough to catch up with Jock on this topic, and he gave a good rundown tonight to club reps. There are positives in the card system, especially with the option of carding players involved in a melee without reporting them, and giving a straight red for a serious incident that will penalise the team for 15 minutes.

My concern is that an umpire having a bad day, frustrating players with poor or inconsistant calls, will take a players frustration with the situation as direct abuse and give them a yellow card for dissent. That could become critical.

However, the system is in just about every other league around the country, so maybe players have to accept this is the new reality and change their behaviour accordingly.

 

[Michael Goiser]

Personally I think the card system will be good pretty good.

A direct red card should be very rare and is likely to come out only for something extremely serious like striking an umpire or a significant deliberate act like king hitting someone.

As for two yellow cards resulting in an automatic red, that is already the case anyway. Two reports in a game for separate incidents results in an automatic send off. It happened to us back when I was captain at Qbn in the mid 90s so nothing really changes in that regard.

I particularly like the fact that a yellow card means an offender is off the ground for 15 mins (but can be replaced). It should reduce further on-field incidents. As an example, in a game I umpired last year my umpiring partner reported a player for very late, high contact after disposal. The advantage rule applied after the contact so the game carried on without too many players knowing that a report had been made. About 10 minutes later, the player that had been reported found himself in an overly aggressive tackle in which the tackler was trying an old-fashioned "get square". Unfortunately the tackler then ended up getting reported as well. If we had the yellow card system last year the second report may never have eventuated because the first offender would have still been off the ground until the heat had gone out of the game.

I also like the fact that in some instances (like a melee) a yellow card can be issued, thus sending a player to the bench for 15 mins, without a report having to be made. In my first ever game as an umpire a player took several steps toward my umpiring partner in a very agressive manner, disputing a decision and clenching his fists. From where I was standing I thought the player was going to thump the umpire. The ump took control by suggesting to the team captain that he might want to send his teammate to the bench to cool off for a while as he had really pushed the boundary in regard to umpire abuse. The player later apologised profusely for losing control momentarily. He never struck the umpire and was penalised 50m for abuse (which cost his team a goal). It was a split second thing that didn't really need to go any further. It was good common-sense umpiring for my partner to get the player off the ground for a while and is the way the new yellow card system should operate.

As for my other comment about not liking the new interpretation of the "advantage" rule, we've all been taught all our lives to play to the umpire's whistle and respect his/her decisions (whether you agree with them or not). The new rule now encourages players to ignore the umpire's whistle and make their own judgements on whether to go on with the play or not. I'm not saying that players don't know the rules very well but very often their opinion about an incident differs from the umpire in control and I belive it should still be the umpire's call not the player's as to whether advantage should be applied. It takes some of the confusion away. There was a good example of problems with the new interpretation on the weekend. I think it was the St Kilda v Geelong game on Friday night. The umpire spotted something in a contest, blew his whistle and signalled a free kick. Unfortunately he initially signalled the wrong way (which happens quite often) and a player decided to play on and take the advantage. After he had kicked it, the umpire had to apply a 50m penalty because it wasn't his team's free kick (despite the wrong signal). Allowing players to decide if advantage should apply means they are having a guess at what the umpire may or may not have have seen and encourages them to and take a punt that the free kick is going to their team - thus ignoring the umpire's decision.

Just another two cents worth.

Gois
(Have you ever considered that if you get asked for "a penny for your thoughts", but then you put in your "two cents worth" someone is making a penny!!)

 

[Growling Ferret]

As for my other comment about not liking the new interpretation of the "advantage" rule, we've all been taught all our lives to play to the umpire's whistle and respect his/her decisions (whether you agree with them or not). The new rule now encourages players to ignore the umpire's whistle and make their own judgements on whether to go on with the play or not. I'm not saying that players don't know the rules very well but very often their opinion about an incident differs from the umpire in control and I belive it should still be the umpire's call not the player's as to whether advantage should be applied. It takes some of the confusion away. There was a good example of problems with the new interpretation on the weekend. I think it was the St Kilda v Geelong game on Friday night. The umpire spotted something in a contest, blew his whistle and signalled a free kick. Unfortunately he initially signalled the wrong way (which happens quite often) and a player decided to play on and take the advantage. After he had kicked it, the umpire had to apply a 50m penalty because it wasn't his team's free kick (despite the wrong signal). Allowing players to decide if advantage should apply means they are having a guess at what the umpire may or may not have have seen and encourages them to and take a punt that the free kick is going to their team - thus ignoring the umpire's decision.

Similar to this, we had a situation on the weekend where an umpire called 'Woden's free kick', without pointing his arm in either direction. He then realised he had called it wrong and gave the free kick the other way.

To be pinged 50 for something like that is a big penalty to pay for a straight umpiring error.

 

[A Bit High]

Apparently Tutt a chance for Dogs this week.

Good Luck to the lad if he gets picked!

 

[A Bit High]

Tutt not named, but must be close.

 

[Bottletop Bills]

Hows billy neely looking this year is a freak

 

[Michael Goiser]

Hows billy neely looking this year is a freak

Don't know Bottletop. Billy Neely has returned to South Australia to the Hills District League.

 

[Watcher 22]

Don't know Bottletop. Billy Neely has returned to South Australia to the Hills District League.

Who'd have more jumpers, Billy Neely or Luke Jarjoura?????

 

[LongHaul]

Tutt not named, but must be close.

Watching Foxsports the other night, they showed footage of Tutt getting the gate closed on him as the Doggies were making their way on to the field in a practice match.

Be good to see him get a run soon.

 

[Foot In Mouth]

Don't know Bottletop. Billy Neely has returned to South Australia to the Hills District League.

Thank f**k. One sentance instead of a short story from you. Apparently your players feel the same way and fall asleep half way through your talk to them !!

 

[Foot In Mouth]

Early predictions for round 1.

My Magpies by four goals over struggle Tigers.
Swans by how far
Ainslie to continue winning way with five goal victory.

 

[up da middle]

Thank f**k. One sentance instead of a short story from you. Apparently your players feel the same way and fall asleep half way through your talk to them !!

foot in mouth, you are an idiot. gois has done more for football than you ever will. didnt your mum tell you jealousy is a curse. gois posts sometimes long but very educated and informative, yours well id rather not say

 

[Michael Goiser]

foot in mouth, you are an idiot. gois has done more for football than you ever will. didnt your mum tell you jealousy is a curse. gois posts sometimes long but very educated and informative, yours well id rather not say

Enough said!!

 

[up da middle]

Enough said!!

GOLD

 

[D_train]

What's the go with the AFLCanberra boys who played as top-ups for GWS during the NAB Cup/Challenge series? Will they spend 2011 playing with GWS or have they gone back to their local clubs?

 

[one 4 the road]

What's the go with the AFLCanberra boys who played as top-ups for GWS during the NAB Cup/Challenge series? Will they spend 2011 playing with GWS or have they gone back to their local clubs?

Dont know definately but i cant see the clubs letting some of their best players go and be top ups for a side that is in our league.

 

[A Bit High]

One would assume they play for who they are contracted to.

 

[swan45]

What's the go with the AFLCanberra boys who played as top-ups for GWS during the NAB Cup/Challenge series? Will they spend 2011 playing with GWS or have they gone back to their local clubs?

Word is GWS will use their 17/18 Academy players (Canberra and other Zones) when needed. You will not see the ACT Rep players in GWS colours again this year.

 

[A Bit High]

Good to have local footy back and trying to pick winners in round 1 is like throwing darts at a dart board in the dark.

Most teams have had many changes over the summer and new players are unknown.

Ainslie to be to physical for the GWS.

Tigers to just get over the line against Belco in a toss of the coin. Both squads are vastly different to last season with some big names no longer there.

Tigers are in a rebuilding phase and have gone for youth so I expect to see some inconsistent performances. I also would expect the leaders of the side to step up further and guide the side when things are not going well. This group will need strong leaders if teams are to fear the Tigers again. Reminds me a little of the transition from 97 to 98 and some on here will know what I mean.

Well done to Lexie Bennett on reaching 200 games. A loyal clubman who leads by example.

Swans to beat Eastlake.

If you cant get to the Tigers v Magpies tune into QBNFM 96.7.

 

[waggamick]

GWS too fit and too fast for Ainslie...both #24's played well...Clifton for GWS and (?) for Ainslie.

 

[no orange peeler]

GWS too fit and too fast for Ainslie...both #24's played well...Clifton for GWS and (?) for Ainslie.

i heard Izzy was impressive at CHB

 

[A Bit High]

GWS too fit and too fast for Ainslie...both #24's played well...Clifton for GWS and (?) for Ainslie.

Andrews is #24 for Ainslie according to the footy record.

Have not seen a report but GWS 109, Ainslie 68

 

[LongHaul]

i heard Izzy was impressive at CHB

He put on a few Rugby style fend off's to break tackles. Honestly is skills by foot and hand aren't too bad.

The only thing that will require a lot of work is his situational awareness. He picked up the ball in the 2nd qtr and if he was aware he could of turned on the gas and burnt a would be tackler off but it seemed like he wasnt sure what to do when he got it and was promptly tackled.

I was standing next to Sheeds at the Club end goals and he was coaching Izzy along, just reminding to stay close to his man, touching and watching.

Once he gets a grip on the concept of being tackled or bumped from 360 degrees and not just front on he will go a lot better. IMO.