Toast Round 13 = Collingwood 82-56 Melbourne

[Apex36]

How can an umpire adjudicate that decision? How can you explain it to a neutral? I don't consume enough football media these days to see whether decisions like this are discussed, but Pickitt can not be interfering in that play, irrespective of whether Moore has played on or not. It goes against everything the rule is designed for.

100+ times in a game you have a player in Pickitt's situation correctly not interfere with the player with the ball. On random occasions you have players penalised 50 for doing exactly what Pickitt did. And on random occasions umpires allow players to interfere with the play just like what Pickitt did. And it is solely reliant on a split second decision by the umpire either implicitly or explicitly calling play-on.

It is freaking insane.

Pickett was clearing out of the zone. Moore played on while he was doing so. Ump called play on. Pickett, completely fairly smothers Moore’s kick after play on was called.

Not sure what the issue is, aside from a poor decision from Moore in the first place.

 

[beez]

I felt aggrieved at the time. But that one was pretty basic. If a bloke marks it you have to get away from him, but if he plays in, it's play on and you can tackle him.

I don't disagree with the notion that once one plays on it is theoretically fair game, but it is completely antithetical to the point of the rule and it drives me insane.

principalskinner.gif

 

[nahnah]

The stand rule is terrible, you spend half the game hoping a player doesnt give away a 50. McCreery would have given away a 50 if a demons player didnt randomly run towards him at one point where he ran the wrong side of the mark to his direct opponent

 

[sr36]

I don't disagree with the notion that once one plays on it is theoretically fair game, but it is completely antithetical to the point of the rule and it drives me insane.

principalskinner.gif

nah. It's the rule. He played on, blokes can come from anywhere to tackle him.

 

[Maggie Greg]

As a rookie pick I’m sure he has a lot of competition . Our most recent premiership captain for example.

He is up amongst the best for sure at the very least.

 

[jimmy35]

Rewatched that game, how Coxy didn’t win the medal is mind boggling. Quite clearly the best and most influential player on the ground. I thought Brayshaw was the Dees best anyway. Crazy.

 

[unplugged]

The stand rule is terrible, you spend half the game hoping a player doesnt give away a 50. McCreery would have given away a 50 if a demons player didnt randomly run towards him at one point where he ran the wrong side of the mark to his direct opponent

I was watching Mccreery during this play and you're 100% spot on.

 

[Gone Critical]

I don't disagree with the notion that once one plays on it is theoretically fair game, but it is completely antithetical to the point of the rule and it drives me insane.

principalskinner.gif

Why. A player vacating the protected area correctly has to be given that chance but once the player in control.decides to play on everyone is back in the game. If a player like Moore makes a bad decision surely thats on them.

 

[Gone Critical]

The stand rule is terrible, you spend half the game hoping a player doesnt give away a 50. McCreery would have given away a 50 if a demons player didnt randomly run towards him at one point where he ran the wrong side of the mark to his direct opponent

If McCreery running inside the protected area is your concern thats seperate from the stand rule and has been a 50 for a long time.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

How can an umpire adjudicate that decision? How can you explain it to a neutral? I don't consume enough football media these days to see whether decisions like this are discussed, but Pickitt can not be interfering in that play, irrespective of whether Moore has played on or not. It goes against everything the rule is designed for.

100+ times in a game you have a player in Pickitt's situation correctly not interfere with the player with the ball. On random occasions you have players penalised 50 for doing exactly what Pickitt did. And on random occasions umpires allow players to interfere with the play just like what Pickitt did. And it is solely reliant on a split second decision by the umpire either implicitly or explicitly calling play-on.

It is freaking insane.

If you choose to play on before players in the protected area can get out of the way, then that’s on you. It’s not rugby union where players who are offside are not allowed to tackle. No such rule exists in this game.

This was a good old fashioned Clanger by Moore. Umpire got it spot on.

 

[grayza2018]

What a win! Great to see us turn the screw like that in second half and dictate like we did, just took a bit longer than desired to hit that lead. We never looked back once in front though!

Cox was immense. Checkers too, a brilliant showing from him given he wasn't 100%

Enjoy the break boys

 

[DopeMaster]

I think people on here are getting too carried away. Cox plays a good game every 2 years so I wouldn’t be getting too excited with his game today.

Also, we won’t win a premiership with this side so we really need to get some high draft picks and finishing half way up the ladder at the end of the season is going to screw us for years to come. I would rather finish bottom 4 over the next 2 or so years and get some good young talent.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Well we’ve beaten 3 of the top 4 in recent weeks, so absolutist claims like ‘this list won’t go near a premiership’ or similar, well, who the **** knows… But I want us to get better not worse, so the ‘bottom-outers’ can EAD in my opinion, I want to be excited to watch the team week in week out, not suffer for years to get high draft picks.

Could well end up with Shache and Watts and end up a perennial cellar dweller. This ‘high draft pick=future contender” is a false economy man.

 

[nahnah]

If McCreery running inside the protected area is your concern thats seperate from the stand rule and has been a 50 for a long time.

True but combined it’s just so much extra stuff the players have to worry about

 

[76woodenspooners]

Our last 10 minutes > Melbourne's second quarter.

I had your view until I watched the replay. That passage of play that led to the final goal was 2018 football. Our best was better than theirs imo

Fair enough. I put our last 10 minutes down in part to Melbourne deciding to play high risk / reward footy that didn’t pay off.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I don't disagree with the notion that once one plays on it is theoretically fair game, but it is completely antithetical to the point of the rule and it drives me insane.

principalskinner.gif

I don’t get driven insane by any onfield rule that applies equally to both sides.

 

[sr36]

I don't disagree with the notion that once one plays on it is theoretically fair game, but it is completely antithetical to the point of the rule and it drives me insane.

principalskinner.gif

Otherwise, every time a bloke marks it, he could just burst away with noone allowed to tackle him. It'd be silly.

 

[jathanas]

Fair enough. I put our last 10 minutes down in part to Melbourne deciding to play high risk / reward footy that didn’t pay off.

Melbourne's tactics are a factor as there was no reason for them to slow the game down or kill time.

Could it be that isolating the last 10 minutes solely to that factor might not be giving C'wood enough credit for their pressure, attack, & speed?

 

[jonbe54]

Melbourne's tactics are a factor as there was no reason for them to slow the game down or kill time.

Could it be that isolating the last 10 minutes solely to that factor might not be giving C'wood enough credit for their pressure, attack, & speed?

I think you are on the right track here - Melbourne have always been a skills centric club in general for the entire length of their existence.

Remember when we went the skill route in the '70's.80's and tried to buy a flag?

Some of those sides were stunning when allowed to create without due pressure but we always failed at the final hurdle.

You HAVE TO have a strong pressure ethic both in applying and absorbing to win the big one.

Look at Melbourne's last 25 ish years - tanking to get talent, stumbling around without enough mature leadership and genuine pressure players.

They are vulnerable to physical and score board pressure.

We applied it . . . . relentlessly.

 

[sideswipe]

Melbourne's tactics are a factor as there was no reason for them to slow the game down or kill time.

Could it be that isolating the last 10 minutes solely to that factor might not be giving C'wood enough credit for their pressure, attack, & speed?

The Dees were also out on their feet. Gawn wasn't moving (this didn't hurt Coxy's game) and a few others were semi-busted. If Big Maxy has a syndesmosis, the reigning premiers might be in a spot of bother.

 

[jathanas]

The Dees were also out on their feet. Gawn wasn't moving (this didn't hurt Coxy's game) and a few others were semi-busted. If Big Maxy has a syndesmosis, the reigning premiers might be in a spot of bother.

Fair point. Lever was having a Barry Crocker, May was watching from the sidelines with teammates he hasn't punched-on with, and Gawn was... gone...

 

[neilk]

Fair point. Lever was having a Barry Crocker, May was watching from the sidelines with teammates he hasn't punched-on with, and Gawn was... gone...

Make Lever accountable and he is quite average. It was forced upon him on Monday with outs and injuries, etc, but it will have been noted.

 

[jathanas]

Make Lever accountable and he is quite average. It was forced upon him on Monday with outs and injuries, etc, but it will have been noted.

That has exposed quite a wart for Melbourne's backline.

 

[jimmy35]

That has exposed quite a wart for Melbourne's backline.

And nobody wants a wart on their backline.

 

[JuniorB]

Make Lever accountable and he is quite average. It was forced upon him on Monday with outs and injuries, etc, but it will have been noted.

Lever is facing similar issues to the ones Darcy Moore faced earlier in the season. Darcy has made adjustments, along with the coaches, backs & mids to address the problem. Our back line is functioning much better as a result.

 

[KinderSmock]

McCreery impressed me. I want to see him play inside midfield more. He wasn't there as much in the first but turned up in the second half. One of the Channel Seven commentators referred to him as "that guy" but quickly learnt his name.