Review Round 7, 2023 - Brisbane Lions vs. Fremantle

[Paul Mac]

I have a vague memory that #12 umpire has done us over (badly) before.

He was the one who gave the 50 against Andrews for holding out his arms for desent pretty sure last year. Complete over reaction it was.
No confidence in him, actually the way the game was umpired today i have no confidence in any of those umpires. How blatant head high tackles can be let go when no ducking, dropping of the knees or lifting of the shoulder occurred was staggering.

 

[bungalow_bill]

Who would've known the loopy kick from mid air would have its uses

Jackie Chan in mid air 2.0 according to the media

For reference here is the original and funnily enough the opponent was also Fremantle

 

[iBeng]

The icing on the cake of Ashcrofts insane goal?

He kicked it while Aish was playing on him.

Full circle stuff.

 

[morsie]

For all the stuff about protecting the head it's still apparently OK to apply a headlock in a tackle provided that the ball carrier is already on the ground.Aparently when this occurs the arms of the player tackling and the neck of the p.ayer being tackled are invisible to the umpires.
Inexplicable phenomenon but I reckon I have seen it at least 6 times this weekend.

 

[Clarkythelion]

What i loved about this goal is that he meant to kick it, he is looking at the goals when he does it, lines them up and deliberately does it. It's not a fluke, not a kick over the head, blind shot - this is freakish that his brain worked that quick to execute it.

 

[Morbidly_Obese]

Surprised there is not more love for Oscar in the votes.

It wasn't like he was Dean Cox 2.0 out there.

 

[Quested]

Rich insufficient attempt when Bailey was right there, Dunkley "throw", two clear head high, Freo strippedv that should be HTB, centre bounce where she actually leaned Freos way and still called it play on. Those are just the ones I can remember. Absolutely appalling umpiring, just disgusting.

On Big O, I might be the minority but genuinely thought he was completely out-rucked, the difference was our mids were on to the Freo tap. Even the commentators credited one to him late that ended up with Neale but he didn't touch it. And those look away handballs were a turn over almost every time.

The positives were definitely the defensive pressure, though still too many shrugged tackles. Great to see Linc get some reward for effort. Neale just sublime and Ashcroft having a great day out. Some really nice things but we were a bit lucky at times our opponent was so weak, won't be able to get away with some of that sloppiness against someone like Carlton.

Good win, fingers crossed the injuries are minor.

 

[M Malice]

I can’t believe more people weren’t into it. Couldn’t get my section going at all

The crowd really get into Country Road though, seemed like everyone sang along in section 422, does wonders for the atmosphere.

It must be fantastic to be in those soccer crowds where they chant/sing all game long, love to be at Anfield one day when they sing You'll never walk Alone, it's spine chilling enough when you hear it on TV coverage.... old firm derby between Celtic and Rangers would be pretty special as well.

 

[NeverEddie]

He was the one who gave the 50 against Andrews for holding out his arms for desent pretty sure last year. Complete over reaction it was.
No confidence in him, actually the way the game was umpired today i have no confidence in any of those umpires. How blatant head high tackles can be let go when no ducking, dropping of the knees or lifting of the shoulder occurred was staggering.

That was it . . . he started this whole dissent sh*t show with a classic out of his bum-hole free. That sort of officiating is unique to AFL, fully enabled by some ridiculously grey rules that allow umps to influence results (and the AFL seem to actually like it that way). You see it at the junior level. If an ump takes a disliking for one of the teams (and, they invariably do) . . . they are free to crucify them with bullshit frees (or non calls) that that can rightly be called either way. And amongst the umpiring fraternity I have no doubt they talk and nod and say, "yep I did those pricks today. . .they deserved it . . .I mean, did you hear that parent calling 'ball' ? ". The rules really do need to be sorted out to take the umps out of it.

 

[NeverEddie]

The crowd really get into Country Road though, seemed like everyone sang along in section 422, does wonders for the atmosphere.

It must be fantastic to be in those soccer crowds where they chant/sing all game long, love to be at Anfield one day when they sing You'll never walk Alone, it's spine chilling enough when you hear it on TV coverage.... old firm derby between Celtic and Rangers would be pretty special as well.

about time one of them picked a manly song

 

[DashinD]

Jackie Chan in mid air 2.0 according to the media

For reference here is the original and funnily enough the opponent was also Fremantle

I get the comparison in the action but no comparison in the degree of difficulty. Firstly the tap to keep the ball from his opponent, then the angle, then the ball actually curling away from the goal face to make the angle even tighter… my baby yoda! Difficulty level 10.5.

 

[Clarkythelion]

We continue to get the job done and stay out of the media limelight - that all good. Payne and Andrews are an awesome team now, I though in the last couple of years Harris would be looking after Payne a little too much trying to help him out but now they hold their own ground which allows the backline to function much better. Big test this week coming up for those 2.

The midfield is going great now, Fagan was right is saying it used to be, Stop Neale, Stop Brisbane. Dunkley has brought more pressure and it it's rubbing off on the others. Our clearance work is great and improving i though McCluggage and Bailey were better again through midfield clearances so we still have improvement there but happy to see how the Carlton match goes to see how we cut off supply.

We seem to be more switched on in the forwards to add pressure and McKenna runs end to end helping out. With Jo you just have to accept you get the good with the bad, even ridiculous but 3 goals we will take. Rayner, Charlie and Linc all adding pressure now I'm glad Fagan gave Rayner that time in defence.

Rich and Zorko unfortunately pick up 'old man' injuries and we just have to live with that but as we have disguised endlessly we have great depth, better than in many years for Carlton.

Steady as she goes for me. Bloody glad Fagan finally said something about the umpires, it's time the Lions said it just not been good enough this year especially in our home matches.

Note: we need a new disc jockey on the player's goal songs, whoever was doing in yesterday kept missing the chorus on some players songs especially Joey's. I think it's become obvious that the celebration songs are for the crowd to sing along with NOT about the players identifying their likes. It's great now

One final word - No way, get F......... F........ off. Yep we sang loud and proud from up in the stands.

 

[Thomasno]

Adjudication was totally inconsistent .

One minute soft frees were being plucked from nowhere and the next , blatant head highs, throws and other incorrect disposals were being ignored.

Elini had a shocker. On a few occasions she looked like a deer in the headlights. Just seemed incapable of making a decision and then when she did, she was wrong half the time.

One of her centre bounces went comprehensively out of the circle and straight to the Freo ruckman.....but oh well, can't be bothered reaclling it so "play on".

Then she had the ignominy of calling "play on" deep in our defensive line, only for one of her colleagues to overrule her and give a free to Freo.

I see no advantage in this four umpire system at all anyway. Confusion reigns

My favourite was when she called deliberate out of bounds against us when someone just mis-aimed a handball that went over the boundary.

Feel bad singling her out because it truly was a group effort. I can’t remember the exact specifics, but I remember one of the other umpires very visibly and audibly calling play on after a tackle (even threw his arms up high) before changing his mind and paying a free against us.

And it wasn’t like Freo got the rub of the green either, there were several occasions where we got frees and I remember thinking “that’s soft”

 

[Thomasno]

Any umpire ending in 2 is never a good sign

Don’t get me started on Nathan Williamson, my word

 

[M Malice]

I have an ingrained distaste for bald umpires... may have something to do with self loathing as I am as bald as a badger.

 

[Dalions]

Surprised there is not more love for Oscar in the votes.

He had a very poor start to the game, worked his way into it but poor to start.

 

[Thomasno]

That was it . . . he started this whole dissent sh*t show with a classic out of his bum-hole free. That sort of officiating is unique to AFL, fully enabled by some ridiculously grey rules that allow umps to influence results (and the AFL seem to actually like it that way). You see it at the junior level. If an ump takes a disliking for one of the teams (and, they invariably do) . . . they are free to crucify them with bullshit frees (or non calls) that that can rightly be called either way. And amongst the umpiring fraternity I have no doubt they talk and nod and say, "yep I did those pricks today. . .they deserved it . . .I mean, did you hear that parent calling 'ball' ? ". The rules really do need to be sorted out to take the umps out of it.

It’s not unique to AFL. Let me tell you about scrums. If you ever want to tear your hair out, learn the ins and outs of scrum rules and tactics, and then pick any test match from the last 20 years and go to town.

Scrum penalties are quite literally just a roulette wheel, because the referees don’t understand how they work - by the very nature of the role, referees are all ex-back line players, and so have no idea of both a) the mechanics of how isolated player movements can affect the scrum, and b) tactics used in scrums to try and force penalties because you know the referee doesn’t know what you’re doing.

Makes AFL officiating look logical.

 

[Brett C]

That was it . . . he started this whole dissent sh*t show with a classic out of his bum-hole free. That sort of officiating is unique to AFL, fully enabled by some ridiculously grey rules that allow umps to influence results (and the AFL seem to actually like it that way). You see it at the junior level. If an ump takes a disliking for one of the teams (and, they invariably do) . . . they are free to crucify them with bullshit frees (or non calls) that that can rightly be called either way. And amongst the umpiring fraternity I have no doubt they talk and nod and say, "yep I did those pricks today. . .they deserved it . . .I mean, did you hear that parent calling 'ball' ? ". The rules really do need to be sorted out to take the umps out of it.

 

[POBT]

I thought about it but my knock on him is that when he does those big handballs to just get it out of his area they mostly go to the opposition that transition out of the area - i get trying to get it of there but look first O.

He's that predictable with it that I nearly blame the other players for not getting to the spot. Same when he punches the ball long from a centre bounce - only Zorko seems to recognise the benefit of getting to the right spot then.

But yes, I do agree that the loopy handball doesn't seem like a great play overall, particularly when he often has someone close to give a short handball to. Still, 9 clearances against a quality ruck combo is worthy of a vote IMO.

 

[Berrygood]

Absolutely had ice on it on the telecast, when they first showed him after being subbed off.

Yeah I saw that, on the bench directly after his replacement. I didn't notice it on the ground after the game when the hand shaking and celebration was happening. That's what I was meaning.

 

[dlanod]

Don’t get me started on Nathan Williamson, my word

Zac Foot... Ugh

 

[NeverEddie]

It’s not unique to AFL. Let me tell you about scrums. If you ever want to tear your hair out, learn the ins and outs of scrum rules and tactics, and then pick any test match from the last 20 years and go to town.

Scrum penalties are quite literally just a roulette wheel, because the referees don’t understand how they work - by the very nature of the role, referees are all ex-back line players, and so have no idea of both a) the mechanics of how isolated player movements can affect the scrum, and b) tactics used in scrums to try and force penalties because you know the referee doesn’t know what you’re doing.

Makes AFL officiating look logical.

Granted. But there is one leaf I'd like to take from the Rugby rules playbook. Back in the 90's (I think), it was against the rules to lift in the line out. But everyone did it and it was no big deal yet once in a while a ref would pull a penalty out of their arse over it. So, you know what they did? They just said, fk it, lets just allow it. That will stop the ref's being w***ers over it. AFL need to do the same for:
1) Hands in the Back (just allow the contest - players will get the hang of it)
2) Same for the pushing a player over in the contest - just allow it . . .always. If you are strong enough or smart enough to defeat your opponent, well done.
3) The landing in the back rule - what other sport involving tackling limits the tackle in such a stupid way
4) Deliberate out of bounds - they always work a way to put the darn ball over the boundary if they need to anyway . . .just allow it . . .or ban it totally
5) Requirement to make a genuine attempt to get rid of it . . .get rid of it . . .players vigorously jerking off the ball after being tackled is such a bad look

Re holding the ball - I don't think they should get rid of prior opportunity, but I think they should set some clearer guidelines:
1) make it so there is no such thing as ball being knocked out in the contest - if you have possession and prior op, dispose of it correctly or else it is a free
2) a 360 without disposal DOES equal prior opportunity
3) a tackle that puts a player on the ground DOES equal prior opportunity
4) a player taking two steps DOES equal prior opportunity

More black and white is needed in the holding the ball "interpretations"

 

[NeverEddie]

Brett, if you seriously think the umps don't sometimes allow things other than the pure play influence their decisions, you are the one living in a dream. They are human beings. I agree it is less at the pro level (but it still would happen). . .at community level it is extremely bad. The issue is not the umps it's that the rules allow them scope to make a choice either way.

 

[Brett C]

He's that predictable with it that I nearly blame the other players for not getting to the spot. Same when he punches the ball long from a centre bounce - only Zorko seems to recognise the benefit of getting to the right spot then.

But yes, I do agree that the loopy handball doesn't seem like a great play overall, particularly when he often has someone close to give a short handball to. Still, 9 clearances against a quality ruck combo is worthy of a vote IMO.

38% disposal efficiency shows those 9 clearances where next to worthless

 

[dlanod]

Granted. But there is one leaf I'd like to take from the Rugby rules playbook. Back in the 90's (I think), it was against the rules to lift in the line out. But everyone did it and it was no big deal yet once in a while a ref would pull a penalty out of their arse over it. So, you know what they did? They just said, fk it, lets just allow it. That will stop the ref's being w***ers over it. AFL need to do the same for:
1) Hands in the Back (just allow the contest - players will get the hang of it)

This one I'm ok with because there's nothing a player can do about it. They're on a lead and get shoved in the back under the ball - what can they do to protect themselves from that, when they're the ones playing the ball?

2) Same for the pushing a player over in the contest - just allow it . . .always. If you are strong enough or smart enough to defeat your opponent, well done.

Fine with this one, and they do tend to let it go.

3) The landing in the back rule - what other sport involving tackling limits the tackle in such a stupid way

All of them. Can't hip drop in NRL. Can't horse collar in NFL. Every tackle code has eliminated particular forms of tackle because of the risk of injury. The one that annoys me is the forceful contact below the knee because it's such a lotto - hardly ever paid, most could go either way because it often involves high contact, and added in response to a single incident unlike most rules which are based off a trend of problematic tackles.

4) Deliberate out of bounds - they always work a way to put the darn ball over the boundary if they need to anyway . . .just allow it . . .or ban it totally

100% agree. I actually really like the AFLW rule after watching it more the last few seasons. It's a lot clearer and less judgement based on intent.

5) Requirement to make a genuine attempt to get rid of it . . .get rid of it . . .players vigorously jerking off the ball after being tackled is such a bad look

This seems to have randomly disappeared from a lot of umpires' calls because I've noticed a lot less spasming on the ground, but I agree it really just asks "can you act?"

Re holding the ball - I don't think they should get rid of prior opportunity, but I think they should set some clearer guidelines:
1) make it so there is no such thing as ball being knocked out in the contest - if you have possession and prior op, dispose of it correctly or else it is a free
2) a 360 without disposal DOES equal prior opportunity
3) a tackle that puts a player on the ground DOES equal prior opportunity
4) a player taking two steps DOES equal prior opportunity

More black and white is needed in the holding the ball "interpretations"

Simpler - if the tackle starts more than a second after collecting the ball, you've had your prior opportunity. And agree on the "knocking it out" - that's incorrect disposal, penalise it.