Autopsy AFL 2020 Round 11 Eagles v Blues Sun August 9th 3:35pm AEST (Optus) Match Highlights in OP

[KnightsBlue]

Says it all really. Two different sets of rules.

Gee this is hard to watch as a carlton supporter. Says it all really about umpireing this year. Umpire 22 is the problem

 

[TheKITC]

2 sets of rules eh?
You'd think we we're plus 15 in frees.

What was the difference again?

You're obviously one of those people who thinks the free kick count being even makes for a well officiated match?

If 'team a' transgresses more often in a match but the count is even, all good right? It's a very simplistic view of things.

 

[KnightsBlue]

The thing is we are getting these leads. Carlton will become a force in a year or two when we stop these 30 point swings

 

[bzparkes]

Gee this is hard to watch as a carlton supporter. Says it all really about umpireing this year. Umpire 22 is the problem

There's some inconsistencies there.

There's also some fine examples of whoever made that video not understanding the rules.

 

[KnightsBlue]

There's some inconsistencies there.

There's also some fine examples of whoever made that video not understanding the rules.

In fairness some of the people who have been supporters for 30 years plus are finding it hard to understand the rules these days (loyalty to rules that once was will always be a thing)

 

[bzparkes]

You're obviously one of those people who thinks the free kick count being even makes for a well officiated match?

If 'team a' transgresses more often in a match but the count is even, all good right? It's a very simplistic view of things.

How big was the points turnaround?

Think you're time would be spent better invested worrying about that than a couple of umpiring decisions.

You make it sound like you lost by under a goal when in reality you got flogged from midway through the 3rd quarter.

The umpiring had no impact on that, as much as you'd like to think it did.

 

[bzparkes]

In fairness some of the people who have been supporters for 30 years plus are finding it hard to understand the rules these days

Yes, I do agree.

 

[TheKITC]

How big was the points turnaround?

Think you're time would be spent better invested worrying about that than a couple of umpiring decisions.

You make it sound like you lost by under a goal when in reality you got flogged from midway through the 3rd quarter.

The umpiring had no impact on that, as much as you'd like to think it did.

Categorically disagree and all of my posts have shown that.

 

[kranky al]

The thing is we are getting these leads. Carlton will become a force in a year or two when we stop these 30 point swings

Young team.

same as saints last year and brisbane a couple before that

you see them losing to the good teams by <4 goals and winning a few here and there means watch out next season!

 

[bzparkes]

Categorically disagree and all of my posts have shown that.

You honestly believe a couple of umpiring decision caused a 40 point swing?

Righto.

Did the umpires cause the losses in the other games this year with such a big swing as well?

 

[VicBased]

You honestly believe a couple of umpiring decision caused a 40 point swing?

Righto.

Did the umpires cause the losses in the other games this year with such a big swing as well?

You would think the Umpires kicked them.

 

[TheKITC]

You honestly believe a couple of umpiring decision caused a 40 point swing?

Righto.

Did the umpires cause the losses in the other games this year with such a big swing as well?

Are you unable to read the whole thread? Because I have comprehensively covered these in my previous posts.

 

[bzparkes]

Are you unable to read the whole thread? Because I have comprehensively covered these in my previous posts.

I read your posts over the last couple of pages and you seem to be putting way too much emphasis on a +1 free kick differential in a half of football for a 40 point turnaround.

 

[TheKITC]

I read your posts over the last couple of pages and you seem to be putting way too much emphasis on a +1 free kick differential in a half of football for a 40 point turnaround.

Again, I have comprehensively covered this in my previous posts. Keep going round and round all you like. Pretty obvious you are one of these people who wants the last word as a 'win' so have at it mate

 

[bzparkes]

Again, I have comprehensively covered this in my previous posts. Keep going round and round all you like. Pretty obvious you are one of these people who wants the last word as a 'win' so have at it mate

No really, you're the one quoting everyone and saying absolutely nothing.

Enjoy the 40 point turnarounds and blaming the umpires for your team's inability to hold onto a decent lead

Adios.

 

[bzparkes]

Can anyone tell me if Nic Nat has added to his total of 3 marks for the season? AA ruckman

On Pixel 2 using BigFooty.com mobile app

I can now tell you he added another 8 votes to his coaches' awards tally

 

[Numero Uno]

Anyone remember the blues vs eagles game at the MCG a couple of years back.. eagles won by 10 points

I want Carlton fans to watch that game then come back here and sook about umpiring
Was worth 6 goals to Carlton that day

 

[Fadge]

Anyone remember the blues vs eagles game at the MCG a couple of years back.. eagles won by 10 points

I want Carlton fans to watch that game then come back here and sook about umpiring
Was worth 6 goals to Carlton that day

I thought this thread was about Sunday's game?

Oh yes that's right, it is!

 

[Elmer_Judd]

I can now tell you he added another 8 votes to his coaches' awards tally

Yeah Nic Nat was superb on Sunday. Probably close to BOG.

 

[Numero Uno]

I thought this thread was about Sunday's game?

Oh yes that's right, it is!

it is ... point is no way WC could have a whinge about it

but A few decisions goes against a Vic club and it’s an endless sook fest

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Says it all really. Two different sets of rules.

Incorrect decisions underlined. The rest are all reasonable decisions.

1. Casbolt shepherds Naitanui out of the ruck and doesn't compete. Umpire probably split the difference here but should have been a free to Naitanui.
2. Fisher holding Cole not paid. Incidental contact between Casbolt and Barrass.
2a. Rotham then pushed in the back not paid.
3. Darling was paid for a hold, which seems like a weak free-kick unless it happened before the footage.
4. Casboult shepherds Allen out of the ruck and is this time given a free-kick against.
5. Duggan is being tackled as he takes possession of the ball, no prior and makes an attempt.
6. Hurn is tackled without prior and makes an attempt.
7. SPS makes no attempt but his complete lack of prior should impact the decision. Comparison to Yeo decision not to other highlighted decisions where attempt has been made.
8. Carlton player appears to attempt at disposal before being tackled but changes mind. Harsh but that is deemed prior.
9. The creator of the video suggests Nelson lifts both hands, but he clearly doesn't lift the hand with the ball in. No prior.
10. Carlton player kicks for touch, Sheed kick deflected according to umps.
11. Naitanui, no prior and makes an attempt of disposing of the ball. The textbook example of no prior opportunity.
12. Naitanui no prior. Ball dislodged in the tackle, why even highlight this?
12a. Ryan dropping the ball with prior a clear free-kick.
13. Cole no prior. The video creator highlighting he doesn't know the rules.
14. Duggan no prior.
15. SPS picks up the ball and just stops moving, that's a clear case of prior opportunity. He makes no attempt to dispose of it either. Deer stuck in the headlights.
16. Yeo is a line ball decision. If the tackles are simultaneous I wouldn't pay prior if they're separate tackles its HTB.
17. Walsh hands are together through the whole motion. If only they paid these more often.
18. Duggan punch was deliberate.
19. Shuey trip clearly missed, happened to Yeo last week.

The video creator doesn't know the rules in some cases and equivocates between different types of decisions. If that's the extent of a one-sided video highlighting the problems in this game then the umpires can walk away having done an okay job.

 

[TheKITC]

I was done with this thread and responding to inane posts, but seeing as you have put some actual work and thought into it (respect) I will too...

Incorrect decisions underlined. The rest are all reasonable decisions.

1. Casbolt shepherds Naitanui out of the ruck and doesn't compete. Umpire probably split the difference here but should have been a free to Naitanui.

17.4.3 Free Kicks - Ruck Contests A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick in a Ruck contest against a Player where the Player: (a) who is not a designated Ruck, contests a throw-up or boundary throw-in;

It's a blatent missed free in favour of WCE when Yeo takes it out of the ruck. Very debatable that Naitanui is taken out prior, but as that wasn't called, it's an unforgivable 'missed' free.

2. Fisher holding Cole not paid. Incidental contact between Casboult and Barrass.
2a. Rotham then pushed in the back not paid.
3. Darling was paid for a hold, which seems like a weak free-kick unless it happened before the footage.

Categorically disagree except that Darling received a very soft and dubious free. If the tackle on Rotham constitutes a push in the back, we should have had 10+ more frees for us let alone other games and teams if that's the standard. There is far more contact and force in the push on Casboult yet you call it incidental? He pushes him directly in the back. It's a missed free. The only consistency is that WCE benefit across the decisions.

4. Casboult shepherds Allen out of the ruck and is this time given a free-kick against.

Attached is a still frame that clearly shows Allen has a hold of Casboult's jumper (stretched), which is a free kick. Both are clearly looking at the ball yet Casboult is not only not awarded, but it goes against him for using strength, which Darcy and Ling agree upon was wrong (as does everyone else). You also fail to mention the extremely soft Naitanui ruck free where no holding is apparent, yet a free kick is paid. 2 to WCE benefit from ruck contests.




5. Duggan is being tackled as he takes possession of the ball, no prior and makes an attempt.

Fair enough probably, but where is the consistency? It could easily be argued that Duggan attempts to 'shrug' the tackle rather than dispose. Think it's a 50-50 but prefer a ball up personally so correct call.

6. Hurn is tackled without prior and makes an attempt.

Categorically disagree. Hurn makes two movements which under the rules, constitute prior opportunity. He initially uses one arm to fend, then ducks his head in the tackle. HTB under current interpretations. WCE benefit again, directly in front of our goal. Again, where is the consistency?

7. SPS makes no attempt but his complete lack of prior should impact the decision. Comparison to Yeo decision not to other highlighted decisions where attempt has been made.

Hard to make an attempt when you are totally wrapped up, other than flopping like a fish. Agree, wrong call.

8. Carlton player appears to attempt at disposal before being tackled but changes mind. Harsh but that is deemed prior.

It's harsh, but agree it's HTB. However it's relevant to use in video when examples of WCE players doing same/similar are not called.

9. The creator of the video suggests Nelson lifts both hands, but he clearly doesn't lift the hand with the ball in. No prior.

See above. Could be argued he attempted to take tackler on, but I would hate to see these be paid. Only relevant as an example of the unbalanced decisions. Ball up in fine, agreed.

10. Carlton player kicks for touch, Sheed kick deflected according to umps.

No, I think you have made that up. There is no verbal call from the field umpire who is 10m away from Sheed for 'touched, play on' after the kick. Therefore that excuse doesn't stack up. Prime example of unbalanced decisions.

11. Naitanui, no prior and makes an attempt of disposing of the ball. The textbook example of no prior opportunity.

I'm trying not to be aggressive here, but bullshit. He is able to dispose of the ball before being tackled but chose to run with it. He is tackled and disposes of it incorrectly. It is HTB 100%.

You've also overlooked the extremely soft ruck free Naitnui received directly afterwards. That's 2 more in WCE favour.

12. Naitanui no prior. Ball dislodged in the tackle, why even highlight this?

Agree he doesn't have prior, could be argued for it to be a free for incorrect disposal/throw. These get missed all the time.

12a. Ryan dropping the ball with prior a clear free-kick.

Agreed. Not once, but twice it was missed. Unforgivable and directly leads to WCE goal.

13. Cole no prior. The video creator highlighting he doesn't know the rules.
14. Duggan no prior.

Agreed on both. Would have been nice for this to be applied across the whole game.

15. SPS picks up the ball and just stops moving, that's a clear case of prior opportunity. He makes no attempt to dispose of it either. Deer stuck in theheadlights.

Disagree. If this is a free kick, the above two are as well. He has possession of the ball for 1 second. No consistency.

16. Yeo is a line ball decision. If the tackles are simultaneous I wouldn't pay prior if they're separate tackles its HTB.

It's there, but it would be easy to miss the fend, even I had to rewind this. Can accept this as a mistake if it wasn't for all the others.

17. Walsh hands are together through the whole motion. If only they paid these more often.

It's a sloppy handball, but he has clearly made the correct contact for it to be deemed legal, both hands contacting the ball. Looked like a bit of a throw I can admit, but wasn't.



18. Duggan punch was deliberate.

Yep...

19. Shuey trip clearly missed, happened to Yeo last week.

Another one that is unforgivable.

The video creator doesn't know the rules in some cases and equivocates between different types of decisions. If that's the extent of a one-sided video highlighting the problems in this game then the umpires can walk away having done an okay job.