Autopsy AFL 2025 Round 8 - Pies v Cats Sat May 3rd 7:35pm AEST (MCG)

[Sttew]

Sure kingy umpires should make decision because of the “spirt of the game” can’t think of anyone who made himself look more moronic than David King tonight.

David King has never forgiven GFC for proving him to be a buffoon of a commentator in 2011 when he declared Cats were no chance to win a premiership.

 

[TiggyTig]

Indeed, lucky not to be reported like Rowan Marshall was for tripping.

Wasn't intentional so no report but still trip

 

[FootyLad0]

It wasn’t asif the majority of people were there to see Geelong.

Bulldogs would get a similar crowd against Collingwood at the G.

Flog comment from a flog player at a club full of flogs.

Geelong got nearly 90k at the G two weeks prior as the “Home” team and it didn’t feature a Pies, Blues, Dons, Tigers

You can’t claim Collingwood is the only reason there are big crowds, sure they are a big part of it but other clubs can have big crowds too.

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

It was an utterly bizarre whinge from King.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Yeah an anomaly for sure. But there's Kingy's spirit of the game right there.

I guess I just will take the points and move on. If I were the Pies I'd be more annoyed at being in yet another game where it was way closer than it should have been. We're certainly not in Adelaide v Fitzroy '91 territory here.

I'm trying not to go over the top about King's (and apparently Dunstall's) umpire criticism from Saturday night. It's weird, I vividly remember the same pair losing their minds with the "Geelong have got an extra three men playing for them" routine in an early season win against Carlton last year, I guess I remember it because while King can often lose the plot, Dunstall has always seemed a lot more measured to me.

Like Saturday night, that was a case of a few line-ball (not even categorically incorrect) calls going our way. But if they had been blatantly incorrect, just say that and move on- it happens.

Instead they obsess over this stuff which they should dedicate less than 5% of their commentary to (like they're BigFooty posters in a game day thread). And then I have no doubt they'll react in horror when the next umpire gets bottled at a game and will drone on and on about how everyone has a responsibility to show respect for umpires. Wake up to yourselves, you clowns.

 

[Sttew]

I was at the game so didn't hear the commentary. Did King say anything about Mihocek's non-mark in the dying minutes that resulted in a goal? Blicavs got his hands to the ball first and pushed it forward, Mihocek then marked it so should have been play-on or ball up. Clear as daylight.

And what about Mullin's 50metre penalty that was barely 30 metres. The difference between 50 and 30 was probably a shot on goal. Did King say anything about that?

Or Dangerfield's mark with Maynard scragging him well after he'd taken possession. Should have been a 50. Did King say anything about that?

As for the Bobby Hill tackle on Mannagh. As admirable as it was for Hill to bring Mannagh down, the umpire was right there and declared it a tackle below the knees which footage confirms to be the correct decision.

It's swings and round abouts. Umpiring did NOT cost the Pies the game, IMO.

 

[RCAB]

I was at the game so didn't hear the commentary. Did King say anything about Mihocek's non-mark in the dying minutes that resulted in a goal? Blicavs got his hands to the ball first and pushed it forward, Mihocek then marked it so should have been play-on or ball up. Clear as daylight.

What are your talking about? Which mark?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Yeah an anomaly for sure. But there's Kingy's spirit of the game right there.

I guess I just will take the points and move on. If I were the Pies I'd be more annoyed at being in yet another game where it was way closer than it should have been. We're certainly not in Adelaide v Fitzroy '91 territory here.

Yeah we def had our chances to put scoreboard pressure on but we didn't, however, the cats were superb in gaining control in the last.

They did to Collingwood what Collingwood did to Geelong earlier in the game and what the Pies have been doing so far this year.

Pretty sure the old 'don't get beaten what you know' comes to mind, well that's easier said than done, but Geelong proved it can be done.

Which obviously I don't like

 

[Whiskers]

I can’t believe we got close, never mind winning.
The injuries and b2b 6 day breaks against their continual rests at home with 85% of the crowd. Yet they whinge about a controversial decision that’s right anyway?
It’s unbelievable stuff.
One of the great wins.

 

[STPer18]

I can’t believe we got close, never mind winning.
The injuries and b2b 6 day breaks against their continual rests at home with 85% of the crowd. Yet they whinge about a controversial decision that’s right anyway?
It’s unbelievable stuff.
One of the great wins.

I watched the show last night with King and Montagna yet when he reviewed this game King was like a completely different person. Not a single mention of umpiring despite the on-air meltdown he had Saturday night. He and a few of the other commentators (Dunstall and Jack Riewoldt) worked each other into a lather but in the cold light of day probably realised they were just acting like a bunch of overly-emotional gooses about little old Geelong.

 

[Sttew]

What are your talking about? Which mark?

My bad just watched that one again and it was a mark to Mihocek but the others...

 

[peternorth]

The blicavs "touch" was discussed on Eddie and Bartels podcast. From the snippet, ed said it wasnt touched from where he sat. Bartel sheepishly queried eds account

 

[tropicaltiger]

STAND rule is a joke, Crisp marks 45m out, cat on mark jumps a good 2 feet in the air and slightly forward and to the right of his original stand position and lands over metre from where the mark was taken. (2 feet forward, 2 feet to the side) if 4 umps scream stand.... why is jumping allowed before play on is called???im bamboozled.

 

[RCAB]

STAND rule is a joke, Crisp marks 45m out, cat on mark jumps a good 2 feet in the air and slightly forward and to the right of his original stand position and lands over metre from where the mark was taken. (2 feet forward, 2 feet to the side) if 4 umps scream stand.... why is jumping allowed before play on is called???im bamboozled.

Because it's randomly selected.

 

[Soggy2112]

The blicavs "touch" was discussed on Eddie and Bartels podcast. From the snippet, ed said it wasnt touched from where he sat. Bartel sheepishly queried eds account

I thought that was one of those tricky ones where it looks like it probably was a goal, but you couldn’t overturn a decision based on that footage. How that is still the best footage we have is a different question.

What I want to know is what did that boundary umpire see/hear to be so confident it was touched. The goal umpire looked uncertain but like he was leaning towards goal, so really I think the boundary umpire was the one that decided. You’d think they only get involved if they are 100% certain.

 

[peternorth]

I thought that was one of those tricky ones where it looks like it probably was a goal, but you couldn’t overturn a decision based on that footage. How that is still the best footage we have is a different question.

What I want to know is what did that boundary umpire see/hear to be so confident it was touched. The goal umpire looked uncertain but like he was leaning towards goal, so really I think the boundary umpire was the one that decided. You’d think they only get involved if they are 100% certain.

yeah its a mess. Then the AFL cant even provide high quality vision/footage.

 

[Sttew]

yeah its a mess. Then the AFL cant even provide high quality vision/footage.

At least Crisp's kick after the siren was not contentious and didn't require video review