Autopsy AFL 2026 Round 1 - Pies v Crows Sat March 14th 7:35pm AEDT (MCG)

[WeeBlake]

Momentum is everything in football and that horseshit 50 to Tex completely f***ed us.

it’s still kind of unsatisfying though. Feels better if there was an actual umpiring mistake to get angry about, instead of just not liking the rules

 

[Dirty Bird]

I dont think the intent could be argued. Its a week every day and on sundays as well

Live I thought - Enjoy your 1 week off
SLow motion Replay - Barely touched him, probably not even a free.

Wouldn't be shocked with a suspension, or with nothing.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I'm gonna be honest, I don't really understand the new 50m Penalty interpretation.

Outside 5 versus having to Stand? Who has to Stand? Getting called to Stand when you're actually not on the Mark?



IDK WTF is going on.

 

[Dirty Bird]

How can Membrey have 1 Disposal and 3 Contested Possessions?

Possessions is how you get the ball
Doesn't always correlate with Disposals which is how you get rid of it.

Plus, that graphic was shown after a contested mark, so what it tells me.
1) Contested possession that he disposed of
2) Contested possession that and he was tackled before disposal
3) Contested possession that he's yet to take his shot.

 

[Dirty Bird]

No team gets more ****ing cheap frees than Adelaide

This isn't 2025 any more
The rule changes have stopped that - Why do you think the shrug rule came in? With Peatling, it became our MO.

 

[Soggy2112]

This isn't 2025 any more
The rule changes have stopped that - Why do you think the shrug rule came in? With Peatling, it became our MO.

I think Peatling and Soligo now often don’t get high frees when they are there.

Which I actually don’t mind, if you spend a year tricking umps in to giving you frees the natural consequence is they might be hesitant to blow the whistle, but they certainly aren’t getting the soft ones.

 

[Worm4]

I'm gonna be honest, I don't really understand the new 50m Penalty interpretation.

Outside 5 versus having to Stand? Who has to Stand? Getting called to Stand when you're actually not on the Mark?



IDK WTF is going on.

Welcome to the world of AFL, where the need to change rules is a yearly thing

 

[ABAB]

I'm gonna be honest, I don't really understand the new 50m Penalty interpretation.

Outside 5 versus having to Stand? Who has to Stand? Getting called to Stand when you're actually not on the Mark?



IDK WTF is going on.

Only one has to stand and it's the player closes to the mark. The umpire see who it is so calls stand, this didn't happen so it was a 50m.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Stand rule is an absolute f***ing joke

It’s only a “joke” if you try and get away with doing the wrong thing. The 50’s were there and who was the bloke 5m away from Walker the 50m was 120m away from goal! You literally could have defended it

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Only one has to stand and it's the player closes to the mark. The umpire see who it is so calls stand, this didn't happen so it was a 50m.

Yep. This has been in for years now they are just being stricter in the interpretation. It’s not hard. Stand still.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Only one has to stand and it's the player closes to the mark. The umpire see who it is so calls stand, this didn't happen so it was a 50m.

So in reality, anyone who's in the vicinity realistically needs to stop and make sure it's not them that has to Stand?

Otherwise they run the risk of giving up the 50?

 

[ABAB]

So in reality, anyone who's in the vicinity realistically needs to stop and make sure it's not them that has to Stand?

Otherwise they run the risk of giving up the 50?

Not really, there were occasion when a few players were both close to the mark but they communicate to each other who is going to stand the mark. Usually it's the opponent of the player who took the mark.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Yep. This has been in for years now they are just being stricter in the interpretation. It’s not hard. Stand still.

You used to have a few seconds to get the f**k out of there and choose to be 'Outside 5' though.


Personally I always hated that the team that won the contest (either a Mark or Free Kick) were somewhat disadvantaged due to how well teams defended the Mark. It was bullshit.

Combined with the AFL clamping down on short kicks, and reducing the time the player was given to take their kick - and it played in to the defending team's hands too much. If you missed your initial opportunity to Play On quickly, it became a disadvantage to actually have the ball in that situation in many cases.

And the 'Outside 5' thing basically gave the defending team an extra player to defend with. Also kind of bullshit.


So I'm all for the AFL fixing it.

 

[Dirty Bird]

The last touch rule is an absolute blight on the game. I'd rather have umpires make judgement calls on deliberate out of bounds than have frees paid against players for an accidental toe poke at the footy.

SANFL changed their rule years ago to stop ricochets.
I hated the last touched rule in u10s because 1 team (Willoughby) were trained to deliberately handball into the feet to get the deflection and a free kick.
ANd some of those ricochets last night were annoying (Did it finish 1-1 each way?)

Ping possessions, don't bing accidental deflections.
Also - Full field. Screw the mid zone only.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Not really, there were occasion when a few players were both close to the mark but they communicate to each other who is going to stand the mark. Usually it's the opponent of the player who took the mark.

There'll definitely be lots of scenarios where it's line ball though and 3 or 4 guys all stop to confer as to who is going to Stand.

FWIW though, I don't mind that. It won't happen that often, and when it does, it will give the team that won the contest an advantage. That's always been the point of winning a contest.

 

[Cyclops]

Not really, there were occasion when a few players were both close to the mark but they communicate to each other who is going to stand the mark. Usually it's the opponent of the player who took the mark.

We didn't lose because of the umps any more than St Kilda did last week.

The stand rule, already bad, has been complicated further, and people who follow footy are offended by the weird mini game that micro interpretations have become.

Like the incorrect disposal/htb rule, it has become a point for AFL House twits to tinker with. No doubt some suit got a bonus for ****ing this up.

Seven rule changes this off season. Seven fat bonuses. Its a new benchmark. I guess next year Dill will improve things even more.

 

[beerbandit]

Those 50s most likely did stop Collingwood from charging home over the top, but the only ones to blame for those 50s are Collingwood.

Rules have been tweaked whether we like them or not, this will be quite common I feel in close games at the death as players are drilled to try and sprint back to defend.

But like every rule in AFL, they’ll be lenient on this next week and be over umpiring some other rule in the game.

Interesting that insufficient attempt has now just been thrown out, blokes can rush it over willy nilly now between the arcs to stop the “lasso” rule.

 

[Soggy2112]

The purpose of the stand rule is to encourage quick ball movement. Having one player in a marking contest who must stand, and the rest of the defenders have to clear out, gives the player with the ball far more options to move the ball on quickly. If defenders are given leeway or time to adjust as King was suggesting, then it slows down the player with the ball, thus defeating the whole purpose.

The players have been told, and have practiced, that in a marking contest, someone has to stand the mark. That’s not a complicated idea. There were three Collingwood players in the vicinity and all three ran away, which means it simply is a 50.

If you watch the replay back, you can see two Pies players who are at fault.

1. As Walker starts to push back, Perryman is literally standing where the mark is, he looks around, and still chooses to run off the mark. He needed to stand.

2. Quaynor is Walker’s direct opponent at the time, he loses him and is hanging at the back of the stoppage. As a defender, Quaynor should have been screaming at someone to stand the mark, or sprinting to do so.

I hate when we have instances like this where players simply get it wrong, and the umpire makes a correct decision, we still put the spotlight on the umpire because their decision had a big impact on the game. It was the correct call. If Perryman or Quaynor don’t make those errors, it’s not a 50m penalty, why are we talking about the umpire and not their mistakes?

I think the Crows gave away 1 50m penalty and the Pies 3, and from memory all were correct decisions. Why is the narrative about umpiring, and not that one side was more disciplined?

 

[Cyclonus]

Lol- it was 10 minutes from full time after cripps had done 14 kms of running against a whippit who may have done half as much. Show me a video in AFL where a 195cm can outrun a 175cm small forward, anywhere, anytime. Weird flex by you

 

[Soggy2112]

But like every rule in AFL, they’ll be lenient on this next week and be over umpiring some other rule in the game.

This is part of the problem. Any time there is a new rule or clarification introduced, it is usually adjudicated quite consistently with maybe a couple errors. Then inevitably it happens at a big moment of a tight game, and certain media types start stoking the fire saying things like “we don’t want that to decide a game”.

So then we start to see a softening of interpretation and 50 shades of grey get introduced. Before you know it, a rule that was really clear and straightforward is now a complete mess and it becomes a lottery of when something gets paid or not.

We saw it with the stand rule version 1.
We saw it with dissent.
We saw it with insufficient intent.
We saw it with rushed behinds.

Let the umpires do their job, and stop asking them to think about the “context of the game” or anything like that. Put the focus on players needing to be disciplined in clutch moments.

 

[JustaBattler]

Let him play on çripps for ahalf and see hwo much run he's got then - hat a ridiculous comparison..to put up..

 

[Cyclonus]

Let him play on çripps for ahalf and see hwo much run he's got then - hat a ridiculous comparison..to put up..

Well said.

 

[WetCrow1991]

What is the 50m penalty count for the game? Seem to all be going one way

Collingwood undisciplined.

 

[Kipz]

As a big fan of umpires, the umpiring fraternity, local umpires and a general fighter against umpire abuse on and offline - that was putrid. After not quite handing it to St Kilda last week they made sure not to let another one slip.

However, Crows can have the meaningless regular season wins. We'll show them the seasons doors once again come the pointy end

 

[Go the Guts]

As a big fan of umpires, the umpiring fraternity, local umpires and a general fighter against umpire abuse on and offline - that was putrid. After not quite handing it to St Kilda last week they made sure not to let another one slip.

However, Crows can have the meaningless regular season wins. We'll show them the seasons doors once again come the pointy end

You won’t be playing finals.