Autopsy Autopsy vs Gold Coast - Round 15, 2021

[Mav]

That's why the rule is ******* dumb, players "deliberately" try and get the ball out of bounds all game long, but it's up to the whims of the umpire what is deliberate and "deliberate". Just because you umpired when I was a toddler doesn't mean your opinion is infallible either.

FMD. Umpires have to make decisions all game long. Sometimes I think idiots like you would prefer there were no umpires and players just put their hand up when they did something wrong.

He deliberately tried to punch the ball out, the ump saw it and called him on it. There was no doubt what so ever.

SANFL has the last touch rule and I really like it. But if the AFL introduced it nuffties like you would complain and complain, even though it’s clear cut and takes away decisions made on a “whim”.

 

[north_lad]

FMD. Umpires have to make decisions all game long. Sometimes I think idiots like you would prefer there were no umpires and players just put their hand up when they did something wrong.

He deliberately tried to punch the ball out, the ump saw it and called him on it. There was no doubt what so ever.

SANFL has the last touch rule and I really like it. But if the AFL introduced it nuffties like you would complain and complain, even though it’s clear cut and takes away decisions made on a “whim”.

May shock you to learn that I like that rule and agree, they should implement it. Good to see you get worked up over * all though

 

[Zondor]

I haven’t umpired for 30 years. But yep, of course they do.

You’re too gutless to answer the question cause you know you’re wrong. The game has always been umpired on “spirited and intention”. It’s the same as kneeing a guy in the head when taking a hanger. If you had your way it would be a free against the guy taking a mark.

But don’t listen to me. Read it again. And the again, and again, and again and again. You’ll get it…sooner or later.

LOL. mav going off on a tangent. You're getting a little defensive there brother. :stern look

Too Gutless to answer a question? Please it is you who has failed to point out to me in the Rule Book where it says you can punch the ball out of bounds on purpose in a marking contest. And don't give me this Spirit nonsense. That is just ambiguous rot. :stern look

My point is simple. You clowns OK a defensive action of punching a ball with intent out of bounds in a marking contest but God Forbid that ball bounces prior to a contest and the defending player takes the same action. Oh the Hypocrisy and you're defending it. :stern look

And where did I ever say if I had my way, that it I would be paying a free kick for a guy kneeing another guy in the back of the head in a marking contest? You're just making s**t up in an attempt to argue your point. That's poor form mav. :stern look

At least you admitted that you Clowns umpire on a vibe. But fancy defending Overlands. C'mon mav. :stern look

 

[Event Horizon]

With Hawthorn winning, those that are especially keen on pick 1 will sleep well tonight. I’m not one of them. I would love to get a few more wins and if it means pick 2 or pick 3, so be it. Can still draft an absolute champion


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

With Hawthorn winning, those that are especially keen on pick 1 will sleep well tonight. I’m not one of them. I would love to get a few more wins and if it means pick 2 or pick 3, so be it. Can still draft an absolute champion


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Winning and still keeping pick one is the ideal scenario.

 

[Mav]

LOL. mav going off on a tangent. You're getting a little defensive there brother. :stern look

Too Gutless to answer a question? Please it is you who has failed to point out to me in the Rule Book where it says you can punch the ball out of bounds on purpose in a marking contest. And don't give me this Spirit nonsense. That is just ambiguous rot. :stern look

My point is simple. You clowns OK a defensive action of punching a ball with intent out of bounds in a marking contest but God Forbid that ball bounces prior to a contest and the defending player takes the same action. Oh the Hypocrisy and you're defending it. :stern look

And where did I ever say if I had my way, that it I would be paying a free kick for a guy kneeing another guy in the back of the head in a marking contest? You're just making sh*t up in an attempt to argue your point. That's poor form mav. :stern look

At least you admitted that you Clowns umpire on a vibe. But fancy defending Overlands. C'mon mav. :stern look

It’s not a tangent. We were penalized for deliberately punching the ball out, and for some reason you think the ump shouldn’t have paid the free cause you can do it when spoiling a mark.

So why can’t you knee a guy in the head when he’s bent over the ball, cause you’re allowed to do it when you’re taking a mark.

See the stupidity of your argument?

Read, the rules again. You’ll soon get it.

 

[marklovesbeer]

I’ll take that bet.
It was definitely Dal that called them corn rolls, not Kelli…

Yep. Watching the replay & Keli said braids before Dal said corn rolls & then she made a comment about Dal trying to sound ‘hipster’ & being ‘up with the cool kids.’

I owe everyone $50.

 

[Mav]

Yep. Watching the replay & Keli said braids before Dal said corn rolls & then she made a comment about Dal trying to sound ‘hipster’ & being ‘up with the cool kids.’

I owe everyone $50.

I’ll take it in beer thanks.

 

[Zondor]

It’s not a tangent. We were penalized for deliberately punching the ball out, and for some reason you think the ump shouldn’t have paid the free cause you can do it when spoiling a mark.

So why can’t you knee a guy in the head when he’s bent over the ball, cause you’re allowed to do it when you’re taking a mark.

See the stupidity of your argument?

Read, the rules again. You’ll soon get it.

Na you went off on a tangent claiming nonsense like " It’s the same as kneeing a guy in the head when taking a hanger. If you had your way it would be a free against the guy taking a mark." What is my way mav? You wouldn't know now would you? But you had to go on a tangent in some lame effort to defend your argument. :stern look

I'll repeat my point and it is simple. You clowns OK a defensive action of punching a ball with intent out of bounds in a marking contest but God Forbid that ball bounces prior to a contest and the defending player takes the same action. Yet you defend this hypocrisy with ambiguous nonsense. You can't point out in the rule book where it clearly states that this action of punching the ball out of bounds on purpose is O.K. when the rules clearly state that if you don't show intent to keep the ball in you will be penalised. :stern look

You can wank on about reading the rules all you like and using one of my lines of "Soon getting it" but the last time I checked the rule book, it says nothing about OKing the punching of the ball on purpose out of bounds in a marking contest. After all isn't that showing "Insufficient Intent" in keeping the ball in play? :stern look

Sadly you will respond to this post with the same nonsense about reading the rule book and using one of my lines of soon getting it. Your umpire love is there for all to see. Go have a crank over Overlands and how he was right in penalising our team for an action very similar to one that is never penalised but should be as the rules read. :stern look

 

[Mav]

Na you went off on a tangent claiming nonsense like " It’s the same as kneeing a guy in the head when taking a hanger. If you had your way it would be a free against the guy taking a mark." What is my way mav? You wouldn't know now would you? But you had to go on a tangent in some lame effort to defend your argument. :stern look

I'll repeat my point and it is simple. You clowns OK a defensive action of punching a ball with intent out of bounds in a marking contest but God Forbid that ball bounces prior to a contest and the defending player takes the same action. Yet you defend this hypocrisy with ambiguous nonsense. You can't point out in the rule book where it clearly states that this action of punching the ball out of bounds on purpose is O.K. when the rules clearly state that if you don't show intent to keep the ball in you will be penalised. :stern look

You can wank on about reading the rules all you like and using one of my lines of "Soon getting it" but the last time I checked the rule book, it says nothing about OKing the punching of the ball on purpose out of bounds in a marking contest. After all isn't that showing "Insufficient Intent" in keeping the ball in play? :stern look

Sadly you will respond to this post with the same nonsense about reading the rule book and using one of my lines of soon getting it. Your umpire love is there for all to see. Go have a crank over Overlands and how he was right in penalising our team for an action very similar to one that is never penalised but should be as the rules read. :stern look

Are you pissed? The analogies are exactly the same.

See if you can answer these questions with out childish remarks about umpires.

Do you want guys penalized for spoiling a mark out of bounds?

Do you want guys penalized for deliberately hitting the ball out (when not in a marking contest)?

If you answer “no” and “yes” then your ramblings are nothing but childish.

If you answer anything else then you just don’t get it, and never will.

 

[R00StaR]

With Hawthorn winning, those that are especially keen on pick 1 will sleep well tonight. I’m not one of them. I would love to get a few more wins and if it means pick 2 or pick 3, so be it. Can still draft an absolute champion


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

I very confident in Noble not cutting corners in our rebuilding process. For mine he's already shown he'll stick to his guns and gained incremental improvements in doing so. So id expect he'll continue to expose younger guys to midfield minutes and develop players over any short term benefits.

Stick to that and whatever happens with picks can take care of itself. If his process means we miss pick 1 so be it, just means its working better than expected. That is better than any difference between pick 1 and pick 2 or 3.

Dont get me wrong, having such a crap year it would be nice to get Horne. But real growth of the team, particularly the younger guys is greater than anyone one player.

 

[Luke72]

I read this on Footyology…

Tasmanian Premier Peter Gutwein had urged local fans to jeer Suns chairman Tony Cochrane, who was in the crowd at Blundstone Arena, and Gutwein made his way to North’s changeroom post-match with a big smile on his face.

This guy is a Turkey, he undermines our games in Tassie then is in the rooms celebrating when it suits his agenda! GAGF

 

[Luke72]

$50 that Kel said ‘Corn Rolls’ not Dal.
I’ll PM you my bank details.

I’ll take that bet, in fact double it!

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

You would be the only one ever to call it a spoil. But that’s ok, keeping watching and you’ll learn more and more about the game. Maybe even speak to your PE teacher to see if they can help.

Spoiling is an effective method of preventing an opponent from marking or gaining possession of the ball.

http://www.aflcommunityclub.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Schools/coaching.pdf

Which opens it up to handball and bouncing ball spoils.

 

[The Anvil]

I read this on Footyology…

Tasmanian Premier Peter Gutwein had urged local fans to jeer Suns chairman Tony Cochrane, who was in the crowd at Blundstone Arena, and Gutwein made his way to North’s changeroom post-match with a big smile on his face.

This guy is a Turkey, he undermines our games in Tassie then is in the rooms celebrating when it suits his agenda! GAGF

For all things said and done by the Premier, they have ploughed money into both us and the Hawks for many years. Which other new franchise has ever had to do that to get what they want?

For mine, I would love to see Tasmania get their own team in 2023, for the AFL to hand them a decent percentage of the 1st round in the next 2 drafts just after we have loaded up on a few years of high draft picks and headed for some years of finals appearances.

Worked very well for the Hawks last time this happened.

The bloke is a plonker but if it benefits the Roos, I’m fine with it.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Mav]

Spoiling is an effective method of preventing an opponent from marking or gaining possession of the ball.

http://www.aflcommunityclub.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Schools/coaching.pdf

Which opens it up to handball and bouncing ball spoils.

Ha ha ha, it talks about chest and overhead marks. Nothing else.

But what ever helps you sleep at night.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Do you want guys penalized for spoiling a mark out of bounds?

Do you want guys penalized for deliberately hitting the ball out (when not in a marking contest)?

If you answer “no” and “yes” then your ramblings are nothing but childish.

If you answer anything else then you just don’t get it, and never will.

So whatever the answer you are either "rambling and childish" or you "just don't get it and never will".
To be honest, if there is nothing in the rules that says the free kick cannot be paid in a marking contest spoil, then they should start paying them when a person spoils with no intention of keeping the ball in the field of play.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

Ha ha ha, it talks about chest and overhead marks. Nothing else.

But what ever helps you sleep at night.

It is clearly stated it is also related to preventing possession. You don’t have to agree with it, but you can save the petty I know you are but what I am routine, if someone has the nerve to disagree with you.

Should have blocked you earlier after your petty PE comment and now I will. Don’t bother replying, as you can’t act like an adult.

 

[shintemaster]

Are you pissed? The analogies are exactly the same.

See if you can answer these questions with out childish remarks about umpires.

Do you want guys penalized for spoiling a mark out of bounds?

Do you want guys penalized for deliberately hitting the ball out (when not in a marking contest)?

I don't care either way. Last touch would be fine. No deliberate would be fine. It is a nonsense rule that isn't required and it especially isn't required to be a grey area.

 

[Ligma]

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[scottywiper]

Why was the deliberate rule/interpretation even changed? Was it really a major issue in the game that demanded revision? Sure, it caused the occasional bit of annoyance but I would say it is more annoying now. See Powell getting pinged for a fantastic repeat effort to push the ball forward last week. Classic AFL, got to change things.
As for the game on weekend, we saw Tarrant knock it out and get pinged as ball bounced so it wasn't a marking contest.
Then we saw a GC player panic and thump it out when he could actually have taken an almost uncontested mark. The very same umpire, Nicholls, ruled that was ok.
That GC player was under far less pressure than Tarrant and didn't have an opponent to deal with, yet it was okay. All because it was a marking opportunity. Which is not in the rule book. What nonsense!
It's not in the rules and whether it bounces or not should be irrelevant if the player's primary intent is to deny an opponent possession with a defensive act.

 

[ferball]

FMD. Umpires have to make decisions all game long. Sometimes I think idiots like you would prefer there were no umpires and players just put their hand up when they did something wrong.

He deliberately tried to punch the ball out, the ump saw it and called him on it. There was no doubt what so ever.

SANFL has the last touch rule and I really like it. But if the AFL introduced it nuffties like you would complain and complain, even though it’s clear cut and takes away decisions made on a “whim”.

The rule should simply be that if you punch the ball in any contested situation, mark or not, deliberate oob doesn't apply.

 

[Mav]

So whatever the answer you are either "rambling and childish" or you "just don't get it and never will".
To be honest, if there is nothing in the rules that says the free kick cannot be paid in a marking contest spoil, then they should start paying them when a person spoils with no intention of keeping the ball in the field of play.

So you want guys penalized for punching the ball out in a spoil? Is that right?

 

[Mav]

The rule should simply be that if you punch the ball in any contested situation, mark or not, deliberate oob doesn't apply.

So if you’re lying on the ground and someone is about to pick the ball up and you deliberately punch it out that’s ok? What if theres a minute go and there’s a boundary throw in. Ruckman taps to the rover and he just thumps it out to waste more time. Is that ok?

Spirit and intent is a thing in our game and cause I’m the only one that get my head around this I’m the one acting like a child!!!

FMD some of you guys will complain about anything.

 

[ferball]

So whatever the answer you are either "rambling and childish" or you "just don't get it and never will".
To be honest, if there is nothing in the rules that says the free kick cannot be paid in a marking contest spoil, then they should start paying them when a person spoils with no intention of keeping the ball in the field of play.

Yes (and that would totally * the game wouldn't it.)

Although scores might be higher. So the morons trying to run the game might be happy.