Buddys arc (again)

[Messenger]

We're doing this again?

Lordy......

 

[Sheppo10]

I'm a Hawks fan, and i'll say that Buddy should be called to play on every single time. I don't see it being a big issue - nobody on the mark will get there in time to smother - in fact, you can see them going early before the ump calls it and give away 50. The argument that the umpires know Buddy has a natural arc just doesn't fly. A first gamer they've never seen could have a natural arc too and be kicking after the siren for the match - would they ping him because he's not well known to have an arc? Absolutely ridiculous statements from the umpires - the rule has to stick for everyone. If they allow a metre or two for an arc for everyone, that's fine - just make it consistent.

 

[Sheppo10]

Although I love it how an article about Ballantyne becomes more about Buddy.
Surely Victorians love reading about Freo players too?

 

[Rors]

This is gold!

FRED, please unlock my original thread (closed on the 28/4/11) or merge this thread with it!

Buddy's 'natural arc' really is play on....

 

[Mervyn Beasley]

Yep, agree with you two. Play on should be called. It's crap that's he's allowed to do it.

You'll have players that do it both regularly and occasionally too. They are just not Buddy.

 

[Ambrosia]

But I bet NEITHER of you have any issue with the constant holding and impeding of his attempt at the ball he doesn't get paid... I think it's a fair trade off considering he'd have a lot more shots on goal if the umpires called him equally.

This is one of the worst counter arguments I have ever seen.

 

[QuietB]

Are you all the same people who think that the game is over officiated?

 

[DarkPhoenix]

If they are gong to allow an arc, why not let the player start his kick away from the line as long as he ends up kicking over the man on the mark -- arc back onto the line rather than arc off it? Like a rugby kicker taking a set shot.

Of course if the player indicates to the ump that this is what he wants to do, he is giving up his right to play on. He must kick the ball.

i.e. player takes mark.
Player indicates to ump that he wants to step off the line for his kick.
Umpire acknowledges and player can step off the mark without being called to play on.

This is pretty much EXACTLY what I came up with earlier in the year.

Should only apply to set shots not general play.

Begs the question, should they allow the player to arc off the line if theyre making the angle worse?

Theres a few players kicking around (excuse the pun) that like to hook their kicks around the body(rugby style), seems they are being punished under the current rules in situations where they cant play on.

 

[Pessimistic]

there is the "5m rule" to allow any sort of arc.

players were simply getting to close to the kicker, which ended up in a stkilda player running infront of franklin to try and smother.

is it an issue because franklin is leading the coleman? it seems every time he hits a bit of form, the media and opposition fans find something to criticise him about

Its an issue because the Herald sun are devoting more and more space to trolling

 

[strobe00]

According to the age hes using the tactic of whinging in the papers.

Herees a better question. Should harvey/freo be taken seriously when they basically tanked the corresponding game last year ?

Interesting point.

But I suppose you remember what happened during finals?