Davey admits playing for a free

[The Falcon Strike]

And this is all different to say Gavin Wanganeen 20 years ago?

 

[Doss]

Bomber Thompson has always been the master of coaching his pupils in how to influence umpires and win free kicks. Look at the stats from his time at Geelong. Ever since he left that club and Chris Scott took over, their number of free kicks has dwindled.

The funny thing about Davey's free kick (and the new rule) is that the ball came his way because an Essendon player valiantly smothered a Crows kick, but in so doing, he dived across the Adelaide player's legs. I thought this action had far more potential to cause injury than what happened with Davey.

It seems inconsistent to me. Dive on a loose ball to win possession, make inadvertent contact with another player's legs and it's a free kick. Dive on the ball to smother a kick and make even more forceful contact with their legs and it's called play on.

Hmmmm

It was Davey that affected the smother you're thinking of, too.

If we ever get to the stage where we pay a free against a player for a smother (or an attempt to), then we know the powers that be have officially lost all touch.

 

[Chewy]

If we ever get to the stage where we pay a free against a player for a smother (or an attempt to), then we know the powers that be have officially lost all touch.

Yeah, I know... but what's the difference?

Remember when Nathan Brown had his leg snapped in half when Whelan dived across his leg to smother?
It is equally dangerous as this other stuff they're trying to stamp out but they have the blinkers on. They make a new rule, but only apply in certain circumstances

Another grey area... another inconsistency in the rules

 

[Doss]

Yeah, I know... but what's the difference?

Remember when Nathan Brown had his leg snapped in half when Whelan dived across his leg to smother?
It is equally dangerous as this other stuff they're trying to stamp out but they have the blinkers on. They make a new rule, but only apply in certain circumstances

Another grey area... another inconsistency in the rules

Yeah, I agree with you.

I don't agree with the new rule at all.

 

[LordLucifer]

When I first read the thread title, I thought it was about Davey playing for love and not money this season ??

 

[LordLucifer]

"The Reilly and Davey one resulted in a set shot for goal, and I think people get excited about that," Gieschen said.

Is this guy on something permanently ??

The player has just admitted that he is rorting the rules to his advantage and the umpires chief thinks its terrific.

Is it any wonder that the game is sinking further into the mire every season !!

 

[lock33]

Theres a difference between playing for a free and staging for a free.

 

[falcons2]

is video available of this? At the time I thought Reilly dived on the ball and rolled into Davey. Is this considered a slide? What is the actual rule?
Turning the body, preparing to roll and to receive contact are things taught from Auskick level.
Without being a smart R's I think this rule will have a bigger than expected effect on games. It is removing desperation. Close game, late, defender going to be second to the ball, one option has been removed.

Scenario. leading player dives to mark and spills it and slides into an opponents legs. Is this a free? Sliding, contact below the knees ?

Wasn't there already a rule about forceful contact below the knee? Tripping?

 

[Underdog]

Yep, it astounds me that people don't understand what drawing a free is and that it has been occurring for decades. I remember even being taught on how to draw a free in juniors almost 20 years ago.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

They probably won't scrap the sliding below the knees rule though, they'll just bring in some stupid new rule like penalising players for planting their feet.

Of course they will. And Healy, KB and the othet media puppets will back it in on their high horses.

And so the pathetic circle in our provincial game will continue.

Well done Davey. This aint about Essendon, its about a player exposing yet another poorly thought out rule 1 game in.

No doubt games will be unfairly decided (and players will become unfair hate figures) thanks to this ****ing rule too

Its a joke really.