Review Fremantle Defeat St. Kilda 111-70

[King Huskii]

This is disgusting.

Thats fricken shocking!

 

[PurpleEyes]

Just a question. Does the in the act of kicking rule still exist. I think that's where all the confusion is coming from. One was run down while in the act of kicking and the other wasn't. If it still exists as a rule, only some umpires pay it and others don't which adds to the inconsistency.

I have far too often heard people discuss rules of AFL that are not actual Laws, but interpretations that they hear from commentators.
I am only familiar with the "act of kicking" phrase being used in the AFL Laws when talking about taking a kick from a free kick or shot at goal ... not relevant to laws about holding the ball/football.

The interpretation is is another pet hate of mine. For example the hands in the back rule ... was never a rule.
It was just a much talked about "interpretation" of the prohibited contact rule that stated you could not push in the back.

The Holding the Ball (or Football) Laws are fairly clearly defined and if umpired as written, then the only areas that need to be properly communicated by the umpiring fraternity to players/commentators/spectators is what they understand "prior opportunity" and "genuine attempt" mean.

 

[Purple Jesus]

This is disgusting.

Scum!!!

 

[apuchar]

18.6.2 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Prior Opportunity Where a Player in Possession of the Football has had Prior Opportunity, a field Umpire shall award a Free Kick if that Player does not Correctly Dispose of the football immediately when they are Legally Tackled.

Fairly clear rules, even if condition a) is conditional on condition b) etc.

However, If you were to bounce the ball and were tackled, you get pinged, regardless of if the ball has left your hand, bounced or whatever - I gather you are considered in possession when tackled. bouncing is in contrast to trying to dispose by hand or foot. One of those Aussie rules idiosyncrasies.

 

[apuchar]

I have far too often heard people discuss rules of AFL that are not actual Laws, but interpretations that they hear from commentators.
I am only familiar with the "act of kicking" phrase being used in the AFL Laws when talking about taking a kick from a free kick or shot at goal ... not relevant to laws about holding the ball/football.

This is another pet hate of mine when commentators and others talk about interpretations of rules as if they are actual AFL Laws. For example the hands in the back rule ... was never a rule. It was just a much talked about "interpretation" of the prohibited contact rule that stated you could not push in the back.

The Holding the Ball (or Football) Laws are fairly clearly defined and if umpired as written, then the only areas that need to be properly communicated by the umpiring fraternity to players/commentators/spectators is what they understand "prior opportunity" and "genuine attempt" mean.

It is a rule



Stevic was wrong though. Clark had had prior opportunity

 

[Fyfe! The Musical]

Clark was already well into the process of kicking the ball before being tackled. It wasn’t holding the ball in either the spirit or precise application of the rule.

 

[Fyfe! The Musical]

It is a rule
View attachment 1444755
View attachment 1444756

Stevic was wrong though. Clark had had prior opportunity

Wrong.

 

[apuchar]

Clark was already well into the process of kicking the ball before being tackled. It wasn’t holding the ball in either the spirit or precise application of the rule.

He had had prior opportunity though. He was chased down

 

[MadEyeEmmy]

Punting is my main job.

Here was a winner on the weekend on an 82.50 shot

View attachment 1444702

Can you please send me some hot tips for this weekend as I’d like some new makeup from Mecca

 

[freo84]

He had had prior opportunity though. He was chased down

Boot to ball...whether it was a big kick or a small kick it was boot to ball.

 

[NYRB]

Can you please send me some hot tips for this weekend as I’d like some new makeup from Mecca

My tips are Posted on the BigFooty Punting Thread. Not on private messages or the Fremantle Discussion board (because of the Rules)

 

[apuchar]

Boot to ball...whether it was a big kick or a small kick it was boot to ball.

If it touched his boot sure, It was never really shown closely. I assume that Stevic thought he kicked it.

 

[muzzington]

It was frustrating they didn't show a different angle of the Clark one and the commentators just assumed it was HTB.

 

[freo84]

If it touched his boot sure, It was never really shown closely. I assume that Stevic thought he kicked it.

I've watched it 100 times. He 100% makes contact...

Now if the boot was on the other foot ...I'd probably be arguing the other way . But I wouldn't blame that one incident. If i know freo supporters and I think I do, we would've been going off about that horrific kick that gifted Brayshaw his wonderful goal.

 

[Polo342]

P

I've watched it 100 times. He 100% makes contact...

Now if the boot was on the other foot ...I'd probably be arguing the other way . But I wouldn't blame that one incident. If i know freo supporters and I think I do, we would've been going off about that horrific kick that gifted Brayshaw his wonderful goal.

Pretty sure there was a similar one last week that wasnt paid to us. Believe it was Wines who was tackled and it wasnt paid.

 

[Freomaniac]

I was honestly not confident at all going into that, so glad at how misplaced that was.

It's the sort of game we would usually drop with a good team against average opposition away under Connolly or Harvey but not Ross or Longmuir.

Yeah I am hoping that there is a good finals era around the corner under coach Justin Longmuir.

We have had the Chris Connolly contention years of 2003-6 where we made finals in 2003 and 2006. Should of made finals each year from 2003-6.

Can't say we had a finals era under Mark Harvey. Only played and won finals in 2010.

We have the Ross Lyon finals era of 2012-5.

Now we potentially might have a finals era under Justin Longmuir. It could be a 2 or 3 year run. It might be a 4 or 5 year run.

 

[DragoDelph]

P

Pretty sure there was a similar one last week that wasnt paid to us. Believe it was Wines who was tackled and it wasnt paid.

And the justification for the wines one not being paid, was that he had made a legitimate attempt to dispose of the ball legally.

I would say Clark made an attempt as well

 

[mightymouse75]

Wayne Carey showed his anti-Freo bias during that HTB call defending Butler by saying he could understand his frustration because it was HTB.
And then post game, during the Fyfe interview Carey had to have a dig at Fyfe for not kicking 5 goals (Darcy said the same earlier in the broadcast).
I think Carey feels threatened that Fyfe at CHF might be some threat to Carey's legacy ... I have never been a fan of Carey the person, but he was without doubt one of the games all-time greatest CHF's. He should be excited of what Fyfe can do in that position.

Fyfe kicked 3 goals. He has only kicked more (4) on two occassions. And he had 10 score involvements for the game (equal top with Shultz).

Why is carey even have a job.
Ficks his mates wives and beats up women.. what a champion

 

[TheInjuryFactory]

P

We'll a p alright

 

[BigTacoBandit]

Clark was already well into the process of kicking the ball before being tackled. It wasn’t holding the ball in either the spirit or precise application of the rule.

Seems to be a gap in the rules that doesn't account for situations where you start the process of kicking before you are tackled.

 

[freo84]

Yeah I am hoping that there is a good finals era around the corner under coach Justin Longmuir.

We have had the Chris Connolly contention years of 2003-6 where we made finals in 2003 and 2006. Should of made finals each year from 2003-6.

Can't say we had a finals era under Mark Harvey. Only played and won finals in 2010.

We have the Ross Lyon finals era of 2012-5.

Now we potentially might have a finals era under Justin Longmuir. It could be a 2 or 3 year run. It might be a 4 or 5 year run.

I'd love to have an article written in 2033 that says "Dockers decade of dominance is over as the Fremantle Dockers miss finals for the first time since their drought breaking premiership run starting in 2022. Dockers won 7 out of the last 10 Grand Finals beating Carlton 5 times in a row and Geelong twice. David Mundy aged 47 is still going strong and expected to play on next season but thinks it may be his last."

 

[Fyfe! The Musical]

Seems to be a gap in the rules that doesn't account for situations where you start the process of kicking before you are tackled.

The benefit of the doubt is always granted towards the player in possession of the ball. Had Clark started his disposal after being tackled it would be more clear cut holding the ball.

It’s a hard rule to adjudicate, but Hill was closer to holding the ball than Clark. Personally I think each should have been called the same way, but only because I think the difference should be clearer (imo there should be more holding the ball calls per game)

 

[FreoMonocle]

Seems to be a gap in the rules that doesn't account for situations where you start the process of kicking before you are tackled.

If you are tackled without the ball, there are already rules in place. But, you wouldn't want to see that applied here, the spirit of the tackle was fair, you don't want to discourage that in the game for the sake of a half second or less.

 

[wakojako]

fish pic

 

[Wray27]

Yeah I am hoping that there is a good finals era around the corner under coach Justin Longmuir.

We have had the Chris Connolly contention years of 2003-6 where we made finals in 2003 and 2006. Should of made finals each year from 2003-6.

Can't say we had a finals era under Mark Harvey. Only played and won finals in 2010.

We have the Ross Lyon finals era of 2012-5.

Now we potentially might have a finals era under Justin Longmuir. It could be a 2 or 3 year run. It might be a 4 or 5 year run.

I reakon 5 years is not a stretch if we have smart list management and luck with form and injury.
2027 team (Age in Brackets at start of season)
Chapman(29) Pearse(32)* Young(26)
Walker(24) Cox(29) Clark(26)
NOD(25) Brayshaw(27) Johnson(24)
Freddy(27) Treacy(24)* Switta(30)
Jackson(25) Amiss(23) Shultz(29)
Darcy(29) Serong(26) Brodie(28)
Int. from
Erasmus(23) Logue(29) Ryan (31) Henry(25) Aish(31), Acres(31), Western (24)
Maybes-Sturt(27) Banfield(29) Worner(23)
Prospects-Benning(23), Kuek(26)
* Draft/trade need. KPD>200cm & KPF to cover for outs. Good news we would have 5 trade periods to fill gaps.
No assumptions re salary cap either.