Review Good/Bad/Ugly v West Coast

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

I like the idea of one person making the decisions. Should help with consistency.

The concept breaks down though if the person is an idiot.

And a Victorian who can carry forward the tradition of blithely pinging interstate clubs who are remote from any otherwise local Melbourne bad media/fan reaction and will help to keep the AFL report averages up.
 
I like the idea of one person making the decisions. Should help with consistency.

The concept breaks down though if the person is an idiot.
I prefer having a panel of 3 people. They can split the games to review the incidents. The majority of panel then must agree on any penalties.

360 just called the original decision to fine Tex the worst for the year & a disgrace.

I have no confidence that Christian can make sound decisions as he has been inconsistent previously, favouring high profile Victorian players.
 
It’s like the video replay, good in theory, but s**t when the person making the decision makes up his own rules/interpretations.
They still haven't worked out that there needs to be clear conclusive evidence to overrule a decision.

If it's a close 50/50 decision, should be umpires call every time.
 
It's one thing to take a shot from 60.. it's entirely another to do so when you have a player who is wide open 30m out. The probability of Gibbs kicking that goal would have been much higher than Walker kicking it from 60. There's a time and a place to be kicking bombs from 60 - and that was neither the time, nor the place.

See, I think this is just a bad instinctive feel for football.

Tex is a 50/50 shot from that distance. There were three things (at least) that could go wrong if Tex passes- he misses the pass, Gibbs drops the mark, Gibbs misses the set shot. I'm not convinced that the odds of us doing all three perfectly are better than the odds of walker just hitting from there.

But beyond that, its the value of the moment. Walker was feeling it, was up and about, and wanted to put the team on his back. There's something about your captain smashing a goal from 50m out that has a lifting effect on the whole team. It creates momentum.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

See, I think this is just a bad instinctive feel for football.

Tex is a 50/50 shot from that distance. There were three things (at least) that could go wrong if Tex passes- he misses the pass, Gibbs drops the mark, Gibbs misses the set shot. I'm not convinced that the odds of us doing all three perfectly are better than the odds of walker just hitting from there.

But beyond that, its the value of the moment. Walker was feeling it, was up and about, and wanted to put the team on his back. There's something about your captain smashing a goal from 50m out that has a lifting effect on the whole team. It creates momentum.
Which he did moments later.
 
According to Michael Christian, they were "very clear" about not wanting punching off the ball. The link below has a video where you can watch him explain this while the footage shows Shuey hitting Tex then Tex retaliating (with what to me looks like similar force). They just ignore the Shuey punch. It's not even mentioned. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2018-07-02/the-reason-buddy-wasnt-banned
That's the most baffling thing. Putting aside the ridiculousness of the charge, how does a punch to a player's back not get cited but the retaliation tap to a chest does?

Shuey wasn't just not cited either, it wasn't even looked at. No scrutiny at all. It happened 1 second earlier ffs!
 
That's the most baffling thing. Putting aside the ridiculousness of the charge, how does a punch to a player's back not get cited but the retaliation tap to a chest does?

Shuey wasn't just not cited either, it wasn't even looked at. No scrutiny at all. It happened 1 second earlier ffs!
It's a truly baffling decision
 
Robbo said it’s the dumbest decision he’s ever seen and he’s right. How can you let off the guy who punches a player in the back and then penalise the retaliator who does a similar thing? It’s absurd.
 
Robbo said it’s the dumbest decision he’s ever seen and he’s right. How can you let off the guy who punches a player in the back and then penalise the retaliator who does a similar thing? It’s absurd.
The AFC should ask for an investigation as was a clear injustice & put a vote of no confidence in Christian.

Need to hold AFL house accountable.
 
It's a truly baffling decision

Not sure you have grasped the AFL concept yet.

Captain of a non Victorian team you'll get charged for misconduct for a tummy tickle.

If you're the poster boy captain of a big Vic club you can cannon into someones head/concuss them....nothing to see here/every media person in Melbourne fighting in your corner........and still get to captain your team in a Grand Final......and then claim a premiership medal.

See how it works?
 
See, I think this is just a bad instinctive feel for football.

Tex is a 50/50 shot from that distance. There were three things (at least) that could go wrong if Tex passes- he misses the pass, Gibbs drops the mark, Gibbs misses the set shot. I'm not convinced that the odds of us doing all three perfectly are better than the odds of walker just hitting from there.

But beyond that, its the value of the moment. Walker was feeling it, was up and about, and wanted to put the team on his back. There's something about your captain smashing a goal from 50m out that has a lifting effect on the whole team. It creates momentum.
Alright, time to put some numbers on this.

Let's say tex is a 50% chance to kick the goal.

On the other hand, he is a 90% chance of kicking to Gibbs without fluffing it. Gibbs is a 95% chance of marking it. He is then probably an 80% chance of kicking the goal. Multiplied together that makes it a 68% chance that Gibbs would have kicked the goal.

Should have passed it.
 
Alright, time to put some numbers on this.

Let's say tex is a 50% chance to kick the goal.

On the other hand, he is a 90% chance of kicking to Gibbs without fluffing it. Gibbs is a 95% chance of marking it. He is then probably an 80% chance of kicking the goal. Multiplied together that makes it a 68% chance that Gibbs would have kicked the goal.

Should have passed it.
One problem though, is that when Tex took the mark, Gibbs was behind Tex on his blind side (and moving further away) and Tex wheels onto his right foot. Maybe Tex might have heard Gibbs calling and other players perhaps could have pointed out Gibbs to Tex but Tex is at the 50m arc and sees no one ahead of him so decides to have a ping.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top