Goulburn Valley FL 2018

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Great Gutsy Win Today(I mean Yesterday) at the Kennel for the bulldogs. For the wet conditions, it was a Very good Match to watch if you were a neutral.

Even 1st half of the first quarter then Tat kick 3 goals make Tat infront by 2 goals
2nd quarter was all Euroa really with a 4 goal to one, with Euroa up by a goal
3rd and 4th was all Tatura with a 9 goal to 4 2nd half to win by 26 points

Zav Ballis Tagged JD hayes all match and did fantastically on him only keeping him to a few possessions

Euroa did not have anyone to match Grenfell and the 2nd half was the Grenfell show with him kicking 7 goals.

Linc Wellington was fantasticly as well as Sean Martin.

Harrison and Karaztas was the best for Euroa.

Look forward to next week game at Benalla for the bulldogs
 
ringo1 said:
Benalla v Tat and Echuca v Mansfield will unlock the 2018 puzzle a bit more! Should both be crackers next weekend.
Click to expand...

I think 3 games next week look interesting. The two you suggested Ringo but also adding Euroa vs Seymour in the mix as well. If Euroa lose, Might be in 6th or 7th. Do or Die for the Lions next week I think and these are big rivals too.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

oz1235 said:
Great Gutsy Win Today(I mean Yesterday) at the Kennel for the bulldogs. For the wet conditions, it was a Very good Match to watch if you were a neutral.

Even 1st half of the first quarter then Tat kick 3 goals make Tat infront by 2 goals
2nd quarter was all Euroa really with a 4 goal to one, with Euroa up by a goal
3rd and 4th was all Tatura with a 9 goal to 4 2nd half to win by 26 points

Zav Ballis Tagged JD hayes all match and did fantastically on him only keeping him to a few possessions

Euroa did not have anyone to match Grenfell and the 2nd half was the Grenfell show with him kicking 7 goals.

Linc Wellington was fantasticly as well as Sean Martin.

Harrison and Karaztas was the best for Euroa.

Look forward to next week game at Benalla for the bulldogs
Click to expand...
Have seen Hayes tagged before, he doesn't handle or like it at all....sooks up big time and it seems to filter thru the rest of the team.
 
Lion71 said:
If u get tackled hard and fair get up and get on with it......not get up and sook and push and shove like a few of the Ky boys did today. ....typical of the young blokes today, soft, no respect and sooks !!!....across the board. ....most wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes back in the day.
Click to expand...

This conversation thread does not surprise me at all, having watched junior comp footy a bit a few years back was all to common to see kids come up swinging after being on the end of a hard (and fair) tackle - seems to me that nowadays there isn't enough time spent not only coaching kids not only how to execute hard fair tackling techniques but also on the flip side on how to take a tackle which IMO is just as important - sure you want to evade a tackle if you can but knowing how to take a tackle really can be a fundamental key in injury prevention.
It doesn't help either when the elite players are fined penalised and suspended just for being good at this part of the game.
 
I would like a more stricter interpretation of “in the back” for a number of reasons. I would interpret it if I player is laying across the player with the ball, even a small proportion of his body. This would provide more encouragement for the player first to the ball, encourage the tackler to stand up for tackling a player on the ball thus making it easier to get out and less excuse for being held in, then there will be less ball ups and less frustration by players having people laying all over them. It’s not a rule change just interpretation change.
 
Bootz36 said:
I would like a more stricter interpretation of “in the back” for a number of reasons. I would interpret it if I player is laying across the player with the ball, even a small proportion of his body. This would provide more encouragement for the player first to the ball, encourage the tackler to stand up for tackling a player on the ball thus making it easier to get out and less excuse for being held in, then there will be less ball ups and less frustration by players having people laying all over them. It’s not a rule change just interpretation change.
Click to expand...
This is what shits me no end-(and certainly not directed at Bootz),there is no provision within the official afl rules for interpretation.

  1. 15.4.5 Prohibited Contact and Payment of Free Kick
    1. A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player where they are satisfied that the Player has made Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player.

      pushes an opposition Player in the back, unless such contact
      is incidental to a Marking contest and the Player is legitimately Marking, attempting to Mark or spoil the football;
      Note the word shall@ rule 15.4.5.1!!!
      Not might,not maybe,not perhaps,not rule of the week,not interpretation!!
      The rule specifically says SHALL!!!
      Just umpire according to the written laws of the game!
      How bloody hard can that be?

 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Marvin34 said:
This is what shits me no end-(and certainly not directed at Bootz),there is no provision within the official afl rules for interpretation.

  1. 15.4.5 Prohibited Contact and Payment of Free Kick
    1. A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player where they are satisfied that the Player has made Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player.

      pushes an opposition Player in the back, unless such contact
      is incidental to a Marking contest and the Player is legitimately Marking, attempting to Mark or spoil the football;
      Note the word shall@ rule 15.4.5.1!!!
      Not might,not maybe,not perhaps,not rule of the week,not interpretation!!
      The rule specifically says SHALL!!!
      Just umpire according to the written laws of the game!
      How bloody hard can that be?
Click to expand...
Would an overall guideline to the rules stating somehow “umpires should give players attempting to play the ball the benefit where warranted” work??
( sorry for the crudeness of my wording)
Just when I played you knew the umpires who would favour players attacking the ball and you felt a lot more comfortable with at is going on. Make it a guideline for everything, not a rule.
 
Bootz36 said:
Would an overall guideline to the rules stating somehow “umpires should give players attempting to play the ball the benefit where warranted” work??
( sorry for the crudeness of my wording)
Just when I played you knew the umpires who would favour players attacking the ball and you felt a lot more comfortable with at is going on. Make it a guideline for everything, not a rule.
Click to expand...
Mate,I am in no way critical of anything you've contributed.
What pisses me off is the rules specifically states "shall",that is unequivocal.
All legislation is written on the same basis i.e. As to be unambiguous/unequivocal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Sticky
Goulburn Valley FL 2024
36 37 38 39 40
Replies
975
Views
82K
jayco13
J
Trent the flight Steward
Goulburn Valley FL 2023
124 125 126 127 128
Replies
3K
Views
269K
Long Run
L

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top