Remove this Banner Ad

Jarrad Waite...

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

DamianBis

DamianBis

Club Legend
Veteran Carlton Blues - Matthew Kreuzer 2011 Player Sponsor Carlton Blues - Matthew Kreuzer 2010 Player Sponsor
Jul 1, 2007
1,839
1,041
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Hey. i was at the game today and my post is about Waites punching the ball out into the crowd, was a bullshit free kick, should have been given free in the middle if anything.

Anyway.

Waite has quite a temper on him. The game against Melbourne after a goal he kicked the ball straight into the fence. and he almost struck one of the adelaide players when the ball was marked with a little punch over the shoulder.

Am i the only one who worries about him hitting someone a la Barry Hall?

What's your opinion? should carlton do something to manage his temper or just leave it?
 
Gee I'd prob do a Hall after that decision if I was Waite. Absoulte rubbish! Didn't have an influence on the match result but had everyone scratching their heads.

Chamberpot the next Goldstink?? Disgrace!!!
 
Waite usually takes out his agression by tackling and throwing players to the ground, often swinging them around his body and ploughing them gruffly into the turf!

Tackling however; is a fundamental part of the game.

He is not a violent person and would never punch another player.

That free kick was a joke. A warning maybe, a free kick in the middle at worst.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

The umpire that paid that free is an idiot. Yes, if the ball was out of bounds, but not after a goal has been scored. It's time-off. FFS, there's a bag full of the fscking things just behind the goals. Just grab another one and get on with it you gimp.
 
it was stupid by waite, but to pay a free in the goal square made the ray chamberlain look like a ____ing imbecile.....a free in the centre would have been a fairer result without doubt
 
Most disappointing thing is the AFL coming out in support of the decision. These guys really need to be removed from office. Its become a protectionist organisation that has lost touch with what the fans really want to see.

By the way Chief, this is Australia... so can you please get rid of that ____ing spell check that teaches dummy Webber (US) English spelling

THERE IS NO Z IN ORGANISATION :mad:
 
To all those whinging about the free kick, like it or not under the playing rules the decision to pay the free kick was correct and given that the infringement occur in the goals that's where the kick should've been taken.

Strange free to be given but ultimately Waite had no need to do it in the first place!
 
Waite seems to be one of the most commited players out there
i have been loving the way the team has gone about its business this year
but this week we seemed to concede fairly early
would of liked too see a change up in tactics to see if we could break the flood
but waite gets frustrated if the team isnt performing
which i believe is better than dropping your head ala fev late in the match
 
These types of decisions are what creates umpire abuse. What a disgrace!! Ray Chamberlain should be charged with bringing the game into disrepute. Watched the Sunday Footy Show this morning, they said the decision was 'technically correct' and the free was paid for time wasting. Shows how little common sense umpires have when there's a bucket full of balls behind the goals, just grab one of them FFS!! And the fukcing idiots have to wait a good 30 seconds in the middle of the ground till the light flashes for the TV telecast. Ridiculous.
 
I don't think anyone is denying the decision was correct, but as I have stated in another thread I don't understand how it can be construed to be time wasting & therefore why the rule is still in the rule book. It is impossible for a player to waste time after a goal is kicked. Time stops as soon as the goal umpire signals the score, so it doesn't matter how long the ball is over the fence. Commonsense tells us that the boundary umpires should grab a ball from the bag of balls behind the goals & take it back to the centre for a centre bounce.

The rule is about as relevant to the game today as a law detailing where & how horses should be tied up in the Melbourne CBD.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Yes, technicaly it was a free kick of some description. Where it was to be taken can be debated. The next play was in the centre so I'd say that's where it should be take. If the ball was punched after being kicked on the full, would that be taken where there, or on the goal line?

There are lots of 'technical' free kicks that could/should but aren't paid in a game and thank god for that. Mark McVeigh took a mark over Thornton where his hands 'technically' were in Thornton's back but the unpire decided not to pay the free. Is that a good, or bad idea?

The ump should've done what most people would do and tell him that he'll ping him next time if he does it again. End of story and he escapes with his dignity - now many people hate his guts because he's a show pony.
 
Stupid rule. Stupid decision.
No common sense.
If that was the hawks v cats in a GF and it cost the game
it would be an absolute travesty.
It didn't effect the game in anyway.
I've also noticed the communication between the goal
umpire, field umpire and the 'ball bag' dude is terrible.
As the ball sails thru and a goal umpire signals it...
once the green maggot has signaled all clear he should
have a ball in his hand on his way.
Sometimes they wait for the crowd ball, sometimes they don't,
sometimes thy stand around, sometimes they're bossing
the ball bag dude around trying to get a pill.
As for Waite?
get angry, just channel it champ.
 
mediumsizered said:
I don't think anyone is denying the decision was correct, but as I have stated in another thread I don't understand how it can be construed to be time wasting & therefore why the rule is still in the rule book. It is impossible for a player to waste time after a goal is kicked. Time stops as soon as the goal umpire signals the score, so it doesn't matter how long the ball is over the fence. Commonsense tells us that the boundary umpires should grab a ball from the bag of balls behind the goals & take it back to the centre for a centre bounce.

The rule is about as relevant to the game today as a law detailing where & how horses should be tied up in the Melbourne CBD.
Click to expand...

Just in case you havent seen the incident, the goal umpire hadn't gotten the all clear or signalled the goal when Waite punched the ball over the fence. Yeah it was a shit decision to gift them another goal but that doesnt make it an incorrect decision.

In regard to the OP i agree that Waite seems to have a few little freak out moments in most games. I doubt that he will ever do something in the same league as what Hall did because his frustrations are usually as a result of something he feels that he could have done better. When the Adelaide player took the mark and Waite did his Basil Fawlty it looked as though it had more to do with him being frustrated at not making the spoil rather than anything else.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Jarrad Waite...

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top