Moved Thread Malthouse almost imploded with rage during interview.

[the distributer]

Richo should have head butted the fool.

 

[mcgarnacle]

What is the actual rule regarding this issue? I was at the game and it was clear as day the Carlton player kicked in the direction of the Hawks Doctor/Physio because he thought it was a teammate. Say what you want about vision, but when you have a split second to make a decision when under the pump kicking out of the backline, then you cannot say it was a poor kick/decision by the Carlton player.

Think about it, your team is in dark colours and opposition in light colours. You see a person in the distance with a dark top on and you kick to them.

I can understand why Malthouse would have been furious about it.

match-day uniforms are an absolute joke in the AFL.

there is no other sport in the world that requires a such a clear differentiation as this league does. Players are running in all directions in all parts of the field, a blanket can be thrown over 70% of players at times, camera angles and views on television change with regularity, etc.

But it always comes back to BS arguments such as it's been like this for over 100 years and go and get your eyes checked.

this issue is raised (whether it be similar or clashing uniforms, or the colours of runners and trainers) with regularity these days and has been for over a decade now.

You rarely hear about it being an issue in other major professional leagues because they actually have regulations that are effective and apply equitably to all teams and all matches.

There are no excuses in the professional era. We're not in the 1920's where clubs can't afford another set of full uniforms so they'll just wear white shorts. Apparel providers clamour to be associated with football clubs now.

Instead, the same guernseys are rehashed, but inverted. That HAW guernsey last night served a great purpose didn't it considering there wasn't even a need for any alteration.

"But what about the kids and the average moron? They won't be able to recognise what team is playing if they're not wearing their colours?"

But in the blind support of their club, we have some HAW supporters now arguing that blue is the unofficial third colour of the club, because it suits them.

**** off.

even volleyball can get regulation of this issue right and players and team officials don't even cross paths during a match.

 

[Simpleskills]

Richo should have head butted the fool.

Grow up mate..

 

[the distributer]

Grow up mate..

 

[madmug]

So the question is 'what are the umpires actually being told to do each week'? Because every game I see on the box looks like they are enforcing a whole new or different set of rules/interpretations.
WTF is going on?

 

[Simpleskills]

Richo should have head butted the fool.

I bet you're one of those blokes that king hit people out on the streets. You're a flog.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I'm struggling to think of anybody in footy who possesses less class than MM.

 

[the distributer]

Grow up mate..

 

[Simpleskills]

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Whilst Mick had a point, to me it's another beautiful diversion from the grumpy old one for the Blues blowing another lead when in a dominant position. No doubt we got a great run from the umpires, but the Blues had us on toast several times and failed to put us away, just like they did last week against Essendon. It's easy to blame outside influences, but they again failed to close out a game with poor decision making, poor skills, fumbles and brain fades.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

So the question is 'what are the umpires actually being told to do each week'? Because every game I see on the box looks like they are enforcing a whole new or different set of rules/interpretations.
WTF is going on?

Yeah this.

Rules of the week are:
Umpires will call ball up, free kick or HTB very quickly. If you don't hear the whistle straight away there won't be a free
Kicks under 10m are okay.
Anything to kee the ball moving - if that means you dropped it like its hot then that's okay, as long as you're running and the ball is moving.
Hands ithi back rule off the menu.

 

[the distributer]

View attachment 21071

 

[Seth]

Oh what a shame.

 

[sherb]

So the question is 'what are the umpires actually being told to do each week'? Because every game I see on the box looks like they are enforcing a whole new or different set of rules/interpretations.
WTF is going on?

Last night was just embarrassing.

*And no, I don't blame the umpires for the loss at all.

 

[Knight Ryders]

Win or lose, Mick has a point. Changes in interpretation from week to week makes it hard for coaches to do their job. What if Mick said before the game that the Blues should hold the ball in to stop the Hawks spread, because that is where they are most dangerous with some confidence that this free is not being paid. Not that hard to see happening.

If this happened at our own work without communication we would rightfully lose our shit.

Coaches should come together and do something about it

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

match-day uniforms are an absolute joke in the AFL.

there is no other sport in the world that requires a such a clear differentiation as this league does. Players are running in all directions in all parts of the field, a blanket can be thrown over 70% of players at times, camera angles and views on television change with regularity, etc.

But it always comes back to BS arguments such as it's been like this for over 100 years and go and get your eyes checked.

this issue is raised (whether it be similar or clashing uniforms, or the colours of runners and trainers) with regularity these days and has been for over a decade now.

You rarely hear about it being an issue in other major professional leagues because they actually have regulations that are effective and apply equitably to all teams and all matches.

There are no excuses in the professional era. We're not in the 1920's where clubs can't afford another set of full uniforms so they'll just wear white shorts. Apparel providers clamour to be associated with football clubs now.

Instead, the same guernseys are rehashed, but inverted. That HAW guernsey last night served a great purpose didn't it considering there wasn't even a need for any alteration.

"But what about the kids and the average moron? They won't be able to recognise what team is playing if they're not wearing their colours?"

But in the blind support of their club, we have some HAW supporters now arguing that blue is the unofficial third colour of the club, because it suits them.

**** off.

even volleyball can get regulation of this issue right and players and team officials don't even cross paths during a match.

It does amaze me we are still having these issues. Surely it's not that hard to ensure that clubs don;t clash at all. We even had situations a few years ago where the umpires would be wearing similar colours to the teams playing (I think the swans were umpired when the umpires wore red, same with Gold coast). Now water boys? Why wouldn't you have had them wear white last night to ensure no clash??

 

[Messenger]

In the sydney afl, all runners have to wear the fluro green kit they provide that says "(insert team name) runner".

Why can they do it there but not at the afl level.

This isn't about runners. Doctors and trainers have always won club colours.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

The warning signs were there with the Waite suspension last month.

Before the St Kilda game:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-05-06/mick-backs-waite

Malthouse told 3AW it had been frustrating for Waite to be sidelined by injury and he suspected the action might have been caused by exuberance and desperation to contribute to the team's cause.

"There are ways and means of doing it I guess and he has fallen foul of the law," Malthouse said.

"I still think that Jarrad is the type of player when his energy levels are up he does help us and we have to be very careful about being too critical."

After the St Kilda game:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl...ion/story-e6frf3e3-1226645369949#.UbufTpybHkc

Carlton have taken the unusual step of fining ill-disciplined Jarrad Waite for his latest AFL suspension.

Waite's one-game ban for headbutting proved crucial on Monday night as the Blues lost to St Kilda by only nine points.

Would Waite have been fined if his suspension hadn't (arguably) cost Carlton the game? It doesn't sound like it. And this is the same Malthouse who was banging on about 'processes, not results' when they were 0-3.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Richo's reaction was hilarious. Love Mick, tells it like it is.

He tells it like he thinks it is.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Heres an example of telling it like he thinks it is

"We pride ourselves on our tackling and dispossession and … the rule, I'm sure, says something about, 'If you don't dispose of the ball correctly, it is incorrect disposal.'

Well no Mick, that simply is not the rule. If the tackled player has not had prior opportunity, then its not incorrect disposal. Learn the rules before having a cry!!

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

It does amaze me we are still having these issues. Surely it's not that hard to ensure that clubs don;t clash at all. We even had situations a few years ago where the umpires would be wearing similar colours to the teams playing (I think the swans were umpired when the umpires wore red, same with Gold coast). Now water boys? Why wouldn't you have had them wear white last night to ensure no clash??

They should have a club jacket in a colour that doesn't clash with either team (obviously gold would have been the go last night, since for some strange reason, the Hawthorn players weren't wearing gold) and, failing that, a fluorescent blue/pink/yellow/green/orange tracksuit...whichever provides the best distinction to the players' uniforms.

It just amazes me that Hawthorn have worn their new brown guernsey with white shorts twice in games this year where their opponent has worn a dark guernsey with white on it. Firstly, their traditional gold guernsey would clearly be a better option; and secondly, if they do insist on wearing their brown guernsey, at least wear it with gold shorts.

 

[Ted38]

Probably a valid point and it will be interesting to read what the AFL has to say but really Mick is that why Carlton lost?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Would be one for the record books if a team lost because the opposition doctors were wearing dark clothing.

 

[Andrew Mc]

This isn't about runners. Doctors and trainers have always won club colours.

Then that probably needs to change for anyone who might be on the field during play (no issues with the water guys who only run on after a goal).

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

They should have a club jacket in a colour that doesn't clash with either team (obviously gold would have been the go last night, since for some strange reason, the Hawthorn players weren't wearing gold) and, failing that, a fluorescent blue/pink/yellow/green/orange tracksuit...whichever provides the best distinction to the players' uniforms.

It just amazes me that Hawthorn have worn their new brown guernsey with white shorts twice in games this year where their opponent has worn a dark guernsey with white on it. Firstly, their traditional gold guernsey would clearly be a better option; and secondly, if they do insist on wearing their brown guernsey, at least wear it with gold shorts.

Yeah, I've not quite got that either. Wore it against Melbourne as well from memory yet to me it was more of a clash than our standard guernsey. But hey, it's the AFL, maybe we are simply having brown on gold instead of gold on brown. Who knows.

The runners and water boys should simply be in a standard colour with no possible clash with anyone. For a professional sport, we certainly do some unprofessional things. We would be one of the few sports with runners/waterboys on the field as regularly as they are, but it should be fairly easy to fix