Oppo Camp Non-Eagles Discussion 2025

[Astro7]

Prolonged tackle though clear free kick .

Nah he never really had a hold of it, and even if he did, he certainly didn't have prior.

Cox was over committed to the tackle and then brought him to ground when the ball was clear anyway, so it was always a free kick.

Not that it wouldn't be funny if it wasn't

Watch it in slo-mo. Even in real time it's clear?

 

[Westend]

Seeing a graphic on the shows how many times the cats and pies have reached the finals in the past 20 years

its a joke of a comp

 

[Bender_]

Swallow didn't even take possession let alone have prior opportunity. It was clearly holding the man.

 

[new breed]

Watch it in slo-mo. Even in real time it's clear?

Might have had the ball fleetingly but not enough for a free kick , umpires don't have slow mo .......It was play on but Cox continued with the tackle , very costly mistake.

 

[Wooshaaaa]

Probably mentioned already, but when Swallow was tackled he had possession of the ball and dropped it as a result of the tackle - that's holding the ball, free kick to Freo!
There's no way he was tackled after disposing of the ball, or without the ball.
Shows how bad the umpiring can be in a high stakes game.

Did he have prior is the question.

If he did..holding the ball
If he didn't, play on.

Either way shit decision, but I'll take the rub of the green today!

 

[eagles rule]

Joking that worst on ground Frederick would bob up with a Joe the Goose to win the game, when it was a guy with even fewer ranking points that did the job

View attachment 2419018

A big mistake to play Jagga Omeare he’s been cooked for a few years now..

 

[Altum Volantes]

Watch it in slo-mo. Even in real time it's clear?

What is clear?

He either didn't have full possession of the ball and it was knocked completely free on impact or he did and he didn't have any prior opportunity to dispose of the ball before being tackled?...

And then he was brought to ground, without the ball...

 

[Altum Volantes]

Seeing a graphic on the shows how many times the cats and pies have reached the finals in the past 20 years

its a joke of a comp

That was us not that long ago - good clubs stay up the top - Geelong, Collingwood, Sydney, Hawthorn.

I'd rather hang with them again than end up like Carlton, Essendon, St Kilda, Adelaide or...Fremantle.

 

[Ochre]

"Dropping the ball" isn't, and has never been, a free kick. Umps job is tough enough without criticising them for not paying rules that don't exist.

 

[Tugga27]

Did he have prior is the question.

If he did..holding the ball
If he didn't, play on.

Either way shit decision, but I'll take the rub of the green today!

No shit decision, it was clear as day holding the man.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

Was clearly holding the man.

And what about the absolutely zero defensive effort which allowed Gold Coast to mark the ball and kick the goal that tied it all up

 

[UseR2006]

Feel for the Kid.

 

[Forward Press]

Probably mentioned already, but when Swallow was tackled he had possession of the ball and dropped it as a result of the tackle - that's holding the ball, free kick to Freo!
There's no way he was tackled after disposing of the ball, or without the ball.
Shows how bad the umpiring can be in a high stakes game.

Any possession was extremely brief and Cox tackled him for far too long. If you watch it in real time, it's an obvious free kick, just crude and unnecessary. Calling it incorrect disposal is bloody harsh, Swallow had it for about 0.2 seconds and it was jarred loose by the tackle. Plenty of other players during the game had it for far longer and weren't close to being pinged once the tackler was onto them.

Actually takes more guts to make that call in the dying stages of a close final in a team's forward line, because it was a correct call.

 

[eagles rule]

Who was it that touched the ball off Swallow’s shot on goal?
Normally it’s good but in that circumstance with the time clock , Freo were destined to lose ..

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

Who was it that touched the ball off Swallow’s shot on goal?
Normally it’s good but in that circumstance with the time clock , Freo were destined to lose ..

Erasmus

 

[DorothyG]

So noone actually bother to read the HtB rules for this year?

It doesn't matter if you are tackled and you incorrectly dispose of the ball, as long as the ball comes free, it's basically play on.

This is 100% what happened.

And then the tackled lingered. The umps are correct. The correct free kick was payed.

I hate that this is how the AFL wants HtB to be officiated as it goes against every ethos of Aussie Rules, but you cannot say that the umps were wrong and it shouldn't have been a free kick.

Too bad Freo, be better next time

 

[oak79]

"Dropping the ball" isn't, and has never been, a free kick. Umps job is tough enough without criticising them for not paying rules that don't exist.

Dropping the ball has ALWAYS been a free kick - it's called "incorrect disposal". Just not paid enough.

Knocked out in a tackle is not incorrect disposal (though it should be IMHO)

But the free kick for holding without the ball was definitely there.

 

[eaglevision]

Who was it that touched the ball off Swallow’s shot on goal?
Normally it’s good but in that circumstance with the time clock , Freo were destined to lose ..

Part of the beauty of it is that Freo were far more likely to score a goal from the centre in 9 seconds than they were to go the length of the ground for at least a point had they not appealed for touched.

 

[Bender_]

Every goal is reviewed anyway, so likely it would've been called back regardless.

Anyway I think Erasmus (?) was appealing for touched instinctively and would've been important if GC took a grab in the goal square.

 

[Forward Press]

Dropping the ball has ALWAYS been a free kick - it's called "incorrect disposal". Just not paid enough.

Knocked out in a tackle is not incorrect disposal (though it should be IMHO)

But the free kick for holding without the ball was definitely there.

In defence of Ochre, fairly sure they were referring to the ball being dropped or dislodged whilst you have possession, which although similar is very different to improper disposal being called after you've been deemed to have prior opportunity - ie you had enough time to decide what to do with the ball, took the tackle on, and then didn't get rid of it properly which could be via dropping the ball or not completing a handpass or kick. Obviously it is then called holding the ball.

There is no universe where you can adjudge Swallow to have had prior opportunity in that situation.

 

[Ochre]

In defence of Ochre, fairly sure they were referring to the ball being dropped or dislodged whilst you have possession, which although similar is very different to improper disposal being called after you've been deemed to have prior opportunity - ie you had enough time to decide what to do with the ball, took the tackle on, and then didn't get rid of it properly which could be via dropping the ball or not completing a handpass or kick. Obviously it is then called holding the ball.

There is no universe where you can adjudge Swallow to have had prior opportunity in that situation.

Yeah this is all in response to the original post saying Swallow should've been penalised for dropping the ball.

 

[Astro7]

Any possession was extremely brief and Cox tackled him for far too long. If you watch it in real time, it's an obvious free kick, just crude and unnecessary. Calling it incorrect disposal is bloody harsh, Swallow had it for about 0.2 seconds and it was jarred loose by the tackle. Plenty of other players during the game had it for far longer and weren't close to being pinged once the tackler was onto them.

Actually takes more guts to make that call in the dying stages of a close final in a team's forward line, because it was a correct call.

Ok sure, but pretty hard to disengage a tackle when you're fully committed and both falling to the ground in seconds. I obviously don't understand the finer points of the game. He did have possession of the ball with two hands to his chest/stomach, but in the lightning pace of finals footy, was hit by a tackle a second later and dropped/lost possession of the ball. Admittedly he had no prior, it happened so fast; but also because it happened so fast the tackler had no idea what was unfolding after he tackled him 'with the ball'. I always thought when a person is tackled and the ball spills free, it's a free kick to the tackler. Clearly I'm wrong and that's ok. Maybe my Port hangover has something to do with it?

 

[Forward Press]

Ok sure, but pretty hard to disengage a tackle when you're fully committed and both falling to the ground in seconds. I obviously don't understand the finer points of the game. He did have possession of the ball with two hands to his chest/stomach, but in the lightning pace of finals footy, was hit by a tackle a second later and dropped/lost possession of the ball. Admittedly he had no prior, it happened so fast; but also because it happened so fast the tackler had no idea what was unfolding after he tackled him 'with the ball'. I always thought when a person is tackled and the ball spills free, it's a free kick to the tackler. Clearly I'm wrong and that's ok. Maybe my Port hangover has something to do with it?

Of course it's hard, but this is the top level of Australian rules football and players have been training and drilled to let go once the ball is free. Just asking for it by committing to the tackle no matter what eventuated. Plenty of other tackles lingered during the game, and duly not penalised because the tackler let go asap.

Wasn't even a second, when I said 0.2 seconds it wasn't an exaggeration.

 

[ziad]

"Dropping the ball" isn't, and has never been, a free kick. Umps job is tough enough without criticising them for not paying rules that don't exist.

illegal disposal

 

[ziad]

What could have improved the dockers game:
It is tough perhaps,
after the siren
a clanger from Fyfe settimng it up

thats about it.
Obvious free, some earlier both ways were more 50:50