Review R17: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly vs. Melbourne Demons

[Apsaalooke]

Mmmm .. would it have mattered?

I'm not convinced about the touch

 

[rocket18]

Mmmm .. would it have mattered?

LOL, so even when the AFL apologise for an error they are still wrong.

You can't jump off the ground, grab on to the goal post with one arm and attempt to touch the ball as it crosses the line with the other.

Does anyone at the AFL know what they are doing?


Edit - from AI: No, AFL players are not allowed to climb the goal post. AFL Rule 17.11.1 specifically prohibits players from climbing the goal or behind posts. Doing so results in a free kick being awarded against the player.

Edit: The 2025 Laws of the game has it in clause 18.12

 

[radiojake]

6th home game win in a row

When was the last time we did that ?

Spoiler

Rnds 10 - 22 2016 - 7 games

 

[Samcro24]

Mmmm .. would it have mattered?

 

[Maddogmetro]

Yeah .. interesting. Had both feet off of the ground as well.

Who the Sydney player that was trying to climb the post when there was a set shot after the final siren?

Rampe I think

 

[Samcro24]

LOL, so even when the AFL apologise for an error they are still wrong.

You can't jump off the ground, grab on to the goal post with one arm and attempt to touch the ball as it crosses the line with the other.

Does anyone at the AFL know what they are doing?


Edit - from AI: No, AFL players are not allowed to climb the goal post. AFL Rule 17.11.1 specifically prohibits players from climbing the goal or behind posts. Doing so results in a free kick being awarded against the player.

So we were robbed of a double goal

 

[Maddogmetro]

So we were robbed of a double goal

Nah the rule specifically says that, if it is otherwise a goal, there is no free kick and is called all clear.

Rule 18.12 if you're interested.

 

[PeterSalt]

Rampe I think

Found it, and a bit of commentary around it

Seems to be more about shaking post than actually climbing it, though may depend on an umpires interpretation?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.afl.com.au/video/81215/rampe-climbs-goal-post-and-almost-costs-swans%3FvideoId%3D81215%26modal%3Dtrue%26type%3Dvideo%26publishFrom%3D1557497374001&ved=2ahUKEwisgJ7H4KqOAxXYrVYBHSA-AncQ9KsOegQIDhAB&usg=AOvVaw32hfz_DkFhRiGxPiaUjegc

 

[Mutineer]

LOL, so even when the AFL apologise for an error they are still wrong.

You can't jump off the ground, grab on to the goal post with one arm and attempt to touch the ball as it crosses the line with the other.

Does anyone at the AFL know what they are doing?


Edit - from AI: No, AFL players are not allowed to climb the goal post. AFL Rule 17.11.1 specifically prohibits players from climbing the goal or behind posts. Doing so results in a free kick being awarded against the player.

AI is wrong the rule doesn't read like that at all.

There's no reference to climbing the post that I can see and he certainly wasn't shaking the post.

17.11 SHAKING GOAL POST OR BEHIND POST17.11.1 Free Kicks - Shaking Goal Post or Behind PostUnless Law 17.11.3 applies, a Free Kick shall be awarded against a Playeror Official who intentionally shakes a goal or behind post (either beforeor after a Player has disposed of the football).17.11.2 Taking Free KickThe following shall apply to a Free Kick awarded under Law 17.11.1a) If a Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the DefendingTeam and a Goal is not scored, the Player from the Attacking Teamwho was about to or who has Kicked for Goal, shall take theFree Kick at the centre of the Goal Line.(b) If the Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the AttackingTeam, the Player on the Defending Team who was nearest to the positionfrom where the football will be or has been Kicked shall take the Free Kick

 

[Samcro24]

Rule 18.12 if you're interested.

No but thank you

 

[Mutineer]

Found it, and a bit of commentary around it

Seems to be more about shaking post than actually climbing it, though may depend on an umpires interpretation?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.afl.com.au/video/81215/rampe-climbs-goal-post-and-almost-costs-swans%3FvideoId%3D81215%26modal%3Dtrue%26type%3Dvideo%26publishFrom%3D1557497374001&ved=2ahUKEwisgJ7H4KqOAxXYrVYBHSA-AncQ9KsOegQIDhAB&usg=AOvVaw32hfz_DkFhRiGxPiaUjegc

You beat me by that much

 

[rocket18]

AI is wrong the rule doesn't read like that at all.

There's no reference to climbing the post that I can see and he certainly wasn't shaking the post.

17.11 SHAKING GOAL POST OR BEHIND POST17.11.1 Free Kicks - Shaking Goal Post or Behind PostUnless Law 17.11.3 applies, a Free Kick shall be awarded against a Playeror Official who intentionally shakes a goal or behind post (either beforeor after a Player has disposed of the football).17.11.2 Taking Free KickThe following shall apply to a Free Kick awarded under Law 17.11.1a) If a Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the DefendingTeam and a Goal is not scored, the Player from the Attacking Teamwho was about to or who has Kicked for Goal, shall take theFree Kick at the centre of the Goal Line.(b) If the Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the AttackingTeam, the Player on the Defending Team who was nearest to the positionfrom where the football will be or has been Kicked shall take the Free Kick

AI and you were both wrong, edited my post.

The 2025 Rules of the game has it in 18.12

 

[Maddogmetro]

AI is wrong the rule doesn't read like that at all.

There's no reference to climbing the post that I can see and he certainly wasn't shaking the post.

17.11 SHAKING GOAL POST OR BEHIND POST17.11.1 Free Kicks - Shaking Goal Post or Behind PostUnless Law 17.11.3 applies, a Free Kick shall be awarded against a Playeror Official who intentionally shakes a goal or behind post (either beforeor after a Player has disposed of the football).17.11.2 Taking Free KickThe following shall apply to a Free Kick awarded under Law 17.11.1a) If a Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the DefendingTeam and a Goal is not scored, the Player from the Attacking Teamwho was about to or who has Kicked for Goal, shall take theFree Kick at the centre of the Goal Line.(b) If the Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the AttackingTeam, the Player on the Defending Team who was nearest to the positionfrom where the football will be or has been Kicked shall take the Free Kick

The current rule just requires a player using a goal post to their advantage. Includes bracing against it, climbing it, using it for leverage, etc

 

[Pea Nut]

AI is wrong the rule doesn't read like that at all.

There's no reference to climbing the post that I can see and he certainly wasn't shaking the post.

17.11 SHAKING GOAL POST OR BEHIND POST17.11.1 Free Kicks - Shaking Goal Post or Behind PostUnless Law 17.11.3 applies, a Free Kick shall be awarded against a Playeror Official who intentionally shakes a goal or behind post (either beforeor after a Player has disposed of the football).17.11.2 Taking Free KickThe following shall apply to a Free Kick awarded under Law 17.11.1a) If a Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the DefendingTeam and a Goal is not scored, the Player from the Attacking Teamwho was about to or who has Kicked for Goal, shall take theFree Kick at the centre of the Goal Line.(b) If the Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the AttackingTeam, the Player on the Defending Team who was nearest to the positionfrom where the football will be or has been Kicked shall take the Free Kick

When Rampe climbed the post, that was the rule that the media quoted when referring to the incident to clarify whether he had broken any rules or not.

 

[FR0GGY]

Mmmm .. would it have mattered?

Do they think the laces are his fingers or something?
About the time he’d be close to it, the laces look like the end of his fingers.

 

[PeterSalt]

Do they think the laces are his fingers or something?
About the time he’d be close to it, the laces lol like the end of his fingers.

 

[Cyclonus]

I'm not convinced about the touch

On the broadcast they showed a behind the goals replay after the score review and McVee clearly touches the ball and it changes angle. Unfortunately none of the clips I've seen posted show this view.

 

[Maddogmetro]

On the broadcast they showed a behind the goals replay after the score review and McVee clearly touches the ball and it changes angle. Unfortunately none of the clips I've seen posted show this view.

Yeah watching the replay, the behind view makes it clear.

But also very clear that he gains an advantage from the use of the goal post. Goal was the right outcome in the end.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

Did the AFL also admit that Jack Viney

7

Jack Viney

Age

31

Ht

179cm

Wt

93kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

22.1

5star

K

9.4

4star

HB

12.6

5star

M

2.8

3star

T

5.7

5star

CL

5.0

5star

D

21.8

5star

K

10.3

4star

HB

11.5

5star

M

2.5

3star

T

4.5

5star

CL

5.0

5star

D

13.4

4star

K

8.6

4star

HB

4.8

4star

M

2.6

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

3.6

5star

should’ve been pinged for a deliberate rushed behind when he scored a try in front of the hill?

The rule about goalposts says this:

Unless Law 18.12.3* applies, a field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player or Official who intentionally shakes, climbs or otherwise interferes with a goal or behind post (either before or after a Player has disposed of the football).

* Law 18.12.3 is the one someone mentioned that said there’s no free kick if it’s a goal anyway.

We could have a nice debate about whether McVee grabbing the post meant he was shaking it, or what exactly is meant by “otherwise interferes with” - but I don’t think it’s obvious that we should be getting a free kick there.

 

[FR0GGY]

Did the AFL also admit that Jack Viney should’ve been pinged for a deliberate rushed behind when he scored a try in front of the hill?

The rule about goalposts says this:

Unless Law 18.12.3* applies, a field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player or Official who intentionally shakes, climbs or otherwise interferes with a goal or behind post (either before or after a Player has disposed of the football).

* Law 18.12.3 is the one someone mentioned that said there’s no free kick if it’s a goal anyway.

We could have a nice debate about whether McVee grabbing the post meant he was shaking it, or what exactly is meant by “otherwise interferes with” - but I don’t think it’s obvious that we should be getting a free kick there.

Viney did what worrell should have done and pretended he fumbled it through.
Forever and a day the umpires have given the player the benefit of the doubt that they have u9 skills in taking possession of the ball near the boundary/goal line when everyone knows what they are doing.

 

[Vader]

On the broadcast they showed a behind the goals replay after the score review and McVee clearly touches the ball and it changes angle. Unfortunately none of the clips I've seen posted show this view.

They really didn't, it was a visual illusion caused by parallax error - one which was destroyed when other angles were taken into account.

Of the 3 players who attempted to touch the ball, the players coming in from the sides didn't get anywhere near it. Only the player in the middle came close, and there was no evidence to suggest that he touched it (e.g. no fingers being bent back by impact with the ball). It was not this player who Garry Lyon suggested touched the ball.

 

[Cyclonus]

They really didn't, it was a visual illusion caused by parallax error - one which was destroyed when other angles were taken into account.

Of the 3 players who attempted to touch the ball, the players coming in from the sides didn't get anywhere near it. Only the player in the middle came close, and there was no evidence to suggest that he touched it (e.g. no fingers being bent back by impact with the ball). It was not this player who Garry Lyon suggested touched the ball.

I have just reviewed the footage from behind the goals (facing down the ground) which is shown after the conclusion of the score review. It shows Judd McVee touching the ball.

 

[Vader]

I have just reviewed the footage from behind the goals (facing down the ground) which is shown after the conclusion of the score review. It shows Judd McVee touching the ball.

Now view the one from side on, which shows him missing it by a mile.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

They really didn't, it was a visual illusion caused by parallax error - one which was destroyed when other angles were taken into account.

Of the 3 players who attempted to touch the ball, the players coming in from the sides didn't get anywhere near it. Only the player in the middle came close, and there was no evidence to suggest that he touched it (e.g. no fingers being bent back by impact with the ball). It was not this player who Garry Lyon suggested touched the ball.

100% correct.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Now view the one from side on, which shows him missing it by a mile.

The only one I've seen from side on is with footage well after the supposed McVee touch

I'd be interested to see the split screen vision from when the ball left Keays' boot (shin) onwards