Autopsy Rd 12 Newnes wins the game for Carlton after the siren!

[Blue__Balls]

Exactly and given all that came about - Most wouldn't have wanted it any other way?
What a fillip it was for not just our club, but for the AFL as a whole.

* Interesting about your last point.
Did you look this up yourself, or has it been highlighted amongst the 27533 discussions the media have had on it, to date

It's been pointed out somewhere else, I'm sure, but I had a good look through the Laws of the Game on Monday and it stood out.

Oddly enough - it's not in the section on free kicks for "out of bounds on the full". That just states that the free kick will be taken at the point where the ball crossed the boundary line. The 2017 version has a separate note, specifically for late contact:



That section does not exist in the latest version.

As best I can tell, though, there is nothing in the rules that stipulates which player needs to take the free kick for an OOBOTF.

Makes you wonder if it should be treated the same way as a behind - just let the team taking the kick decide who is taking it, provided they're not wasting time bringing the full back down to have a snap for goal.

I should probably also note...there doesn't seem to be anything written into the rules about who takes free kicks in most cases. It does state in the "Intention" section that they want free kicks to be awarded to a player who executes a legal tackle that results in their opponent incorrectly disposing of the ball. But, for example, a marking infringement...there's nothing in writing that says the infringed player has to take the kick. It's all about a free kick being awarded against the infringing player.

I'm assuming it's just one of those "known" things, that never gets questioned and therefore never got put onto paper. But technically, if one wanted to challenge the rules as written, we would be within the rules to have McGovern taking set shots for anyone who has their arms chopped or is pushed in the back.


References:

- 2019 - https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/do...99ff625c/2019-Laws-of-Australian-Football.pdf
- 2017 - http://www.aflcommunityclub.com.au/...oach_AFL/2017_Laws_of_Australian_Football.pdf

 

[Sector 7G]

What happened though, was the the umpire was still trying to put the pieces together from the call down the ground.
This officiating umpire was looking up at the other umpire, when Gibbons moved back and Newnes forward and once the mark had been set, Newnes was closer.

It was wrong, but I'm only putting forward why I think it played out the way it did.


View attachment 938662

Look at it here.
If Gibbons didn't move back as far as he had, setting himself for the shot, he would have likely received the ball from the umpire.

From watching 360 last night the boundary umpire set the mark for the OOTF just short of the 50 and Gibbons manned the mark. The field umpire came in and took the ball of the Freo player and set the mark pretty much where the Freo player was standing and gave the ball to the nearest player which was Newnes. When the ball went OOTF the boundary umpire was standing where the field umpire is in this shot.

Would be filthy if I was a Freo supporter but it was karma that Tabener stuffed up twice after getting a cheap free in the first.

 

[gunslingr]

Haha, yep. One of those "we'll never know" jobs. Maybe Gibbons would have kicked it, maybe not. Ultimately, there was no conspiracy, no cheating, no rule abuse - it was just a messy circumstance in which the umpires had to make a judgement call on very limited information.

That being said, I also find it fascinating that the "closest to the mark" rule existed in the Laws of the Game in 2017, but isn't there in the 2020 edition. I mean, technically, anyone could have been given that kick and it doesn't break the rules as they're currently written.

That second para makes the AFL’s stated position - that it was a mistake to give Newnes the kick - quite extraordinary

 

[HARKER]

From watching 360 last night the boundary umpire set the mark for the OOTF just short of the 50 and Gibbons manned the mark. The field umpire came in and took the ball of the Freo player and set the mark pretty much where the Freo player was standing and gave the ball to the nearest player which was Newnes. When the ball went OOTF the boundary umpire was standing where the field umpire is in this shot.

Would be filthy if I was a Freo supporter but it was karma that Tabener stuffed up twice after getting a cheap free in the first.

Maybe. It's difficult to make absolute sense of what transpired and we don't have a tape measure to map out distances, once the officiating umpire took control of the next passage of play.

As for Freo supporters; 2 things -

1. If Newnes was given the ball and then have the call corrected, handing back to Gibbons and Gibbons kicked the goal. What do we think would have happened?
2. I know it counts as a loss for Fremantle, but they'll never forget this game. Sometimes even the bad things in life are worth remembering.

 

[Blue__Balls]

From watching 360 last night the boundary umpire set the mark for the OOTF just short of the 50 and Gibbons manned the mark. The field umpire came in and took the ball of the Freo player and set the mark pretty much where the Freo player was standing and gave the ball to the nearest player which was Newnes. When the ball went OOTF the boundary umpire was standing where the field umpire is in this shot.

Would be filthy if I was a Freo supporter but it was karma that Tabener stuffed up twice after getting a cheap free in the first.

Watch the replay with audio - you can hear the field umpire talking to the boundary umpire once the down field free kick info comes in.

Field umpire: "Where it crossed the line, Gareth, where it crossed the line".

The boundary umpire then runs towards him and says "There" before continuing around the line to take position near the point post.

Now, I've also seen that vision showing the boundary umpire pointing to the spot closer to the 50m line. So as far as positioning the mark - that is entirely on the boundary umpire. He told the field umpire where it was, and that's where Newnes was set to take his kick from.

 

[Sector 7G]

Maybe. It's difficult to make absolute sense of what transpired and we don't have a tape measure to map out distances, once the officiating umpire took control of the next passage of play.

As for Freo supporters; 2 things -

1. If Newnes was given the ball and then have the call corrected, handing back to Gibbons and Gibbons kicked the goal. What do we think would have happened?
2. I know it counts as a loss for Fremantle, but they'll never forget this game. Sometimes even the bad things in life are worth remembering.

I would have prefered if RW had have stayed down and Eddie kicked the goal and we beat the Cats. Would be a much better memory

 

[David Sylvian]

Carlton = Valentino Rossi

 

[Sector 7G]

Watch the replay with audio - you can hear the field umpire talking to the boundary umpire once the down field free kick info comes in.

Field umpire: "Where it crossed the line, Gareth, where it crossed the line".

The boundary umpire then runs towards him and says "There" before continuing around the line to take position near the point post.

Now, I've also seen that vision showing the boundary umpire pointing to the spot closer to the 50m line. So as far as positioning the mark - that is entirely on the boundary umpire. He told the field umpire where it was, and that's where Newnes was set to take his kick from.

On closer inspection it appears the boundary umpire tried to incorrectly set the mark down the field and only came clean on the correct position when the Field umpire interrogated him. The lengths those umpires go in WA to cheat us.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Watch the replay with audio - you can hear the field umpire talking to the boundary umpire once the down field free kick info comes in.

Field umpire: "Where it crossed the line, Gareth, where it crossed the line".

The boundary umpire then runs towards him and says "There" before continuing around the line to take position near the point post.

Now, I've also seen that vision showing the boundary umpire pointing to the spot closer to the 50m line. So as far as positioning the mark - that is entirely on the boundary umpire. He told the field umpire where it was, and that's where Newnes was set to take his kick from.

I dont understand why Gibbons was standing where he was.....he was on the outside of the boundary line - a player manning the mark would stand on the inside to block off an inbound kick.

 

[ferrisb]

This forum caters to children too...

And often appears to be populated by them too...

 

[Sector 7G]

I dont understand why Gibbons was standing where he was.....he was on the outside of the boundary line - a player manning the mark would stand on the inside to block off an inbound kick.

He had just seen Doc run 10m around the boundary outside the line to get past Taberner. Wasn't going to make the same mistake.

WC did the same run around outside the boundary last week and I was screaming at the tele you can't do that. Well apparently you can . Doesn't really make any sense to me.

 

[Blue__Balls]

I dont understand why Gibbons was standing where he was.....he was on the outside of the boundary line - a player manning the mark would stand on the inside to block off an inbound kick.

Yeah, I'd say Gibbons heard the down-field call and wanted to take the kick. But by the time the umpire in the area got involved, it was unclear who was supposed to be taking the kick and he did what most umpires would probably do, and gave it to Newnes who was a) in the area at the time of the OOB call, and b) was the closest to the mark when it was being worked out.

Newnes was the one manning the mark for Freo's kick in. It's usually the closest player who would take that responsibility, so a fair assumption for the umpire to make.

 

[Blue__Balls]

On closer inspection it appears the boundary umpire tried to incorrectly set the mark down the field and only came clean on the correct position when the Field umpire interrogated him. The lengths those umpires go in WA to cheat us.

You could probably argue that, if it should have been closer to the 50m line, then we were actually impeded by the move further around. Yeah, it was about 2-3m closer to goal, but it was a sharper angle, with less room for a run up, and Newnes wasn't allowed to deviate from his line.

 

[slashin_velvet]

He had just seen Doc run 10m around the boundary outside the line to get past Taberner. Wasn't going to make the same mistake.

WC did the same run around outside the boundary last week and I was screaming at the tele you can't do that. Well apparently you can . Doesn't really make any sense to me.

Yeah, I thought you had to bring the ball back in behind the spot of the line - you cant play on out of bounds.

 

[Percy2257]

Pity that it’s hard to identify them. Is that Marchbank in the red top?

 

[katmanblue]

It's been pointed out somewhere else, I'm sure, but I had a good look through the Laws of the Game on Monday and it stood out.

Oddly enough - it's not in the section on free kicks for "out of bounds on the full". That just states that the free kick will be taken at the point where the ball crossed the boundary line. The 2017 version has a separate note, specifically for late contact:

View attachment 938833

That section does not exist in the latest version.

As best I can tell, though, there is nothing in the rules that stipulates which player needs to take the free kick for an OOBOTF.

Makes you wonder if it should be treated the same way as a behind - just let the team taking the kick decide who is taking it, provided they're not wasting time bringing the full back down to have a snap for goal.

I should probably also note...there doesn't seem to be anything written into the rules about who takes free kicks in most cases. It does state in the "Intention" section that they want free kicks to be awarded to a player who executes a legal tackle that results in their opponent incorrectly disposing of the ball. But, for example, a marking infringement...there's nothing in writing that says the infringed player has to take the kick. It's all about a free kick being awarded against the infringing player.

I'm assuming it's just one of those "known" things, that never gets questioned and therefore never got put onto paper. But technically, if one wanted to challenge the rules as written, we would be within the rules to have McGovern taking set shots for anyone who has their arms chopped or is pushed in the back.


References:

- 2019 - https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/do...99ff625c/2019-Laws-of-Australian-Football.pdf
- 2017 - http://www.aflcommunityclub.com.au/...oach_AFL/2017_Laws_of_Australian_Football.pdf

Out of bounds on the full doesn't apply. Down field was first. And that rule states it will be where it is the greatest penalty. So that means it could have been anywhere.

Edit: the greatest penalty bit is new this year apparently.

On SM-N960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[TD2010]

Is this situation the biggest storm in a Teacup since Andrew Walker wore a hat????

Steady on, that was a very hot day

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk

 

[Blue__Balls]

Out of bounds on the full doesn't apply. Down field was first. And that rule states it will be where it is the greatest penalty. So that means it could have been anywhere.

On SM-N960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yeah, what I'm trying to highlight though is that, even for regular On The Full calls, there is nothing in the written rules about who takes the kick. There was a specific note in the 2017 version, that in the event of late contact after a disposal, that the down field free kick would be taken by whoever was closest to where the ball landed or crossed the boundary. But that particular rule has been omitted from the latest version of the rules.

So while "common practice" might dictate it should have been Gibbons, there's actually nothing in the Laws of the Game that prevents the umpire awarding the free kick to anyone else.

The big take away is that the written rules of AFL have holes in them that you could drive a cruise ship through.

 

[Dadda Dave]

Just watching the replay ,we absolutely flogged them in that 3rd quarter cooda, shooda been 4 goals up at the break..

Ed
Has anyone else noticed that Sam Walsh is a jet ..
Everywhere in the last...

 

[Love the Drake]

Just watching the replay ,we absolutely flogged them in that 3rd quarter cooda, shooda been 4 goals up at the break..

Ed
Has anyone else noticed that Sam Walsh is a jet ..
Everywhere in the last...

Walsh’s composure has improved remarkably over the last 6 games.

He is in our best 5 players.

 

[Sector 7G]

Harry could have kick 4 on the weekend.
We really need him to put it all together.

 

[BlueZombie]

We had a storm here in Gero ( WA ) during the Freo match and my power went out shortly after the final siren - so I was robbed of an opportunity to express my sheer joy ( on here ) of what Newnesy did with that last memorable kick. My little Brother, who lives in Melbourne, called me immediately to congratulate me. I had practically lost my voice at that point. I was stunned. I mean, what a kick! As I told my kid brother, I hadn't seen that since our greatest ever Captain, Sticks, threaded a shot from an eerily similar position back in 1987 in, I think, the last H & A game against North? I know it was definitely against North. What childhood memories! It was an amazing kick from JN and it was an amazing win ( I predicted we'd win by 2 goals but 2 points will do just fine! ) and most importantly it keeps alive the hope, among we, the Faithful, that September is still very much within our reach. Bring on the Suns!

 

[thylacine60]

nice one, zombie - I was even at the 87 game and I recalled it incorrectly - thought sticks was much further out and on much less of an angle - wouldn't reckon you could call it anywhere near similar to be honest - who gives a **** though? here it is for your viewing pleasure once more:

 

[BlueZombie]

nice one, zombie - I was even at the 87 game and I recalled it incorrectly - thought sticks was much further out and on much less of an angle - wouldn't reckon you could call it anywhere near similar to be honest - who gives a fu** though? here it is for your viewing pleasure once more:

Cheers for that mate! Much appreciated. That was bloody brilliant to watch again - considering I haven't seen it in 30+ years - when I was but a whippersnapper. Still an amazing kick. And a bloody high scoring match too! And it was so sweet beating the Hawks that year after what they did to us in '86.

 

[thylacine60]

loved hearing kb passing on that scores were level at princes park...........3 games simultaneously still live for the make-up of the finals - exhilarating stuff.....