Autopsy Round 16: Liked, Hated, Learnt

[PowerForGood]

I get that Carlton didn't man up inside 50 but if you milk 30 seconds from the clock (by feigning a set shot) and then give a short pass it is purely and simply time wasting.

So for the rest of the game you get 10 secinds to find a loose player to pass off to, otherwise its play on.
Yet for some reason people think that because you are within 50 mtr of goal you should get 30 seconds to find a player to pass off to until its play on. Why should the defensive team have to chase players and cut off leads for an extra 20 seconds, under the pretense of "having a shot"?

 

[PowerForGood]

In principle I'd go with teams only getting one 'extended' clock per I50, but even that is problematic (what about shots from outside 50, or going out then back in), so really I can't see a practical solution to this problem.

Think about what happens in basketball if you dont have a shot within 30 seconds and how a shot is defined. Then apply it to football. Its actually pretty simple. (And remembering that the clock would only start if the player is having a shot - they can play the 10-15 sec normal rule if they want to pass off)

 

[Dez!]

I get that Carlton didn't man up inside 50 but if you milk 30 seconds from the clock (by feigning a set shot) and then give a short pass it is purely and simply time wasting.

That short pass was only possible because they didn't man up.

 

[Hobbes]

Is it just me, or would it be better if the clock isn't ticking when the ball isn't in open play?

 

[telsor]

Think about what happens in basketball if you dont have a shot within 30 seconds and how a shot is defined. Then apply it to football. Its actually pretty simple. (And remembering that the clock would only start if the player is having a shot - they can play the 10-15 sec normal rule if they want to pass off)

So a guy takes a mark inside 50, the 'shot clock' starts, 5 seconds later he passes off to a guy in a better spot, who marks, holds it for 10seconds, then passes it off to a guy who gets knocked over..free kick is called, as is time off while he gets up and shakes himself off, time on is called and he quickly (say, 3secs) passes to a teammate....So what's the shot clock at now?

Yeah, no way that could ever cause problems....bet the umps would be right on top of it every single time...


and while my example wouldn't be common, it's probably more likely that the problem you're trying to fix.

 

[NathanMX]

The same people whinging about the time wasting would not care less if their team did the same thing.

Onus on opposing team to man up, not sure why Carlton had nobody on Lewis but they had their chance.

 

[Cyclonus]

I think the kicker is more than happy to have a shot unless a better opportunity presents. It's not like Neal-Bullen and Lewis has this all planned out as they were heading towards their 50. N-B would have taken the shot if Lewis hadn't used his skill and the lack of Carlton pressure to get into space.

As such, I can't see it being labelled time wasting.

 

[PowerForGood]

So a guy takes a mark inside 50, the 'shot clock' starts, 5 seconds later he passes off to a guy in a better spot, who marks, holds it for 10seconds, then passes it off to a guy who gets knocked over..free kick is called, as is time off while he gets up and shakes himself off, time on is called and he quickly (say, 3secs) passes to a teammate....So what's the shot clock at now?

Yeah, no way that could ever cause problems....bet the umps would be right on top of it every single time...


and while my example wouldn't be common, it's probably more likely that the problem you're trying to fix.

But this is only if the player calls that he wants to take a shot.... And gets 30 seconds to, you know, take a shot. That's why it's called a shot clock, not a pass clock.

The 30 seconds was brought in to allow players to go back and gather their thoughts and go through a goal kicking routine, without taking too long and wasting time. Not to have more time to get off a pass, which it was used for by Melbourne and what the complaint from some is.
If player doesn't want to have a shot, then play the game as normal. Kick it around for 5 minutes if you want to, but not getting extra time each pass.

 

[PowerForGood]

The same people whinging about the time wasting would not care less if their team did the same thing.

Onus on opposing team to man up, not sure why Carlton had nobody on Lewis but they had their chance.

That can be said about any rule (even striking) so we shouldn't change any rule ever? And everyone keeps talking about the incidnt, not whether the rule itself make sense.

What purpose does the shot clock have, if you don't have to take a shot?

 

[telsor]

But this is only if the player calls that he wants to take a shot.... And gets 30 seconds to, you know, take a shot. That's why it's called a shot clock, not a pass clock.

The 30 seconds was brought in to allow players to go back and gather their thoughts and go through a goal kicking routine, without taking too long and wasting time. Not to have more time to get off a pass, which it was used for by Melbourne and what the complaint from some is.
If player doesn't want to have a shot, then play the game as normal. Kick it around for 5 minutes if you want to, but not getting extra time each pass.

It's still yet another thing for the umpires to have to worry about all game in order to discourage something that would happen less than one game in a hundred....and people wonder why umps miss things...

 

[PowerForGood]

It's still yet another thing for the umpires to have to worry about all game in order to discourage something that would happen less than one game in a hundred....and people wonder why umps miss things...

Exactly. So lets simplify it if we are going to use it.

 

[NathanMX]

That can be said about any rule (even striking) so we shouldn't change any rule ever? And everyone keeps talking about the incidnt, not whether the rule itself make sense.

What purpose does the shot clock have, if you don't have to take a shot?

Pretty sure most fans are not appreciative of their own players striking though in the same manner.

Carlton had their chance to win it, Melbourne took it that's all. And unlike Richmond or Hawthorn or whoever endlessly rushing behinds freely the 30 second rule is not as damaging in the same respects, I mean would it really have been so hard for Carlton not to have a man on the mark for the first Dees player thus having 18 men to mark 17 Demons ensuring no easy mark to Lewis?

Here's an idea, no runners on the ground at all in the last 2 minutes of any quarter, no time on the scoreboard either. Then maybe we will see how play goes when players have no idea if it is "milk the clock" time or not.

 

[I Lost My Keays]

Liked: seeing the crows play like the form we had from rounds 1-6, big tex and JJ playing blinders.
HATED: West Coast making Port look good. Richmond losing to let port take top 4 again. (as you can see I HATE port)
Learnt: Sydney will win the flag.. they are finally in the 8 and there is no turning back now.. they will win the flag with that side they have.

I hate port as much as the next guy. But they deserved that win and played well.

 

[stevie26]

I think the kicker is more than happy to have a shot unless a better opportunity presents. It's not like Neal-Bullen and Lewis has this all planned out as they were heading towards their 50. N-B would have taken the shot if Lewis hadn't used his skill and the lack of Carlton pressure to get into space.

As such, I can't see it being labelled time wasting.

Lewis admitted the plan was discussed and set up with Neale Bullen before NB went to line up for the set shot (on AFL360- Tuesday).

 

[Cyclonus]

Lewis admitted the plan was discussed and set up with Neale Bullen before NB went to line up for the set shot (on AFL360- Tuesday).

Well, blow me (down).

 

[DemonLord]

Lewis admitted the plan was discussed and set up with Neale Bullen before NB went to line up for the set shot (on AFL360- Tuesday).

Actually what he said was "ANB took the mark and indicated he would take the shot - start the shot clock. Lewis then indicated to ANB - take your time then pass it to me. ANB said he was confident on taking his shot, the runner gave him the news on time left and he passed to Lewis as planned". So in fact the plan was setup after ANB indicated he would take his shot but before he started his shot routine.

I can see both sides of the argument. But in reality they used the current rules to their advantage.

Lets look at a few options if ANB takes his shot.

A. He kicks the goal leaving about 30 seconds for Carlton to kick 2 goals (as they would by now be 8 points behind). Same result in all likely hood.

B. He kicks a behind or out on the full. Carlton have 30 seconds to travel the length of the ground and kick a goal, something they had not been able to do in the last 15 minutes of play let alone in 30 seconds when Melbourne could flood the defence. I would back same result just a 3 point win not 8.

C. He doesn't call for a shot and passes off to Lewis after the 10 seconds. This would leave about 45-50 seconds on the clock and Lewis gets his 30 seconds. See A: and B: for probable outcome as there is now only 15 seconds or less to score for Carlton.

D: Carlton decide to do something radical and man up. This forces ANB to shoot, go directly to option A or B above to see probable outcomes.

I think the bottom line is, Carlton played a really good game, lost 2 players early in the 2nd quarter and ran out of petrol tickets.

DL.

 

[SSSSSS]

Hate - Razor Ray. Utter cretin. Every game he umpires is the same over umpired mess regardless of which team. Was some horrendous decisions going both ways today.

The quicker he is out the game but the better it will be. It's bad enough having to see his ugly mug and his whiny voice going along with his decisions.