The free against Gresham when Owens marked was a joke. No read for the game whatsoever. They saved Melbourne's asses there as we were all over them. Ruined the spectacle as you say.
It shocked me that Petracca was allowed to continue running through the zone on the "idea" he was attempting to leave. * off he was, he could run the opposite way but chose to run behind the player instead. Should have been an immediate 50.
The one on Marshall really was there, you cant just hold onto a player even if its an awkard one where you are hanging onto them for support so I cant critisize that TOO much. The Owens one was a complete joke and an incorrect interpretation of that rule however. He was contesting the ball on the ground, not sliding into it which is what the rule is meant to stamp out (breaking knees/legs) and it was an absolute critical moment of the match as well.
Its frustrating because this s**t happens in almost every contest and as long as they both are on each other its play on. Is it techincally there? Yes. Is it fairly adjudicated? Absolutely not.
4th umpire just means a fourth different interpretation adding further confusion.
Reason why Butler wasn't suspended, ok not really, the tackled player wasn't injured, but the discussion was you can't take accidents out of football.
I dont believe the knee was accidental in the slightest. He leads with it straight into his opponent to legaly push him under the ball and I firmly believe it was with the intent to hurt his opponent. Did he intend to concuss him? No not directly but that was just a bonus. May is not a clean player whose happy to punch his own team mates, why would he have any care for his opponent?
I played footy years ago against teams where there were a couple of guys who went in with the cocked knees in marking contests with the intention of doing damage- it got a bit dirty at times.
I'll raise your Andrew Stephens with a Nick Foote and he was doing it again on Sat night, pedantic to an extreme on one hand and utterly inconsistent on the other. Seems to hate us. Shows a real problem with recruiting umpires at this level, well most levels really, when such an ordinary umpire continually gets a gig.
To me the Trac one was 1000000000% wrong.
Any time a player manages to get someone "playing on" in the protected area it should be a 50 against them. If you are in a position to tackle then you were NOT moving out of the protected zone. Whats the ******* point of it if not to actually protect the player? The AFL are a bunch of absolute morons who bring in the stand rule to encourage this then fail to actually adjudicate it WITHIN THE RULES. Its not even a grey area like so much else in the sport.
In the Brisbane game Howard got the 50 against him for Keidan Coleman NOT playing on, which to be fair he didn’t play on but Howard also didn’t encroach, he just trotted off aimlessly.
Yep, it's like an old mate of mine says..."You don't fix stupidity by adding more stupid into the mix...because then it just descends to being f*cking moronic."4th umpire just means a fourth different interpretation adding further confusion.
