Review Round 9, 2019 - Brisbane Lions vs. Adelaide

[DERRINALPHIL]

Re Rayner: form is a very intangible thing. One game soon it'll all click. Like McStay, who played his best all-round game for us in ages, possibly ever.

FWIW, Berry, who I rate very highly, cracked a couple of absolute clangers in the last Qu. which could easily have cost us the game. The message- don't turn inside, when in doubt go the boundary, and don't handball to space in hope.

We need to polish up our finishing game when we're in front with a few to go.

A point of interest as a long-term observer, I was only a few metres away Neale on the wing when he clamped onto the pill on the wing. His hard clump grasp on the ball was clearly audible. Wouldn't want to shake hands with this bloke without then counting my fingers. And a free message to the rotating Neale taggers- don't stir him up, it only makes him bore in all the harder. 39 possessions- what a star. Was talking to an under-age coach this morning- Neale's ability to handball off either hand, but also backwards off either hand, may well in time revolutionise the game.

Re the officials- I honestly think that when they get on a roll it's like an infection. Hey, we're in it together. Let's back it up with more crap. I was asked by my companion on Saturday why this was so. My probably inadequate response- we're in a non-AFL state where crap umpiring doesn't rate a mention, whereas if this happened at the G hell would break loose and it'd be Bendigo here we come.

Hey, lay off Bendigo.

 

[mpal6]

To be fair to our boys, the Crows play their best footy when they slingshot out of defence, allowing their forwards to get in behind the opposition defence. It is all about speed of ball movement. Perhaps that part of their game was off last week or it could also be that our pressure didn’t allow them to get the sort of quick, accurate ball movement that they wanted.

It lies somewhere in the middle between our views I think. Adelaide's slingshot relies on Atkins, Smith and Laird but when they are contained like we did, their 40m run n carry + 50m roost just becomes a kick out of defensive half to center. The players at their center line are not known for pacy rebound, giving us that extra few seconds to adjust. We don't get that with the team's mentioned in my post, which I believe is an area of development for our list.

 

[DERRINALPHIL]

Having missed the game due to my election day and night polling booth duties , I've since watched the replay

The first was for the sheer pleasure of it but at the same time trying to get a feel for whether the umpiring was as detrimental to us as is being suggested by many here.

First impression was that we got the rough end of the pineapple but then I did something I haven't done before - watch the replay a second time in an attempt to dissect every free kick (and non-free kick) as dispassionately as I could, quarter by quarter, decision by decision, taking notes as I went

These are decisions/non-decisions that I thought were worth commenting on

First Quarter

1) 2:41 - FK Crows for a tackle my Mitch Robbo
looks like a textbook side on forceful tackle and I'm confused why it's not legal. Almost seems that the ump has penalised him for tackling too hard.
Calling this as an incorrect decision against Lions

2) 4:20 Neale looks like he could get a FK for ITB in a tackle but no call....50/50 for Crows

3) 6:33 FK Crows for Josh Walker holding in contest after Crows kick in (looks soft)... 50/50 for Crows

4) 15:52 High contact against Rayner in a gang tackle missed by the ump....Lynch first praises the Crows for not giving away a free then after seeing the replay, changes his mind and opines that they were "a bit lucky"(not to concede a free)

Calling this an incorrect non decision against Lions

Healy then offers :- " gee there are a couple of 50/50's not going their (the Lions) way and a couple of 50/50'S going to the visitors"

5) 21:08 Josh Walker appears to push Crows player out in a marking contest but no decision

I'm calling this an incorrect non-decision against Crows

6) 24:22 FK Lions for HTB . (First free for us for the match) met by the predictable bronx cheers from the crowd . IMO it's actually a pretty soft one and looks like a bit of a "square up" for the previous softies for the Crows

50/50 for Lions

7) 29:40 Linc appears to be hit high with head over ball. No call. 50/50 for Crows

8) 31:09 Hartigan (Crows) kick straight to the boundary line. Lions appeal to ump for deliberate but nothing doing.... 50/50 for Crows

9) 31:53 After Gallucci manhandles Mitch over the boundary line, the latter reacts and there is a bit of jumper pulling and generally harmless squaring off between the two until the ump rushes in and plucks a "high" free to the Crows. Mitch then looks like he blows up and so gets a 50 to boot. Even allowing for my obvious Lions bias, this looks to me as another case of an umpire conflating a relatively minor incident into a "look at me" opportunity by applying the "reverse halo" effect against a player that never seems to get any love from the officials
No wonder there was smoke coming out of Robbo's ears at quarter time.

I'm classifying both the free and the 50 as "kneejerk" decisions



Second Quarter

10) 2.:10 FK Lions near the boundary line from which Hippy subsequently kicks a great around the corner goal. I've watched this several times and still have no idea what this free was for. Players look confused and Lynch/Healy can't work it out either.

I'm classifying this as a "mystery" decision for Lions

11) 10:08 FK Crows......... Walker v Walker
Looks soft and Heally calls it "reasonably lucky"

50/50 for Crows

12) 13:07 FK Crows.........Walker v Walker again
very slight contact from Josh on Tex's arm. Looks even softer than the previous free

50/50 for Crows

14) 22.21 FK Lions........front on contact against Linc McCarthy
Lynch says there isn't much in it but Healy reckons it's fair enough because it was a mark until he got his arm "whacked"

Let's call it a 50/50 for Lions

13) 31:34
Blatant throw by Betts resulting in goal to the Crows.
Lynch seems to find it amusing, referring to it as an "attempted kick at best... heh heh.... ah no that's a throw"..ha ha , yuk yuk.

Incorrect non decision against Lions


Third Quarter

14) 6:40 Even the commentators seem universally gobsmacked at the "no 50" non decision when the Crows player clearly runs through the mark
Appalling miss by the umpire

Incorrect non-decision against Lions

15) 22.32 FK (again) to Tex, this time against HA for "holding". If it's there, it's barely even noticeable

Close to incorrect but I'll call it 50/50 for Crows

16) 24:12 mark to Dan McStay but it 's pretty clearly a push out. Can't disagree with the commentators on that one.

Incorrect non-decision against Crows


Fourth Quarter

17) 24:42 FK Adelaide for a "block" against Stef in ruck contest from boundary throw in. Stef thinks it's his free and the Adelaide ruck looks surprised that it's his.

50/50 for Crows

18) 29:30 outrageous attempt by Betts to stand on Gardiner's shoulders and clearly an unrealistic attempt at a mark.
Amazingly, there is no whistle and even more amazingly, all Healy is interested in is for the "touch on the line" call from the Goal Umpire to be reviewed.........

"I want THAT reviewed" says Gerard.

Irrespective of what Healy wanted I'm calling it an Incorrect non-decision against Lions


In summary then , I have the contentious decisions broken up as follows:-

50/50's for Lions - 2

50/50's for Crows - 7

Incorrect Decisions/ non-decisions against Lions - 5

Incorrect decisions/ non-decisions against Crows - 2

That leaves numbers 9) and 10) which just happen to occur either side of quarter time. After the harsh treatment meted out to Mitch at the end of the first, there is this curious free to Hippy near the boundary which happily, he slots. Now the cynic in me suspects that there may have been a little square up going on. Must be some other reason though because as we all know, umpires NEVER do that sort of thing.

MY conclusion from all of this is that we really did get a raw deal with the 50/50 calls and especially with some gross non-decisions where the umps seemed to have misplaced their whistles.

So that's it. Subjective I know but I've tried to be as balanced and quantitative as I could be.

I don't want to invite argument here so no correspondence will be entered into.

The way to reduce the number of doubtful frees in marking contests is to simply ban any pushing with the hands in a marking contest. Suddenly all these annoying decisions disappear and more importantly more marks will be taken as the players will be setting themselves to catch the ball or punch it away.

I love a full forward taking a mark in the square (I am always behind the goals at the BSO) and my rule change will improve my enjoyment of the game

 

[jackess]

It lies somewhere in the middle between our views I think. Adelaide's slingshot relies on Atkins, Smith and Laird but when they are contained like we did, their 40m run n carry + 50m roost just becomes a kick out of defensive half to center. The players at their center line are not known for pacy rebound, giving us that extra few seconds to adjust. We don't get that with the team's mentioned in my post, which I believe is an area of development for our list.

Smith was really threatening to win the game for them in the second half.

 

[mpal6]

Smith was really threatening to win the game for them in the second half.

Yep, Atkins was prominent in 4th quarter as well.

 

[buttermuffs]

I think there would be a subtle nagging in every umpire’s head, sub-conscious perhaps but there nevertheless, that the media will be all over them for a bad call. Back page of the newspaper or a big story on TV sport and the footy talk shows, anger and memes in footy forums and social media. It must weigh heavily on them.

But then, officiate a game involving a Qld (and to a lesser extent NSW) team and it must feel quite liberating for umpires. Call what you like against the Qld team, or don’t call ones for them and the outrage is virtually non-existent and short lived. As long as you err on the side of the opposition in 50-50 calls, all will be good, the outrage will be like a minor sunshower compared to the violent storm of indignation and fury all week if you call against the opposition.

Umpires want to umpire again next week so their review I am sure would be as much a measure of the lack of outrage they generated as it is a measure of the technical application of rules.

That is so unbelievably false. The umpires go through a grading process each game, and does not factor in outrage at all. There are still coaches in Queensland that attend the game and grade the field, boundary and goal umpires. They are all competing for a spot in Finals and subsequently the Grand Final, why would they throw that away because they are umpiring in Queensland and not Melbourne.

 

[Tassie4ever]

That is so unbelievably false. The umpires go through a grading process each game, and does not factor in outrage at all. There are still coaches in Queensland that attend the game and grade the field, boundary and goal umpires. They are all competing for a spot in Finals and subsequently the Grand Final, why would they throw that away because they are umpiring in Queensland and not Melbourne.

I wonder how the grading on the non 50m will go.

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

 

[dlanod]

Looked at the slomo of Mathieson's effort on the back of a Crow's players scone.

About confirms my on-field opinion of this bloke. Needs to grow up. If nothing else it was a dog act.

Will provide a teammate with an opportunity and for someone who isn't exactly entrenched might have been a bad, bad career move.

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

Nah, not a dog act - a God act. He was just trying to emulate a dual Brownlow medalist.

 

[dlanod]

There's been a number of questions about umpiring and getting dropped. Here's the list of changes this season. Our umpires on the weekend were Donlon, Haussen and Gavine.

 

[PattyKwasagun]

It lies somewhere in the middle between our views I think. Adelaide's slingshot relies on Atkins, Smith and Laird but when they are contained like we did, their 40m run n carry + 50m roost just becomes a kick out of defensive half to center. The players at their center line are not known for pacy rebound, giving us that extra few seconds to adjust. We don't get that with the team's mentioned in my post, which I believe is an area of development for our list.

Not entirely sure I agree. I don't think any of the teams you mentioned necessarily are faster in their transition from defence than Adelaide, I think they just applied great pressure to us that we couldn't match. That led to bad turnovers which led to them rebounding quickly. It's the immense pressure that leads to turnovers and where they take place that is the core problem to me I think - not much to do with the speed of an opposition backline.

 

[buttermuffs]

I wonder how the grading on the non 50m will go.

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

Under the decision making grade, there would be a -1 put. It will also be reviewed and resolved so that the same mistake doesn’t happen.

 

[Tassie4ever]

Nah, not a dog act - a God act. He was just trying to emulate a dual Brownlow medalist.

Hate to be in the position of defending Ablett [who should have gotten 1 for the second infringement], but the nature of the two [or 3] incidents were entirely different.

Mathieson deliberately elbowed the Crows player in the head from behind, when play had stopped. It was a considered action, and quite honestly pretty cowardly. If the player had gone to ground The Beast would have gotten more than 1 game, and deservedly so. Stupid is what it was. What, have all these cameras miraculously disappeared??

 

[dlanod]

Hate to be in the position of defending Ablett [who should have gotten 1 for the second infringement], but the nature of the two [or 3] incidents were entirely different.

Mathieson deliberately elbowed the Crows player in the head from behind, when play had stopped. It was a considered action, and quite honestly pretty cowardly. If the player had gone to ground The Beast would have gotten more than 1 game, and deservedly so. Stupid is what it was. What, have all these cameras miraculously disappeared??

My post was strongly tongue in cheek, so yes the incidents were different but IMO Mathieson didn't deliberately elbow the Crows player in the head. It looked very much like he was aiming for the upper back, the Crows player dropped at the knees and as a result it copped him high. That's not an excuse because there was no reason to do it in the first place, but it does provide context. Ablett OTOH was in play at least, but also looked very much like he was trying to go high (left his feet, elbow out).

 

[Harris Specter]

Anyone heard whether we are contesting his 1 week ban?

 

[jackess]

Anyone heard whether we are contesting his 1 week ban?

Doesn't look like it

 

[Lions_Insider]

Anyone heard whether we are contesting his 1 week ban?

We are not.

 

[Footballator]

Umpiring standard needs review across the board. That was country league stuff there on Sat and woeful against Collingwood. Not rewarding the tackler has to stop as do the throws - they cost goals in our case. I am sure players practice the slingshot throw - they always seem to favour the team they play for. Ping em. The non 50 for across the mark was amateurish at best and cost us a goal opportunity in retrospect. This knocked out in the tackle crap is spoiling the game. It shouldn't be a case of getting frustrated by poor umpiring at the footy. Their standard is effecting peoples enjoyment of the sport. They should be neither seen nor noticed if they adjudicated properly. I don't think there is genuine bias but when playing the big teams they make themselves look like it.

 

[buttermuffs]

Umpiring standard needs review across the board. That was country league stuff there on Sat and woeful against Collingwood. Not rewarding the tackler has to stop as do the throws - they cost goals in our case. I am sure players practice the slingshot throw - they always seem to favour the team they play for. Ping em. The non 50 for across the mark was amateurish at best and cost us a goal opportunity in retrospect. This knocked out in the tackle crap is spoiling the game. It shouldn't be a case of getting frustrated by poor umpiring at the footy. Their standard is effecting peoples enjoyment of the sport. They should be neither seen nor noticed if they adjudicated properly. I don't think there is genuine bias but when playing the big teams they make themselves look like it.

How do we fix it?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[jackess]

Watching the replay and Hippy really should’ve kicked 5 or 6 including the missed 50.

Even though he’s still only averaging 4 marks a game he’s not far off having a 50+ goal season especially with the rest of the team improving.

Oh and it would help if the umps ever paid a chopping arms free.

 

[spotthedog1]

Watching the replay and Hippy really should’ve kicked 5 or 6 including the missed 50.

Even though he’s still only averaging 4 marks a game he’s not far off having a 50+ goal season especially with the rest of the team improving.

Oh and it would help if the umps ever paid a chopping arms free.

He's coming along very nicely. Was great to see him sticking the arms out this weekend and actually extend towards the ball...

This year particularly, he's not been sticking the mits out when he's on a lead - keeps trying to take them on the chest, and then getting spoiled. If he can put his arms out in front, I reckon he'll mark a lot more. Of course, he'll get chopped a lot more too, and very few of them will get called, but I still reckon he'll take a few more on the lead.

 

[BrainOfMorbius]

ejection duties

If only

 

[jackess]

He's coming along very nicely. Was great to see him sticking the arms out this weekend and actually extend towards the ball...

This year particularly, he's not been sticking the mits out when he's on a lead - keeps trying to take them on the chest, and then getting spoiled. If he can put his arms out in front, I reckon he'll mark a lot more. Of course, he'll get chopped a lot more too, and very few of them will get called, but I still reckon he'll take a few more on the lead.

 

[bungalow_bill]

You don't hear the Buddy/Hippy comparisons any more and for good reason I suppose. Hipwood is fairly unique as far as half forwards go. How many 203 cm string bean forwards are there? Daniher would be the closest comparison.

 

[jackess]

You don't hear the Buddy/Hippy comparisons any more and for good reason I suppose. Hipwood is fairly unique as far as half forwards go. How many 203 cm string bean forwards are there? Daniher would be the closest comparison.

Westhoff

 

[LongLion]

Westhoff

Westhoff 199cm Daniher 200cm Hippy 204cm