Saints vs GWS, free kick to Carlisle?

[BigHippy]

I'm interested to find out whether people thought it was a free kick to Carlisle at the end of the Saints vs GWS game today. I haven't seen much made of it, but it's one that could go either way. If paid, the Saints would have almost certainly won the game.

IMO the umpire made the correct decision. I'd like to see what the general consensus is, so please vote in the poll.

 

[BG32]

Would have to see what else they were paying that game? If soft s**t was being paid then yes

 

[Madison]

I didn’t think so at the time but the other camera angle that they showed at halftime of the port cats game showed it clearly as day.

Was 100% a free kick. He was completely taken high. He should have marked it anyway but from the other camera angle there is no question it was a free. Umpire clearly blindsided though.

 

[BF Tiger]

The advantage that should've been paid and subsequent goal that the Saints had taken away from them early in the second quarter was worse. Saints ended up scoring a point, and then the Giants went Coast to coast for their own goal.

 

[telsor]

Only seen one angle, but it doesn't look like it.

Regardless, blame the kicker...if that ball had been delivered better (i.e. Carlisle not stretching high to reach it) it would have been an easy mark and no interference would have mattered.

 

[BG32]

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Watching it at proper speed, I thought it's play on. Slow it down, change angles it's a free.

Stiff for the saints though

 

[Plugger35]

Should definitely have been a free kick, if it was down the other end and it was a GWS player taken high then it probably would've been paid.

The umpires screwing St Kilda is just par for the course though, even playing at home we don't get the sort of favours that other teams get playing at home.

The advantage that should've been paid and subsequent goal that the Saints had taken away from them early in the second quarter was worse. Saints ended up scoring a point, and then the Giants went Coast to coast for their own goal.

Yeah that was another shocking decision that ultimately cost us a win.

 

[drd23]

From where the umpire was standing (which is the right position btw), there is no way he could have seen Davis' left arm over Carlisle's shoulder and therefore the ump can't/shouldn't give a free kick for something he can't see.

 

[CasuallyDressed]

Reckon GWS would have gotten the free.

 

[Kram]

lol absolutely no free, Carlisle choked.

 

[Seadog]

50/50, seen less paid and worse let go.

 

[pazza]

lol absolutely no free, Carlisle choked.

More like got choked.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Is this a deflection for Carlisle's weak attempt to mark?

 

[Big Cox 88]

Dropping that mark was a lot more pathetic than the umpire not calling a free in a genuine 50/50.

 

[BrisDog]

Twas’ a free kick every day of the week.

 

[Dacksaredown]

The kick to Carlisle was the worst thing about it. Shoulda hit him on the chest and game over. I guess its easier said than done when you're completely knackered. Didnt look like a free kick in real time and thats all the umpire can go on, what he sees.

 

[joop]

lol absolutely no free, Carlisle choked.

"lol"

View attachment 486154

 

[Glees]

Yes, the kick should have been better and yes, Carlisle should have marked it.

But it is still a free kick. Davis even admitted he 'got away with one'.

 

[The Swert]

Umpire was blind sided. So no.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Unlucky, but you'd hate a soft as butter free deciding a game.

Personally the onus should be on Carlisle who should have marked the thing!

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Unlucky, but you'd hate a soft as butter free deciding a game.

Personally the onus should be on Carlisle who should have marked the thing!

I don't agree with that.

It was a blatant free kick. Not 'technically there' like some of the garbage deliberate stuff that we see - but an old school rule that is in the game for a reason and has been for 100 years. You can't wrap your arm around a guy's head in a marking contest. You simply can't.

You could probably add that it was very late too.

Steven's kick was poor, and Carlisle dropped a sitter - but that is irrelevant when discussing whether or not it was a free kick. It clearly was.


On topic, it's a bit of a concern that the three umpires can do everything right (ie. be in the correct positions) and yet such a critical decision gets missed.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I don't agree with that.

It was a blatant free kick. Not 'technically there' like some of the garbage deliberate stuff that we see - but an old school rule that is in the game for a reason and has been for 100 years. You can't wrap your arm around a guy's head in a marking contest. You simply can't.

You could probably add that it was very late too.

Steven's kick was poor, and Carlisle dropped a sitter - but that is irrelevant when discussing whether or not it was a free kick. It clearly was.

On topic, it's a bit of a concern that the three umpires can do everything right (ie. be in the correct positions) and yet such a critical decision gets missed.

A side shouldn't be replying on a dodgy free at the end of the day. It was a glancing thing at worst around his head way after he's dropped the ball (as usual for Carlisle). Was it a free, technically yes, but I'd rather it be play on. There are some "frees" where the umps can just let the game go. Don't need games decided by umpires.

 

[Kram]

Would have been an extremely soft free, play on was the correct call.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Would have been an extremely soft free, play on was the correct call.

Exactly...you'd swear the team didn't have 120minutes to get in front...

Hang on...