Umpires?????

[camsmith]

And you support a team that last year walked the ball over the goal line time and time again. Hardly think that is playing fair(if you are talking about playing in the spirit of the game) and they did win using that tactic against Essendon. I think you should pick a new team or get off your high horse.

BTW, which Cats players fall forward?

The two are totally different, one is close to cheating by trying to fool the umpire into awarding a free kick the other is simply following the rules as they were.

For instance, its like saying in soccer that diving when there is little or no contact is the same as taking a ball to the corner post when trying to run the clock down. See the difference?

Unfortunately I didn't have a pen and paper out to write down which Geelong players did it. You'll have to watch the replay.

You've exposed him, Tay.

You couldn't be any more hypocritical if you tried, camsmith.

If you're going to get on your soapbox, patronise others and grandstand, you best make sure you don't have any skeletons in your closet.

Well done, you wasted a few minutes of your life using the search function to prove a point that isn't even valid.

 

[TheTimeCometh]

this news just in : footy fan complains about umpiring - more information on this unprecendented event as it comes to hand.

 

[Exhale You]

Well done, you wasted a few minutes of your life using the search function to prove a point that isn't even valid.

I admire your attempt to justify your obvious hypocrisy, Pecksniff.

 

[camsmith]

I admire your attempt to justify your obvious hypocrisy, Pecksniff.

If it was so obvious it would be easy for you to point it out.

 

[Exhale You]

If it was so obvious it would be easy for you to point it out.

Really, is that it? Wow.

You came in here, got on your soapbox about players exploiting the rules to win games of footy and claimed that you wouldn't want to win that way, yet when one of your own did exactly that, you were more than happy to take the win.

You can spin all you like, it won't change the fact that you got shown up as a massive hypocrite.

 

[camsmith]

You came in here, got on your soapbox about players exploiting the rules to win games of footy and claimed that you wouldn't want to win that way, yet when one of your own did exactly that, you were more than happy to take the win.

You can spin all you like, it won't change the fact that you got shown up as a hypocrite.

You forgot to add the part where I explained the difference between the two.

 

[bigdroppunt]

I going to tip that camsmith is a female....and cant walk away from an arguement.

let the lol's roll......

 

[Tay29]

You forgot to add the part where I explained the difference between the two.

There isn't a difference. You state that one is cheating. How is exaggerating contact cheating? There is no rule in the AFL that says players are not allowed to exaggerate contact. Unlike in your flawed example of soccer where diving is outlawed in the rules of the game.

While in no way am I agreeing with you that Cats players fall forward as I watched the game and didn't notice it more than once or twice. You would be kidding yourself if you think Richmond players don't exaggerate contact either. All teams have that kind of player who tries to win a free kick of soft contact.

I do agree with you on one point, as you so boldly stated, Bowden was playing within the rules. Likewise players who throw their arms out or fall forward are also playing within the rules. Is it fair play or within the spirit of the game? No but neither was walking the ball over the line because Bowden was too scared to kick to a contest.

 

[reidy75]

I'd prefer the teams I follow to play fair and win fair.

Yet you support Richmond, who play a crud style and don't win....

 

[JUBJUB]

And the JC 50 they didn't see it happen and went off the replay which showed the guy tackling him then the camera panned away - we didn't actually SEE him hold him down, there was no footage but they just jumped and said it was a wrong decision from the crap half replay. I am pretty sure the umpire said 'you held him to the ground' after he gave the 50 which happened after the footage they had.

Correct hamG.If you watch the replay of the game you'll see JC gets tackled and then the Richmond player holds him down on the ground.That's what the free and 50 was for.When they showed replays of it afterwards and on other shows it was cut away just as the Richmond player started to hold him down.Anyone at the ground watching would've seen what the free and 50 was for straight away.

 

[Sausage roll]

Jeff Gieschen says 50m penalty that hurt Tigers was incorrect


I watched the game again today and to think you guys were complaining about umpires....please.

 

[Glassjaw]

Jeff Gieschen says 50m penalty that hurt Tigers was incorrect


I watched the game again today and to think you guys were complaining about umpires....please.

It was incorrect. So were a few others. And so were about 15 wrong calls at Geelong's expense. Now feel free to take your 0 points and go back to your board.

 

[camsmith]

Correct hamG.If you watch the replay of the game you'll see JC gets tackled and then the Richmond player holds him down on the ground.That's what the free and 50 was for.When they showed replays of it afterwards and on other shows it was cut away just as the Richmond player started to hold him down.Anyone at the ground watching would've seen what the free and 50 was for straight away.

As Sausage roll mentioned, even Gieschen has said it was wrong to give a 50m for it.

There isn't a difference. You state that one is cheating. How is exaggerating contact cheating? There is no rule in the AFL that says players are not allowed to exaggerate contact. Unlike in your flawed example of soccer where diving is outlawed in the rules of the game.

While in no way am I agreeing with you that Cats players fall forward as I watched the game and didn't notice it more than once or twice. You would be kidding yourself if you think Richmond players don't exaggerate contact either. All teams have that kind of player who tries to win a free kick of soft contact.

I do agree with you on one point, as you so boldly stated, Bowden was playing within the rules. Likewise players who throw their arms out or fall forward are also playing within the rules. Is it fair play or within the spirit of the game? No but neither was walking the ball over the line because Bowden was too scared to kick to a contest.

I said close to cheating, because it is trying to trick the umpire into giving a free kick. Of course there is no rule as yet in AFL but it doesn't make it right, it is different to what Bowden did as he wasn't bending the umpires interpretation.

All teams have that player that makes things look worse than they are, but it seemed to me to be a tactic of Geelong as a whole, i'll give it time and see if its a trend.

As for the Bowden issue once again, I still dont agree that Bowden went overboard in rushing the ball over, he walked the ball over the line once... then kicked it to McMahon.

Yet you support Richmond, who play a crud style and don't win....

We played a pretty good brand of footy in the 3rd, last week.

And won..... the quarter.

 

[JUBJUB]

We played a pretty good brand of footy in the 3rd, last week.

And won..... the quarter.

A shame for Richmond that games have 4 quarters

 

[Sausage roll]

It was incorrect. So were a few others. And so were about 15 wrong calls at Geelong's expense. Now feel free to take your 0 points and go back to your board.

Great response..flog

Your "wrong Calls" didn't see the opposition end up on the goaline repeatedly

 

[catempire]

Your "wrong Calls" didn't see the opposition end up on the goaline repeatedly

Plenty did actually. I'm watching the replay now.

Ball kicked to Ablett and King. King holding Ablett by the hand. No free. King dives forward and there's no contact whatsoever. He gets a free and Richmond kick the ball down to Richmond's forward line and a goal is kicked.

There's one. I can list them as I go if you want...

 

[DanA]

I said close to cheating, because it is trying to trick the umpire into giving a free kick. Of course there is no rule as yet in AFL but it doesn't make it right.

You mean to say it is not against the rules, yet, but it's not in the spirit of the game?

Funny that's what the AFL rules commitee thought about what Bowden did. They've subsequently changed the rules so that it is not possible anymore.

 

[darren forssman]

Post removed by mod

you could always stay on your own board so you dont have to deal with us "flogs". just an idea.

 

[catempire]

post removed by mod

Who gives a stuff whether it ended up on the goal line. It resulted in a goal.

The point is, there were 50+ free kicks paid for the match. Richmond got 60% of them. Many resulted in goals to Richmond or prevented Geelong from kicking goals.

To isolate 1 or 2 incorrect calls is pointless. There were many more than that and they went both ways.

You'll realise this (if Richmond every actually improve) that umpires don't actually impact the result of too many games. Good teams win matches. Geelong had Richmond's measure. End of story.

 

[Glassjaw]

Richmond got 60% of them. Many resulted in goals to Richmond or prevented Geelong from kicking goals.

Spot on, but it was actually 68% they got. 68% went to them, 32% to us, and they think they got robbed. MASSIVE lolz.

 

[Tay29]

Ball kicked to Ablett and King. King holding Ablett by the hand. No free. King dives forward and there's no contact whatsoever. He gets a free and Richmond kick the ball down to Richmond's forward line and a goal is kicked

This interpretation of head high contact bothers me if that is the incident I remember from the first quarter. I've only seen the game once but I thought there was small contact. However what I noticed is that King stands a little and then dives head first forward into a Cats player who is standing still drawing the free kick.

I am not laying into King here but the rule in general. King created the contact by moving into someone else's space head first. The defender did nothing wrong but to be standing in the wrong spot as King initially had no forward momentum. The AFL in trying to stamp out dangerous neck injuries are actually encouraging players to take more risks and put themselves in vulnerable situations all because the actions of the player who has the ball is not taken into account. There should be some sort of middle ground like a player ducking his head to avoid a tackle.

It won't be took long before we see players running around the ground head first hoping to run into another player.

As for the Bowden issue once again, I still dont agree that Bowden went overboard in rushing the ball over, he walked the ball over the line once... then kicked it to McMahon.

He rushed the ball twice in that passage of play with pressure he brought onto himself because he wouldn't kick to a contest. He eventually did that on the third attempt. Of course you don't think anything wrong with it because you won. Hence your hypocrisy. If you can sit there and claim that what he did was fair play(which the original rushed behind rule was intended for) while criticising other teams actions of fair play then you have zero credibility.

 

[Brasil2007]

Geez, don't you Richmond blokes have something better to do? Maybe you should be writing to your coach asking why after five years of rebuilding you've got a team that has only won one quarter of football for the year.