That article is calling our coach a one trick pony.From today's Fertiliser
Interesting choice for a photo showing obvious holding and then proceed to call him a one trick pony
View attachment 938059
Opinion Umpiring: Corruption or Incompetence, or both
- Thread starter RussellEbertHandball
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Not having a strong voice in the media (other than a dubious Jane Corner) surely has a sub conscience effect on the way the umps view different players / teams
Simply, if the way Dixon was mauled by the Geelong defence was applied on Hawkins and no frees resulted the Vic-centric media pack would have gone crazy on the umpires
Simply, if the way Dixon was mauled by the Geelong defence was applied on Hawkins and no frees resulted the Vic-centric media pack would have gone crazy on the umpires
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
my understanding is, that is the new rule.
it used to be the man closest to the ball but that was removed from the rules of the game 2 years ago
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
I wish Andrew Moore kicked like this against the hawks, to get us into the 2014 GF
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
- Thread starter
- #830
Charlie held by the arm by Taylor, gives away a free for over the shoulder on Henderson - play on is correct call I guess.From today's Fertiliser
Interesting choice for a photo showing obvious holding and then proceed to call him a one trick pony
View attachment 938059
Charlie has to lead into space. We have to kick it into space not on top of his head, and our other forwards have to drag their man away. Our forward(s) should stand by the boundary line and the defender might zone off, but he wont zone off 30m to be able to get 3rd man in to spoil Charlie.
Just shithouse forward set up. Bassett needs a rocket. He doesn't coach them like they are forwards but defenders.
Forzaport
Brownlow Medallist
From today's Fertiliser
Interesting choice for a photo showing obvious holding and then proceed to call him a one trick pony
View attachment 938059
Happened ALL game. If that holding free was paid in the first 20 seconds of the game like it should have been, it would have been a totally different evening.
simba_
sucking a lemon
his fursona is a GREYHOUND not a PONY
Don't want to take this thread off-topic but, yes, our forward set-up stinks, and has for years. Lead to the same spots, compete against each other, and drag their defender to the contest, creating easy 3rd man.
Looking at the Richmond v Suns game it really is hard to accept that umpiring howlers are randomised. It always seems that it's the non-VFL team that gets the hit. Not sure what the remedy is, but it's getting quite blatant.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
- Thread starter
- #835
The AFL are just incompetent PR spin driven organisation when it comes to umpiring.
Nowhere on their website can you easily find the the statement they put out about the Freo v carlton game.
Foxsports has a story time stamped 7.42pm Monday night.
Nowhere in that statement did they address the fact that the boundary umpire pointed at near where the 50m line arc intersects the boundary line is where the free kick should have been taken by Gibbons, who puts his hands up to stand the mark after the boundary umpire sets it, before the central umpire pays an F.A.D.
Nowhere did the AFL umpiring department address it in there statement!! Why?? Because they couldn't handle saying 2 out of the 5 decisions made were wrong. They had to go with 3 out of 4 were correct and the only one they got wrong was to give Newnes the kick instead of Gibbons.
I can't work out if its gross incompetence or just abject failure by Hayden Kennedy and his department.
If anyone can find the AFL statement in full please put the link in this thread.
www.foxsports.com.au
The first decision centred around a deliberate out of bounds free kick paid against Docker Matt Taberner, who failed to keep the ball in and appeared to help the ball over the boundary line with just over 20 seconds left in the game.
Carlton veteran Sam Docherty received the free kick and played on immediately, but his kick from the wing went out of bounds on the full at the half-forward flank. But just after he kicked, the umpire deemed Docker Andrew Brayshaw had made illegal late contact on Docherty while attempting to smother and paid a down-field free kick.
But in a statement on Monday night, the AFL said all three aspects — the deliberate out of bounds, the free kick against Brayshaw and the call to penalise the Dockers downfield — were “warranted and correct decisions”.
“After review today, both the deliberate out of bounds free kick paid against Fremantle’s Matt Taberner and the decision to award a down-field free kick to Carlton’s Sam Docherty after he received prohibited contact from Fremantle’s Andrew Brayshaw were assessed and warranted as correct decisions,” the statement read.
While the AFL’s wording on down-field free kicks has changed from 2019 to 2020, the intent to give the team on the receiving end of the free kick maximum advantage has remained the same. Under Section 17.1.2 titled ‘Awarding Free Kicks’ in the AFL’s 2020 rule book, it states a free kick can be awarded where the offence is or where the football is — “whichever is the greater penalty against the offending team”.
However the call to award the down-field free kick to Newnes and not Michael Gibbons, who appeared to be the closest Carlton player to the spot where Docherty’s kick landed, was incorrect. “The review also determined the down-field free kick taken by Carlton’s Jack Newnes should have been awarded to Carlton’s Michael Gibbons,” the AFL statement read.
“It is also noted the review allows for a different perspective and additional vision available compared to that of the umpire at the time.” AFL 360 host Gerard Whateley declared on Monday night that “we need a better level of officiating at the pointy end of the match”.
Are the AFL saying that if the ball lands in the crowd then that is the spot where the free kick should be taken. That's garbage. The free has to be taken from the point where it went over the line and out of play.
Nowhere on their website can you easily find the the statement they put out about the Freo v carlton game.
Foxsports has a story time stamped 7.42pm Monday night.
Nowhere in that statement did they address the fact that the boundary umpire pointed at near where the 50m line arc intersects the boundary line is where the free kick should have been taken by Gibbons, who puts his hands up to stand the mark after the boundary umpire sets it, before the central umpire pays an F.A.D.
Nowhere did the AFL umpiring department address it in there statement!! Why?? Because they couldn't handle saying 2 out of the 5 decisions made were wrong. They had to go with 3 out of 4 were correct and the only one they got wrong was to give Newnes the kick instead of Gibbons.
I can't work out if its gross incompetence or just abject failure by Hayden Kennedy and his department.
If anyone can find the AFL statement in full please put the link in this thread.
AFL declares key error in Carlton’s match-winning goal — but ticks off three other calls
AFL declares key error in Carlton’s match-winning goal — but ticks off three other calls
www.foxsports.com.au
- August 17, 2020 7:42pm BEN WATERWORTH@bjwaterwort Source: FOX SPORTS
The first decision centred around a deliberate out of bounds free kick paid against Docker Matt Taberner, who failed to keep the ball in and appeared to help the ball over the boundary line with just over 20 seconds left in the game.
Carlton veteran Sam Docherty received the free kick and played on immediately, but his kick from the wing went out of bounds on the full at the half-forward flank. But just after he kicked, the umpire deemed Docker Andrew Brayshaw had made illegal late contact on Docherty while attempting to smother and paid a down-field free kick.
But in a statement on Monday night, the AFL said all three aspects — the deliberate out of bounds, the free kick against Brayshaw and the call to penalise the Dockers downfield — were “warranted and correct decisions”.
“After review today, both the deliberate out of bounds free kick paid against Fremantle’s Matt Taberner and the decision to award a down-field free kick to Carlton’s Sam Docherty after he received prohibited contact from Fremantle’s Andrew Brayshaw were assessed and warranted as correct decisions,” the statement read.
While the AFL’s wording on down-field free kicks has changed from 2019 to 2020, the intent to give the team on the receiving end of the free kick maximum advantage has remained the same. Under Section 17.1.2 titled ‘Awarding Free Kicks’ in the AFL’s 2020 rule book, it states a free kick can be awarded where the offence is or where the football is — “whichever is the greater penalty against the offending team”.
However the call to award the down-field free kick to Newnes and not Michael Gibbons, who appeared to be the closest Carlton player to the spot where Docherty’s kick landed, was incorrect. “The review also determined the down-field free kick taken by Carlton’s Jack Newnes should have been awarded to Carlton’s Michael Gibbons,” the AFL statement read.
“It is also noted the review allows for a different perspective and additional vision available compared to that of the umpire at the time.” AFL 360 host Gerard Whateley declared on Monday night that “we need a better level of officiating at the pointy end of the match”.
Are the AFL saying that if the ball lands in the crowd then that is the spot where the free kick should be taken. That's garbage. The free has to be taken from the point where it went over the line and out of play.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
- Thread starter
- #836
Since crowds back at AO - is the noise of affirmation finally starting to take control at AO?
PA 17 v Adel 14 = +3
PA 15 v Saints 21 = -6
PA 17 v WB 14 = -3
PA 22 v Rich 11 = +11
PA 20 v Haw 8 = +12
Small neutral crowds in Qld most games at Carrara
PA 17 v Freo 15 = +2 crowd 180
PA 15 v WCE 10 = +5 crowd 450
PA 16 v GWS 11 = +5 crowd 368
PA 17 v Carl 20 = -3 Gabba 3,510
PA 16 v Mel 23 = -7 Gabba 323
PA 13 v Gee 18 = -5 3,378
2 Qld clubs
PA 17 v GC 14 = +3 No crowd
PA 12 v Bris 15 = -3 crowd 10,161
WCE at Perth Stadium
WCE 9 v Melb 11 = -2 No crowd
WCE 13 v Freo 13 = 0 Freo home game crowd 25,306
WCE 21 v Coll 21 = 0 crowd 24,824
WCE 15 v Gee 12 = +3 crowd 26,211
WCE 14 v Carl 12 = +2 crowd 19,092
WCE 12 v Haw 9 = +3 crowd 22,870
WCE 11 v GWS 8 = +3 crowd 27,339
WCE in Qld
WCE 16 v GC 16 = 0 no crowd
WCE 15 v Bri 20 = -5 Gabba crowd 1,965
WCE 10 v PA 15 = -5 crowd 450
WCE 15 v Syd 13 = 2 crowd 2,238
WCE 17 v Ade 18 = -1 crowd 210
Maybe a 20k-25k at the bigger Perth Stadium just doesn't make anywhere as much noise as 35k-40k crowd at Subiaco to con the umpires.
PA 17 v Adel 14 = +3
PA 15 v Saints 21 = -6
PA 17 v WB 14 = -3
PA 22 v Rich 11 = +11
PA 20 v Haw 8 = +12
Small neutral crowds in Qld most games at Carrara
PA 17 v Freo 15 = +2 crowd 180
PA 15 v WCE 10 = +5 crowd 450
PA 16 v GWS 11 = +5 crowd 368
PA 17 v Carl 20 = -3 Gabba 3,510
PA 16 v Mel 23 = -7 Gabba 323
PA 13 v Gee 18 = -5 3,378
2 Qld clubs
PA 17 v GC 14 = +3 No crowd
PA 12 v Bris 15 = -3 crowd 10,161
WCE at Perth Stadium
WCE 9 v Melb 11 = -2 No crowd
WCE 13 v Freo 13 = 0 Freo home game crowd 25,306
WCE 21 v Coll 21 = 0 crowd 24,824
WCE 15 v Gee 12 = +3 crowd 26,211
WCE 14 v Carl 12 = +2 crowd 19,092
WCE 12 v Haw 9 = +3 crowd 22,870
WCE 11 v GWS 8 = +3 crowd 27,339
WCE in Qld
WCE 16 v GC 16 = 0 no crowd
WCE 15 v Bri 20 = -5 Gabba crowd 1,965
WCE 10 v PA 15 = -5 crowd 450
WCE 15 v Syd 13 = 2 crowd 2,238
WCE 17 v Ade 18 = -1 crowd 210
Maybe a 20k-25k at the bigger Perth Stadium just doesn't make anywhere as much noise as 35k-40k crowd at Subiaco to con the umpires.
Nah, we've just had games against sides whose style of play gives away a high number of free kicks.
I'm confused. Don't most of us think Dixon moves around too much therefore creating havoc and unpredictabilty but to the detriment of his goal kicking accuracy?From today's Fertiliser
Interesting choice for a photo showing obvious holding and then proceed to call him a one trick pony
View attachment 938059
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
- Thread starter
- #839
When we are playing poorly Charlie has to get onto the wing to get kicks or takes those bomb kick ins from Mckenzie (and others) between the CHB line and centre circle.
See the WCE 2017 EF where he had to do everything and his fatigue affected his goal kicking.
When we are bombing the ball inside 50 because we are dominating he isn't leading into space to catch the ball out in front of his defender, but the ball sits on his head and defenders just jump into him.
If we are getting 10 to 13 inside 50's a quarter and most of those are going to Charlie, a few should be because he is leading from the goal square into space on a 20-30m lead, not signal to the kicker to just bomb it deep because he can out muscle the defence.
My response was to the author suggesting Port was a one trick pony, referring to how Richmond made Riewoldt less of a focus and Clarko got Buddy out of the goal square to be "more unpredictable and create more threats." I then said, slightly tongue in cheek, if we followed that idea we'd get Charlie fatigued and it would affect his goal kicking as some have spoken about on here, but I disagree with, as his goal kicking is still pretty average whether he's running around or not.
As the game continues to “evolve” it should become more and more like soccer. I know many don’t want to hear that and it won’t end up the same, but many aspects will head that way, particularly if protecting players and removing subjective umpiring decisions become a further focus. Having a gun player take all free kicks / marks like soccer would be interesting.
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Jane is wonderful for the club, relative to how things used to be.
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
- Jul 22, 2009
- 9,536
- 19,741
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Nottingham Forest
Haha. If that is the rule why are throws paid, aren’t they just trying to dispose of the ball by hand, but failed?
Bloody joke.
Bloody joke.
- Jul 22, 2009
- 9,536
- 19,741
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Nottingham Forest
Not sure what question was posed but that interpretation needs to go
bow and arrow
Team Captain
- Mar 3, 2014
- 392
- 798
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
So throwing and dropping the ball is ok now. Why bother tackling?
On SM-A530F using BigFooty.com mobile app
On SM-A530F using BigFooty.com mobile app
What about missing loads of purposely dropped balls after making no attempt then a bloke gets tackled the minute he grabs it, the force knocking the ball free, 'Holding the ball'.......... only seems to happen to us though?
Waspy79
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 14, 2008
- 11,365
- 11,866
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Trailblazers
Yep. A putrid rule that is that if the umpire determines the player in possession did not have prior opportunity to dispose correctly of the ball, so long as that player makes a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball, the umpire will call play on.
It just adds more grey and needs to come back to disposal being legal or not.
Similar threads
