At least they’ve shown in that scenario the decision can be overturnedYeah that's a pretty poor error by the ump to pay the mark. If that was a close game, the outrage would be through the roof.
Collingwood v West Coast was a prime example of ridiculous over the top HTB decisions, yet 2nd half they stopped paying it pretty much!I’m finding it very hard to understand the holding the ball rule this season.
This stems from the different game to game interpretations.
No a common misconception of those in the rule changing club at the AFL that have fiddled and confused beyond sense!No, there's not, just a common misconception by fans.
Blatant 50???Are 50 metre penalties paid at all anymore? Seems like you can kick the ball away and not get penalised.
There was one yesterday that confirmed my thoughts, can't remember the game but the ball was clearly kicked out on the full and the bloke who took the mark over the line then threw the ball to the boundary umpire. Blatant 50 in years gone by and I feel like the players have picked up on the fact they're no longer getting paid and are exploiting it.
Yes proves my point , the rules crucify all eighteen teams sometime during every weekend and every game, too much complication and the fans who write on big footy all see it , but when something "blatant" happens as we all witness every week, we all think its only us!I always laugh at the many people on bigfooty who complain about the one sided umpiring and 'our club' needs to talk to the AFL about it happening each week (or the AFL deliberately tell the umpires to pay frees agaist us because they hate us). Then you look at the opposition boards and they are saying the exact same thing about their side. Not much bias shown or impacts their thoughts on the umpiring each week.
I don't disagree. It's just somewhat bizarre how different it is being adjudicated this year compared to last year. Throwing the ball to the boundary umpire when it was clearly out on the full would've been a 50 metre penalty 10/10 times the past 5 years yet this year seems to be different.Blatant 50???
The fifty is over killed every time its used , especially for the run past rubbish, and players getting heated up.
Also I think maybe the umps have eased off on it, 50's are for very serious misdemeanors, not walking an inch and a half over the mark.
50M penalties should be seen very rarely, they can be game changers for pettiness, that is not fair.
My favorite is 'if you do it again I'll pay a free kick'. How about if it's a free kick, just pay itIve never understood the off the ball stuff. You can push and scrag all you like, but if you get a fingernail on the neck it's called too high? So what about all the pushes in the back, the holdings on? Even in tackles when its a ball up, the player will have the arm over the neck, nup, nothing, but if you graze an elbow in the marking contest CHOPPING THE ARMS.
Ziebell getting shirtfronted by Tuohy right in front of goals was one of the worst non free's I have seen in a while.
Took his eyes of the ball and jumped into Ziebell knocking him down, ball get's taken be Geelong down the other end for a goal.
Razor Ray right there in front of it, terrible terrible non decision. Ziebell would of had a shot from 15m out in front to put North in front and maybe set up a bit of momentum. Instead Geelong get a goal and set up there momentum.
I don't think ziebell is one who milks frees but I don't mind it if umpires have a bias against players who milk free kicks. He did say he thought ziebell went down a lot easier than he normally would. Nothing worse than seeing a player who it normally takes 2 blokes to bring to the ground get a soft touch and falls as if he has been shot (not ziebell but in general).And Ray " admitted " yesterday on radio that he thought Jack put a " bit of mayo " ( Ray's words ) to get a free kick earlier. So he didn't pay the block
So instead of implemeting the rules he bent them to his own agenda ! ! !
No, the game isn't rigged and the draw is fair and equitable.
I don't think ziebell is one who milks frees but I don't mind it if umpires have a bias against players who milk free kicks. He did say he thought ziebell went down a lot easier than he normally would. Nothing worse than seeing a player who it normally takes 2 blokes to bring to the ground get a soft touch and falls as if he has been shot (not ziebell but in general).
If you are a player that dives/milks for free kicks, you are less likely to get the 50/50 calls. Good umpiring if they do that.
I wasn't speaking about the actual incident, as I said, I don't think Ziebel is a diver. But in general, I don't mind players who dive/act get treated harsher by umpires when there is a 50/50 call.It wasn't a 50/50 call. Tuohy deliberately ran front on into him, eyes not on the ball while he was going to contest a mark.
I don't care if it's Trump or the Dalai Lama. You can't not pay a free kick because you don't think a player deserves it. Where does that leave the integrity of the game ? ? ?
I wasn't speaking about the actual incident, as I said, I don't think Ziebel is a diver. But in general, I don't mind players who dive/act get treated harsher by umpires when there is a 50/50 call.
It is funny the north reaction is though, acting as if it would have impacted the result.