Umpiring

[kranky al]

Not true. Push in the back has been a rule for 100 years but that wasn't a push in the back. They've been fiddling with "dangerous tackle" rules for the last few years. It's not an old rule and that tackle has been fine for most of the sport's history.

Dont think you will find anyone on our side who thought that was a free - from the angle the ump saw it from perhaps

The footy gods spoke and a behind was the result.

 

[HTT]

Except that his head hit the ground. The push in the back rule has relaxed so much. Broad broke Toby Greene's shoulder when he landed on top of him, no free nothing. One thing that was always paid even in the rough and tough 80's was in the back, todays footballers would love that to be adjudicated the same today.

But it’s not adjudicated that way, so the free shouldn’t be paid in a one off situation.
Even the one with Duncan you brought up earlier was paid HTB on the day, then was laughably given weeks by Michael Christian.

 

[biaseddustyfan]

But it’s not adjudicated that way, so the free shouldn’t be paid in a one off situation.
Even the one with Duncan you brought up earlier was paid HTB on the day, then was laughably given weeks by Michael Christian.

seems every week now we get a new worst free of all time called against us

 

[RJK Tiger]

This is the frame before, not sure it shows he clearly marked it, he got it between his left arm and chest initially, then between his chest and ground before grabbing again with his right arm that he brings in to the ball after its hit the ground

Shot prior

View attachment 1154865

That shot clearly shows the mark IMO.

 

[HTT]

It was a mark. The shot before this shows he took it above the ground and then his body slid forward. The only issue i see with it is the obvious distance it was - 10m's, tops

Yeah when I saw it from the TV angle I thought it was a bit suss. But the reverse angle showed he got it. It’s not like cricket where you have to get under it and not let it touch the ground.
The issue as you say, it wasn’t 15.

 

[RJK Tiger]

Yeah when I saw it from the TV angle I thought it was a bit suss. But the reverse angle showed he got it. It’s not like cricket where you have to get under it and not let it touch the ground.
The issue as you say, it wasn’t 15.

not even close to 15. very frustrating

 

[Ligma]

The mark was about 10 meters max, shocking umpiring now they control the outcomes of games. This will only fuel your fire.

Go well for the rest of the season! Can’t wait to see dusty tear it apart.

From a kanga


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[tigerdan]

Last night was the 7th game this year we've conceded +10 free kicks, but the umpiring wasn't why we lost and it's too easy of an out to blame the umpiring.

We lost by 4 points mate, that's one incorrect decision and one straight kick.

All I want is to lose fair and square, not on the back of an ump being soft.

 

[_RT_]

We lost by 4 points mate, that's one incorrect decision and one straight kick.

All I want is to lose fair and square, not on the back of an ump being soft.

Hmm one straight kick, could that have been the one that Edwards could have taken instead of passing off?
What about the 3 shots Bolton had in the first quarter that failed to score?
What about the snap around the corner from Jack when a drop punt would have been easier?

We lost because we didn't take our chances and WCE did.

 

[Coach_Required]

Got to laugh at some Eagles supporters on Twitter trying to tell me that the kick travelled 14 metres so close enough LOL

Just admit it was a s**t decision instead of trying to defend it FFS. As I pointed out we lost the game from more than 1 decision as we were up by 22 points but they dont see that response they just see I don't agree it was the right decision to award the mark that almost travelled 15

 

[Bojangles17]

Got to laugh at some Eagles supporters on Twitter trying to tell me that the kick travelled 14 metres so close enough LOL

Just admit it was a sh*t decision instead of trying to defend it FFS. As I pointed out we lost the game from more than 1 decision as we were up by 22 points but they dont see that response they just see I don't agree it was the right decision to award the mark that almost travelled 15

Foxfooty should be able to say exactly , surprised we haven’t heard , looks close to 10 , anyway as they always say when games are decided by less than a kick , you need a bit of luck , they got it in spades , that goal sq block in dying seconds was pretty damn obvious too

 

[Waca Jr]

I agree completely and this would be a reasonable point if the umpiring was routinely poor in both directions, but its not.

I was being sarcastic. That is what dimma says every week we get shafted

 

[Waca Jr]

Tipping afl haven't admitted the dangerous tackle was wrong or the ball didn't travel 15m have they?

 

[Coach_Required]

Foxfooty should be able to say exactly , surprised we haven’t heard , looks close to 10 , anyway as they always say when games are decided by less than a kick , you need a bit of luck , they got it in spades , that goal sq block in dying seconds was pretty damn obvious too

Yeah i dont even want to get into it really. i just came here to vent, they even have a screenshot to try and prove it went almost 15 LOL how ever if you look at the goal square (9m) it doesnt look more than 12.

Anyway end of rant, I just get annoyed when its clear as day it was favourable but they still want to argue that it wasnt.

 

[Grockadoc]

Tipping afl haven't admitted the dangerous tackle was wrong or the ball didn't travel 15m have they?

Nope.

After the Zac Bailey non htb against Geelong, the media were up and about, and the AFL claimed it was the wrong decision.

In the Jeremy Cameron not 15m mark call, the media were up and about and the media admitted it was the wrong call.

Josh Kennedy takes a mark from a kick that travelled less than 15, wins them the game and NO media have reported it and you sure as hell know that they won't admit it was a mistake.

 

[biaseddustyfan]

Nope.

After the Zac Bailey non htb against Geelong, the media were up and about, and the AFL claimed it was the wrong decision.

In the Jeremy Cameron not 15m mark call, the media were up and about and the media admitted it was the wrong call.

Josh Kennedy takes a mark from a kick that travelled less than 15, wins them the game and NO media have reported it and you sure as hell know that they won't admit it was a mistake.

AFL has wanted us to lose for years which we already knew with all the rule and interpretation changes. media get pressured by the corrupt AFL cronies to follow the narratives they want or they will lose access. most AFL journos have no integrity and are richmond haters anyway so they're happy to follow. this leads to no media attention when we get reamed, but all the negative media when we managed to occasionally win a free kick count by 1

 

[SavDog23]

Didnt the AFL do a 360 backflip when Geelong sooked about the non 15 call and then Geelong got an armchair ride the following week?

But they say nothing when it involves Richmond in a positive way, unless we are defending women being harrassed or say one sentence about a stadium, then we get roasted by the AFL.

 

[Grrr]

But it’s not adjudicated that way, so the free shouldn’t be paid in a one off situation.
Even the one with Duncan you brought up earlier was paid HTB on the day, then was laughably given weeks by Michael Christian.

I know and it is wrong in my opinion, the player going the ball has always been afforded protection until now. I saw plenty of tackles that were in the back laset night and none of them paid. They would rather reward the tackler. The Duncan one wasn't weeks as he didn't mean to knock him out, but he launched himself at full speed onto a running player and drove him face first into the turf and knocked him out. How is that a correct tackle. You have to look after the player playing the ball, not the tackler as anyone can do that.

 

[tigerdan]

Hmm one straight kick, could that have been the one that Edwards could have taken instead of passing off?
What about the 3 shots Bolton had in the first quarter that failed to score?
What about the snap around the corner from Jack when a drop punt would have been easier?

We lost because we didn't take our chances and WCE did.

Stop being disingenuous. The umpire ****ed up and one straight kick cost us the game.

Just to clarify my point a bit. When Valstuin (or Houli) *s up and kicks it straight to the oppo for a goal, that's losing fair and square. When Jack (or anyone) can't kick a regulation goal, that's losing fair and square.

When some useless maggot *s up because he's afraid of the crowd booing him, that's not losing fair and square.

I have umpired junior footy and know that when I * up it's usually because I get caught on the wrong side of the contest and can't see the free kick that I should have awarded even though the players might go ape (usually throwing the ball or high tackle). But I can always tell when a kick is 10 m or 15 m because i'm not a ******* gimp.

 

[This Is Anfield]

Nope.

After the Zac Bailey non htb against Geelong, the media were up and about, and the AFL claimed it was the wrong decision.

In the Jeremy Cameron not 15m mark call, the media were up and about and the media admitted it was the wrong call.

Josh Kennedy takes a mark from a kick that travelled less than 15, wins them the game and NO media have reported it and you sure as hell know that they won't admit it was a mistake.

Garry Lyon just mentioned it on the couch... said it barely went ten metres but THAT DIDN’T MATTER
FMD

 

[beema limapep]

I'm sick of the pathetic officiating. When the f is Shocking going to be held accountable for us getting butt f’ed every week!

 

[Bojangles17]

Yeah when I saw it from the TV angle I thought it was a bit suss. But the reverse angle showed he got it. It’s not like cricket where you have to get under it and not let it touch the ground.
The issue as you say, it wasn’t 15.

People would be surprised how far 15m is , it takes about a dozen paces for just 10m , pace it out yourself. That pass was easily about 10m , would you expect any less from the umpires though, they called play on in Sydney when it went about 25m and this 10m a *en pass, absolute Comedy Central these clowns and that block with seconds to go was on , but highly unlikely to ever be paid in the sq

 

[Tiges1229]

People would be surprised how far 15m is , it takes about a dozen paces for just 10m , pace it out yourself. That pass was easily about 10m , would you expect any less from the umpires though, they called play on in Sydney when it went about 25m and this 10m a fu**en pass, absolute Comedy Central these clowns and that block with seconds to go was on , but highly unlikely to ever be paid in the sq

AFL = Amateur football League

 

[crackertiger]

I loved how the commentators said nothing. The bias is breathtaking. I must admit that I have stopped watching Richmond in my local Richmond pub due to the hatred the punters have for us. Just end up in too many fights.

 

[Coach_Required]

I loved how the commentators said nothing. The bias is breathtaking. I must admit that I have stopped watching Richmond in my local Richmond pub due to the hatred the punters have for us. Just end up in too many fights.

was on AFL 360 tonight they said it was 14.5 metres... Robbo's exact words were "that's near enough, we can't expect umpires to pin point it exactly". I can see that reasoning especially on the fly but forgive me for being cynical ... the rule doest it not say a legal disposal has to be 15 metres does it not? It doesn't say or near enough .... the kick wasn't 15 and shouldn't have been paid. That's the rule.

What a biased competition we are invested in. near enough depending on who we want to win at the time.