What was Chad Cornes intent?

[slugger]

I thought Port got "the rub of the green", which when we're playing, means the umpires are still making use of the 20K. There were a couple which could have gone either way, and I thought a pretty soft one paid to Wilson very very late (by McLaren). Just looked a soft backline one to clear the area.

They've got to settle the HTB decisions by seeing who the third man in is. If it's the teammate of the guy holding the ball, it should be HTB....otherwise a ball up. Should also depend on whether the ball can be cleared out, or in Sydney style, held in regardless. Ping the guys who just try to close it up.

 

[Saint4Life]

That wasnt a free to Brogan, you cant pay a free in the goalsquare like that in the import last minutes. The jumper hold didnt seem to effect him in any way (when watching on tv), his arms were up and the ball went over their heads, pretty average free.. though im not 100% sure if it did/didnt effect him, i could be wrong. I dont think st.kilda got a free in the goalsquare either? If they did, you'd just hear the crowd boo and port would be like us. ah wells, thats the home advantage ey. Our own fault to loosing to western bulldogs!!!

I just laughed at cornes though, when he was holding revaults (however u spell his name) arm and jumper and then complained/yelled to the umpire. And his deliberate out of bounds, guezzz, that was our free there It happend to us last week, and we kicked it 35m forward. Need some consistancy.

Ah well, i believe tonight bris will win, and win the grand fianl again. I hope port lose only because of the fact that they beat us ill be honest, but i dont think you'd have an advantage at the MCG than AAMI.

 

[Ripper]

The Brogan hold was the same as one Gehrig got in the second quarter, but no-one has complained about that. The deliberate call was 50/50, Roger James standing on the boundary 5-10 metres away from where the ball went over gave the umpire an out which he took. If he wasn't there Cornes would definitely have been pinged.

Thats how I saw it. Cornes would have been desperately unlucky to get pinged when a team mate was not far away.

 

[silky-smooth]

Nahhhhhh. It was just a crappy kick. Chad, you should be ashamed of yourself

Ditto... he was aiming for Roger James - and missed him by about 4-5 metres from a kick that was 45 metres away.

 

[Saint4Life]

i think if he was aiming for him it wouldnt have been a kick along the ground

 

[Big Ted]

I just laughed at cornes though, when he was holding revaults (however u spell his name)

Your a saints fan and you dont know how to spell Riewoldt?....

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Lighten up buddy. Yes, he was lucky. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to upset you so much. Wooooh no more angry pills today ok?

And here is a glaring example of why the majority of supporters despise Port fans??? Your not over the line yet mate. Remember, the GF isn't played at footy park and what was your win/loss finals ratio on the road again??????

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

If you watch the incident you'll realise that Cornes didn't have too many options. He was pretty much surrounded by players and could only go sideways or backwards, a kick in any other direction would have been smothered instantly.

It was a 50/50 call.

A Saints player early in the game, don't remember who sorry, tapped the ball straight over the line right in front of where we were sitting. I thought that was an even more clear decision for deliberate but wasn't paid so I guess you can say the umpires were consistent.

 

[Phantom4]

I got cained on a different thread by saying the Saints didn't get the rub of the green on some important incidents.

This was the one I had in mind. No doubt (in my hopelessly bias mind) that Cornes deliberately kicked it out of bounds, however the umpire made a decision that gave the benefit of the doubt to Cornes.
Directly from the throw in Port took it to the other end where Brogan got the free kick ten metres out right in front.

Rub of the green? Well Port got it in this case, but considering they deserved the opportunity to play at home, these are some of the advantages you get.
If it was in Melbourne the decisions may have reversed.

No use crying over decisions it happened and Port were too good. It is not an excuse.

Cornes was of course going for the out of bounds, but from that distance it should never be a free kick irrespective of where the game is played. If frees are paid from that distance we are only restricting the playing area and that kick could very well been intercepted by either team for the kick did not have much power behind it. Remember the ball can be kicked from the centre of the ground towards the boundry for a deliberate out of bounds.

 

[Nic]

It was definitely a mistake, but not the only one they made last night.

 

[Macca19]

That wasnt a free to Brogan, you cant pay a free in the goalsquare like that in the import last minutes. The jumper hold didnt seem to effect him in any way (when watching on tv), his arms were up and the ball went over their heads, pretty average free.. though im not 100% sure if it did/didnt effect him, i could be wrong. I dont think st.kilda got a free in the goalsquare either? If they did, you'd just hear the crowd boo and port would be like us.[/b]

Alright then...Brogans free is called play on. Then what happened?

2 seconds later Ball rides Mahoney into the turf and a free kick would have been paid and we would have kicked a goal anyway.

Everyone can go on about that all they like but if it was called play on we would have got a blatant free and goal 2 seconds later anyway.

 

[Ipaidmy200in89]

Brett Allen hang your head.

 

[MarkT]

The rule says deliberately out of bounds. It really means obviously deliberate with no other real motive and no real advantage. In other words, like most of the rules it was written with common sense adjudication in mind. The fact umpires have lost sight of that is another matter. The Cornes incident was correctly umpired in the circumstances. Plenty of others were not.

 

[Ipaidmy200in89]

The rule says deliberately out of bounds. It really means obviously deliberate with no other real motive and no real advantage. In other words, like most of the rules it was written with common sense adjudication in mind. The fact umpires have lost sight of that is another matter. The Cornes incident was correctly umpired in the circumstances. Plenty of others were not.

Cornes had no other intention but to see the ball go out of bounds. Surely you have seen the footage from behind him?

 

[Malibu#27]

He probably was going for the boundary - (just like what happens 20 times per game). But it wasn't his sole purpose - his initial aim was to clear the pack.

Interesting that no-one has mentioned the st Kilda runner/trainer sitting inside Ports forward 50 in the last?? quarter when the Saints were kicking in from a point. He's not allowed to be there but the umpires didn't pick it up.