Rd18 Glenelg Defeat Norwood Review

[Pseudo]

I genuinely believe the Bays got some favours today that helped their cause

And the holding-the-ball decision against Chris Hall, thereby discounting a certain goal to Glenelg as said player was blatantly pushed in the back at the top of the goalsquare as he ran to the open goal, didn't help Norwood's cause? Take off the eyepatch Connie, it went both ways.

That doesn't mean I think our boys were the better team on the park, but to be honest it would be hard to seperate the 2 today IMHO.

Agree with that. Not one for the highlights reel.

[JK]

I genuinely believe the Bays got some favours today that helped their cause

And the holding-the-ball decision against Chris Hall, thereby discounting a certain goal to Glenelg as said player was blatantly pushed in the back at the top of the goalsquare as he ran to the open goal, didn't help Norwood's cause? Take off the eyepatch Connie, it went both ways.

Fair call it always goes both ways, but you're on drugs if you reckon that was in the back mate .. Coincided with a time a Bays mate was with me, and he said the player was "gone" before the umpire did .. Bad example mate, Im sure there's better options to choose from!

[baysman]

Oh dear

[am Bays]

My $0.02 on the umpires. They didn't affect the outcome of the game. I thought Colin was fairly consistant rewarded the bloke in front even if they were some times tiggy touchwood but a few were interesting, e.g. Cranny jumping early over Doyle and them palming the ball down to Allen and called for infringing in the ruck contest - um he out jumped him Colin and he actually touched the ball if he missed it is an infringement but the fact he actually plamed it down to our go to...

However Day and Deboy fair dinkum I thought they were pulling them out of somewhere just couldn't read them - no consistancy. however it went against both teams. In the 2nd qtr Norwood appeared to get a ride in the 3rd qtr we did.

As I've said previoulsy I don't mind Colin and Richard asto me they are basically pretty consistaent players can play to tehm but Tony Dey one day I'll work him out one day.....

Mind you our players made just as many mistakes if not more so in may ways we were our own worst enemies.

[mighty_tiger_79]

THE HALL decision was always holding the ball

[dedja]

THE HALL decision was always holding the ball

I've got to admit that's what I thought from 150m away in the bayman pocket.

[mighty_tiger_79]

i was just in the opposite pocket from that in the newly renovated pocket - so probly about 50m closer and a side on view.

a few decisions were interesting but they did go both ways

[mal]

Just one of those games
When the siren went GL happened to be in front
STOPP
WALKER
EVANS
PANOS
YOUNG
all teenagers played today
TERLICH
KITE
also teenagers who have played this year
WEBBER
SHULZ
DAWE
are 20 years old and have played recently as well

Theres a lotta youth at the club and most are getting playing time late in the season

To get so close to GL was quite an effort today with so many kids in the team
NW chased, tackled, harrassed the Bays most of the day
NW didnt play that over the HILL brand of footy today

Good effort
I was impressed with the way GL played when the game was in the balance in the last qtr


UMPIRES
I reckon advantaged GL by about 1 and a half goals today
So GL would still have won by a point ....

[Dutchy]

THE HALL decision was always holding the ball

I've got to admit that's what I thought from 150m away in the bayman pocket.

I thought it was holding the ball and in the back so the correct decision would have been play on IMO

[mal]

GOOD NEWS
for NW
WALKER has qualified for the finals .....

[Jimmy]

GOOD NEWS
for NW
WALKER has qualified for the finals .....

hahaha, what finals

i see that the bays are still showing their flag favouritism

[whatever]

I genuinely believe the Bays got some favours today that helped their cause

And the holding-the-ball decision against Chris Hall, thereby discounting a certain goal to Glenelg as said player was blatantly pushed in the back at the top of the goalsquare as he ran to the open goal, didn't help Norwood's cause? Take off the eyepatch Connie, it went both ways.

That doesn't mean I think our boys were the better team on the park, but to be honest it would be hard to seperate the 2 today IMHO.

Agree with that. Not one for the highlights reel.

That holding the ball decision on Chris Hall was correct, Chris just took to long to get rid of the ball

[TroyGFC]

Did that umpire Deboy stay on the field after the mini league!!! Think at one stage the other ump reversed a decision.

[am Bays]

I thought was the Hall decision was fine - others though I'm still scratching my head over, for both teams.

Highlight of the day was meeting Constance_Perm and a chat with Squawk at half time. Good to finally have met CP, as we say on the Snouts site, CP - top bloke (tm).

[leftlegger]

Tigers seemed very unsettled by all the AFL inclusions, and key forwards missing.
Although they got plenty of the ball, some of the decision making by Carr & Salopek left some of the regular midfielders (& supporters) confused & frustrated.
Douglas was ordinary, but he will improve.
Meyer was ok.

Norwood were great though, nearly an excellent victory for them.

Umpires were ordinary & just made too many errors, both ways.
As for the Hall decision, (I saw it from right angle in the same pocket.) He had time to kick it (& actually did get a toe to it but the ump was in the wrong spot to see it) but the tackle was executed poorly, with the Norwood bloke landing fair in his back. So I agree with Dutchy. The correct decision should have been play on.

[JK]

Ok, I've slept it off and put a fair bit more thought into the game, and my comment regarding the umps was pretty poor so apologies to all.

Umps never win or lose a game, the area I think we'd need to focus on from yesterdays game was the 3rd quarter, where we really needed to gain a big advantage with the breeze, but the Bays took the ascendancy, and also efficiency - I think the Bays were just that bit more productive in that area.

AB - Great to meet you too finally mate, took us a coupla years but we got there in the end.

I have to say, I haven't been to the Bay since 2007 and the changes are awesome - From the Snouts Bar to the new lav's and finally to the Bar/Bistro area, what a sensational setup, Im sure my Norwood comrades would be just as jealous as I am.

I'd like to thank the Glenelg Football Club for this stinking headache I have today lol

[CENTURION]

Tigers seemed very unsettled by all the AFL inclusions, and key forwards missing.
Although they got plenty of the ball, some of the decision making by Carr & Salopek left some of the regular midfielders (& supporters) confused & frustrated.
Douglas was ordinary, but he will improve.
Meyer was ok.

Norwood were great though, nearly an excellent victory for them.

Umpires were ordinary & just made too many errors, both ways.
As for the Hall decision, (I saw it from right angle in the same pocket.) He had time to kick it (& actually did get a toe to it but the ump was in the wrong spot to see it) but the tackle was executed poorly, with the Norwood bloke landing fair in his back. So I agree with Dutchy. The correct decision should have been play on.

I don't get it, Glenelg were not good but won, Norwood were great, yet lost. Surely Norwood were worse than Glenelg? Saying Norwood were great is merely patronising them.

[mal]

Tigers seemed very unsettled by all the AFL inclusions, and key forwards missing.
Although they got plenty of the ball, some of the decision making by Carr & Salopek left some of the regular midfielders (& supporters) confused & frustrated.
Douglas was ordinary, but he will improve.
Meyer was ok.

Norwood were great though, nearly an excellent victory for them.

Umpires were ordinary & just made too many errors, both ways.
As for the Hall decision, (I saw it from right angle in the same pocket.) He had time to kick it (& actually did get a toe to it but the ump was in the wrong spot to see it) but the tackle was executed poorly, with the Norwood bloke landing fair in his back. So I agree with Dutchy. The correct decision should have been play on.

I don't get it, Glenelg were not good but won, Norwood were great, yet lost. Surely Norwood were worse than Glenelg? Saying Norwood were great is merely patronising them.

ANSWER ?

GL are a 10 goal better team
GL won by 10 points

[Pseudo]

As for the Hall decision, (I saw it from right angle in the same pocket.) He had time to kick it (& actually did get a toe to it but the ump was in the wrong spot to see it) but the tackle was executed poorly, with the Norwood bloke landing fair in his back. So I agree with Dutchy. The correct decision should have been play on.

Agree with your summary but think the correct decision would have been In The Back. Hall had time to kick it, yes. Had he been tackled properly he'd have been caught plum, certainly. But the tackle was crude. 10/10 to Puopolo for deperation but minus several hundred for execution. Hall was shoved in the back, the tackle was not legal and ergo not holding the ball.

And everyone within earshot of me was similarly aghast with the call so I must be right

[Pseudo]

I'd like to thank the Glenelg Football Club for this stinking headache I have today lol

Those pie floaters will do that to you