SA Footy

2 Free kicks Ive seen this weekend that I was just gobsmacked about ..

1. Hall jogging back to position past Thompson gives a short forearm jab to Thompson's bicep - Whistle blows, no bounce up but free kick in the centre to the Roo's.

2. Skipper and Trengrove at AAMI on Saturday .. Skipper gives a small warning, slap, insignificant whatever, so Trengrove responds with the most minor of slaps/whatever - Result free-kick and The Hawks get a shot on goal.

The contested footy in the game today as the hardest I've ever seen it, so Im certainly not labelling the game soft, but why oh why do the law makers have to take everything to the nth degree???

You're right, the directives the umpires are now given by that muppett Gieschen are just a joke.

At least with the second case there, the commentators were unified in their condemnation of the decision.
Maybe the umpiring fraternity will get the message...

There was another really soft free given in the Brisbane-Melbourne where Rockliff gave his opponent a slight shove after a contest and a free was given, with a goal resulting. It's true it was undisciplined, but didn't warrant a free in my opinion.

Or how about the reversal against Rioli in the old scoreboard pocket (the original free to Franklin for HTB was a joke anyway) where he leant on the Power players' shoulder to steady himself getting up off the ground?

Constance_Perm wrote:2 Free kicks Ive seen this weekend that I was just gobsmacked about ..

1. Hall jogging back to position past Thompson gives a short forearm jab to Thompson's bicep - Whistle blows, no bounce up but free kick in the centre to the Roo's.

I saw that one against Hall. The umps continue to think it's all about them. Disgraceful.

Drop Bear wrote:

Constance_Perm wrote:2 Free kicks Ive seen this weekend that I was just gobsmacked about ..

1. Hall jogging back to position past Thompson gives a short forearm jab to Thompson's bicep - Whistle blows, no bounce up but free kick in the centre to the Roo's.

I saw that one against Hall. The umps continue to think it's all about them. Disgraceful.

That's my complaint about umpires, they appear to think the crowd is only there to watch them umpire. I watch little AFL, but when I do tune in, I see umpires confusing the hell out of the players, the spectators, etc, and if I watch long enough I will hear some rule I've never heard before in my 40 plus years in the game.

I'm still getting over Osborne's "unrealistic leap", when the guy who was penalised was the only player to get his hands on the ball. Watching AFL is the only time I wished I took drugs or drank heavily, because you need them to enjoy the game.

Adelaide Hawk wrote:I'm still getting over Osborne's "unrealistic leap", when the guy who was penalised was the only player to get his hands on the ball.

That was the worst decision I have ever seen. A joke.

regards,

REB

Drop Bear wrote:

Constance_Perm wrote:2 Free kicks Ive seen this weekend that I was just gobsmacked about ..

1. Hall jogging back to position past Thompson gives a short forearm jab to Thompson's bicep - Whistle blows, no bounce up but free kick in the centre to the Roo's.

I saw that one against Hall. The umps continue to think it's all about them. Disgraceful.

that was one of the best decisions of the season - this prevented another situation like what happened when the teams met earlier this season and another baker / s johnson incident

MAY-Z wrote:

Drop Bear wrote:

Constance_Perm wrote:2 Free kicks Ive seen this weekend that I was just gobsmacked about ..

1. Hall jogging back to position past Thompson gives a short forearm jab to Thompson's bicep - Whistle blows, no bounce up but free kick in the centre to the Roo's.

I saw that one against Hall. The umps continue to think it's all about them. Disgraceful.

that was one of the best decisions of the season - this prevented another situation like what happened when the teams met earlier this season and another baker / s johnson incident

Contact, pass or shot.

Drop Bear wrote:

MAY-Z wrote:

Drop Bear wrote:

Constance_Perm wrote:2 Free kicks Ive seen this weekend that I was just gobsmacked about ..

1. Hall jogging back to position past Thompson gives a short forearm jab to Thompson's bicep - Whistle blows, no bounce up but free kick in the centre to the Roo's.

I saw that one against Hall. The umps continue to think it's all about them. Disgraceful.

that was one of the best decisions of the season - this prevented another situation like what happened when the teams met earlier this season and another baker / s johnson incident

Contact, pass or shot.

so you think wacthing baker vs johnson was good for the game? there is nothing tough about hitting an opponent 100m behind teh play

MAY-Z wrote:

Drop Bear wrote:

Constance_Perm wrote:2 Free kicks Ive seen this weekend that I was just gobsmacked about ..

1. Hall jogging back to position past Thompson gives a short forearm jab to Thompson's bicep - Whistle blows, no bounce up but free kick in the centre to the Roo's.

I saw that one against Hall. The umps continue to think it's all about them. Disgraceful.

that was one of the best decisions of the season - this prevented another situation like what happened when the teams met earlier this season and another baker / s johnson incident

I can appreciate your point mate, but I don't agree with it .. There was nothing further coming from that incident, and even if there was (or something developed later), then by all means be heavy handed with the whistle and notepad if required.

If that penalty was consistently applied (begs the question of why isn't is consistently applied then?) then there would be 20+ free-kicks per game for that sort of thing alone.

Constance_Perm wrote:

MAY-Z wrote:

Drop Bear wrote:

Constance_Perm wrote:2 Free kicks Ive seen this weekend that I was just gobsmacked about ..

1. Hall jogging back to position past Thompson gives a short forearm jab to Thompson's bicep - Whistle blows, no bounce up but free kick in the centre to the Roo's.

I saw that one against Hall. The umps continue to think it's all about them. Disgraceful.

that was one of the best decisions of the season - this prevented another situation like what happened when the teams met earlier this season and another baker / s johnson incident

I can appreciate your point mate, but I don't agree with it .. There was nothing further coming from that incident, and even if there was (or something developed later), then by all means be heavy handed with the whistle and notepad if required.

If that penalty was consistently applied (begs the question of why isn't is consistently applied then?) then there would be 20+ free-kicks per game for that sort of thing alone.

all incidents start somewhere - baker only hit johnson once to start with, thompson only hit barry once, the best way to deal with this is to give a free at the start and then pretty soon the players will stop it

MAY-Z wrote:all incidents start somewhere - baker only hit johnson once to start with, thompson only hit barry once, the best way to deal with this is to give a free at the start and then pretty soon the players will stop it

And not all niggle leads to an "incident" ... Why are players not penalised every time they slap/ bump/knock/niggle an opponent as Hall was?

The Baker/Johnson incidents could have easily been reduced by applying free kick and report if necessary after the first infringement, but I can't see it helping the game if the umps award a free for very little just on the "chance" it could escalate further, how can they ever accurately estimate or judge what will or won't escalate?

Why is it that when Rioli had a brain snap on Saturday at Footy Park the first thing that the media make metion of is Racial Vilification when there was not a scrap of evidence to suggest this, nor any sort of accusation from Rioli himself. If I were Broadbent and Salter I would be mighty pissed off and would be considering following up those media outlets, for IMO they basically questioned the intentions and actions of Salts and Broady.

Why oh why?

1. The proposed introduction of shorter quarters 'driven by the fans' says Anderson.
2. Changing the rules every year. Give it a rest!
3. The expansion. GWS in particular is a joke, Gold Coast might work but GWS never.
4. Tassie being left of the map. If we must expand do it here.
5. Pay TV and FTA showing the same match at the same time.
6. The rule of the week umpiring interpretations. If they aren't directed by a failed Richmond coach why are the doing this?
7. The Eithiad surface. It's crap. Move the games and get your heads out of the Eithad sand.
8. SA vs. Vic. The fans want it. Why isn't it on.
9. NAB Cup. It's crap. Get rid of it.
10. The MRP points system. Complete failure.
11. Too many footy shows. More angles = more controversies and less analysis of the game

GIVE OUR GAME BACK TO US.

regards,

REB

Rik E Boy wrote:Why oh why?

1. The proposed introduction of shorter quarters 'driven by the fans' says Anderson.
2. Changing the rules every year. Give it a rest!
3. The expansion. GWS in particular is a joke, Gold Coast might work but GWS never.
4. Tassie being left of the map. If we must expand do it here.
5. Pay TV and FTA showing the same match at the same time.
6. The rule of the week umpiring interpretations. If they aren't directed by a failed Richmond coach why are the doing this?
7. The Eithiad surface. It's crap. Move the games and get your heads out of the Eithad sand.
8. SA vs. Vic. The fans want it. Why isn't it on.
9. NAB Cup. It's crap. Get rid of it.
10. The MRP points system. Complete failure.
11. Too many footy shows. More angles = more controversies and less analysis of the game

GIVE OUR GAME BACK TO US.

regards,

REB

best post ive seen all year. agree with every 11 points but particulary points 2,4 and most of all point 8. we have an opportunity to pit most of the best of the best against eachother, and we dont? think its because of injurys to players that teams wont risk ?injurys can happen anytime and i think its stupid its not SA VS VIC every year.

Rik E Boy wrote:Why oh why?

1. The proposed introduction of shorter quarters 'driven by the fans' says Anderson.
2. Changing the rules every year. Give it a rest!
3. The expansion. GWS in particular is a joke, Gold Coast might work but GWS never.
4. Tassie being left of the map. If we must expand do it here.
5. Pay TV and FTA showing the same match at the same time.
6. The rule of the week umpiring interpretations. If they aren't directed by a failed Richmond coach why are the doing this?
7. The Eithiad surface. It's crap. Move the games and get your heads out of the Eithad sand.
8. SA vs. Vic. The fans want it. Why isn't it on.
9. NAB Cup. It's crap. Get rid of it.
10. The MRP points system. Complete failure.
11. Too many footy shows. More angles = more controversies and less analysis of the game

GIVE OUR GAME BACK TO US.

regards,

REB

Great post

Booney wrote:Why is it that when Rioli had a brain snap on Saturday at Footy Park the first thing that the media make metion of is Racial Vilification when there was not a scrap of evidence to suggest this, nor any sort of accusation from Rioli himself. If I were Broadbent and Salter I would be mighty pissed off and would be considering following up those media outlets, for IMO they basically questioned the intentions and actions of Salts and Broady.

think u mean Paul Stewart who was on rioli at the time not brogsy!

MAY-Z wrote:

Drop Bear wrote:

MAY-Z wrote: that was one of the best decisions of the season - this prevented another situation like what happened when the teams met earlier this season and another baker / s johnson incident

Contact, pass or shot.

so you think wacthing baker vs johnson was good for the game? there is nothing tough about hitting an opponent 100m behind teh play

Fair exaggeration comparing Hall's nudge to Baker purposefully targetting Johnson on multiple occasions. And that incident is just one in a game which is continually being made into a non contact endurance sport.

Rik E Boy wrote:Why oh why?

1. The proposed introduction of shorter quarters 'driven by the fans' says Anderson.
2. Changing the rules every year. Give it a rest!3. The expansion. GWS in particular is a joke, Gold Coast might work but GWS never.
4. Tassie being left of the map. If we must expand do it here.
5. Pay TV and FTA showing the same match at the same time.
6. The rule of the week umpiring interpretations. If they aren't directed by a failed Richmond coach why are the doing this?7. The Eithiad surface. It's crap. Move the games and get your heads out of the Eithad sand.
8. SA vs. Vic. The fans want it. Why isn't it on.
9. NAB Cup. It's crap. Get rid of it.
10. The MRP points system. Complete failure.
11. Too many footy shows. More angles = more controversies and less analysis of the game

GIVE OUR GAME BACK TO US.
regards,

REB

Well said.

Rik E Boy wrote:Why oh why?

1. The proposed introduction of shorter quarters 'driven by the fans' says Anderson.
2. Changing the rules every year. Give it a rest!
3. The expansion. GWS in particular is a joke, Gold Coast might work but GWS never.
4. Tassie being left of the map. If we must expand do it here.
5. Pay TV and FTA showing the same match at the same time.
6. The rule of the week umpiring interpretations. If they aren't directed by a failed Richmond coach why are the doing this?
7. The Eithiad surface. It's crap. Move the games and get your heads out of the Eithad sand.
8. SA vs. Vic. The fans want it. Why isn't it on.
9. NAB Cup. It's crap. Get rid of it.
10. The MRP points system. Complete failure.
11. Too many footy shows. More angles = more controversies and less analysis of the game

GIVE OUR GAME BACK TO US.

regards,

REB

Spot on with those REB. On #10, C. Rioli only copping two weeks, in light of some of the other decisions this season (Baker, Cotchin, Motlop even..) is bewildering.

#11- According to the AFLPA, in 2009 there were 760 accredited journalists covering the AFL. Seems a little over the top doesn't it?

And on #5, give us back live footy on EVERY sunday arvo, not a 3pm reply.