SA Footy

valleys07 wrote:

stan wrote:

valleys07 wrote:So is the rule concerning a 10m exclusion zone where a player is lining up for goal.

That was conveniently missed.

Rules are rules?

They certainly are, Stan.

So if fans, officials, executives and general observers of the game are going to tow the line of "letter of the law" re. the Dixon play on call, then questions should be raised as to why the same "letter of the law" was not applied to the exclusion zone.

It did have an impact on the contest, because if correct adjudication had of been applied to the above, Charlie gets bought to the tip of the square, Port go 9 points up, and it is game over.

Port would have still found a way too lose.

amber_fluid wrote:

valleys07 wrote:

stan wrote:

valleys07 wrote:So is the rule concerning a 10m exclusion zone where a player is lining up for goal.

That was conveniently missed.

Rules are rules?

They certainly are, Stan.

So if fans, officials, executives and general observers of the game are going to tow the line of "letter of the law" re. the Dixon play on call, then questions should be raised as to why the same "letter of the law" was not applied to the exclusion zone.

It did have an impact on the contest, because if correct adjudication had of been applied to the above, Charlie gets bought to the tip of the square, Port go 9 points up, and it is game over.

Port would have still found a way too lose.

Or did Geelong find a way to win?

When you're 3 points up and having a shot on goal............ with only minutes left, Port definitely lost it!

MW wrote:

Reddeer wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Havent seen last night so cant comment

Last week the umpiring was confusing both ways...


And then the Dixon debacle, i recall a similar incident involving Hawkins.

AS you are Geelong supporter I bet you do.
If that decision had been on Hawkins at that stage of the game the crowd would have torn the stands down and lynched the prick of an umpire who clearly has no feel for the game

Horse shit. "Feel for the game" is the biggest cop out. This rule is quite clear. You are even given a f..king shot clock.

No horse shit about it. Don't give me the crap about rules are rules Every rule is broken in this game very time it is played and they keep changing them No wonder the game never takes any where else

valleys07 wrote:So is the rule concerning a 10m exclusion zone where a player is lining up for goal.

That was conveniently missed.

Show the footage, not the still shot

Reddeer wrote:

MW wrote:

Reddeer wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Havent seen last night so cant comment

Last week the umpiring was confusing both ways...


And then the Dixon debacle, i recall a similar incident involving Hawkins.

AS you are Geelong supporter I bet you do.
If that decision had been on Hawkins at that stage of the game the crowd would have torn the stands down and lynched the prick of an umpire who clearly has no feel for the game

Horse shit. "Feel for the game" is the biggest cop out. This rule is quite clear. You are even given a f..king shot clock.

No horse shit about it. Don't give me the crap about rules are rules Every rule is broken in this game very time it is played and they keep changing them No wonder the game never takes any where else

Rules like that are not subjective. Time is time. It's not even in his head, but in big white numerals on the scoreboard!
Stop looking for excuses.

Jesus, we're back bunging on about this shit are we?? Classic. Someone should post that clip of the Crows supporter crying when he says "we were robbed" and photo shop his guernsey to a Power one.

Bum Crack wrote:Jesus, we're back bunging on about this shit are we?? Classic. Someone should post that clip of the Crows supporter crying when he says "we were robbed" and photo shop his guernsey to a Power one.

I've been waiting for someone to do this

MW wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:Jesus, we're back bunging on about this shit are we?? Classic. Someone should post that clip of the Crows supporter crying when he says "we were robbed" and photo shop his guernsey to a Power one.

I've been waiting for someone to do this

It is a very funny clip though which I am sure u would even get a giggle out of.

in big white numerals on the scoreboard!
How many grounds have big score boards with count down clocks. You don't go to the game to watch how much time you have to take a kick. That's is crap and and an insult to the game. I am not a Port fan, usually hope they lose but not cheated out of it by a idiot umpire. Couldn't care less if he was right just doesn't get the vibe. Typical hometown decision by a Victorian Umpire. They are all crooks

Bum Crack wrote:Jesus, we're back bunging on about this shit are we?? Classic. Someone should post that clip of the Crows supporter crying when he says "we were robbed" and photo shop his guernsey to a Power one.

I barrack for Port but can say wholeheartedly say that we were beaten by the more polished side, we had our chances and didn't capitalise on them, Charlie took too long.

Charlie would have missed anyway so it really is irrelevant that the umpire called play on.......

All players now look at the shot clock

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

MW wrote:

valleys07 wrote:So is the rule concerning a 10m exclusion zone where a player is lining up for goal.

That was conveniently missed.

Show the footage, not the still shot

So you think Duncan was more than 10m away from Dixon when play on was called?

I don't know, that's why I want the footage.
Was he with an opponent which he is allowed to do?

valleys07 wrote:

MW wrote:

valleys07 wrote:So is the rule concerning a 10m exclusion zone where a player is lining up for goal.

That was conveniently missed.

Show the footage, not the still shot

So you think Duncan was more than 10m away from Dixon when play on was called?

LOL

amber_fluid wrote:Charlie would have missed anyway so it really is irrelevant that the umpire called play on.......

trengove miss was the one that cost them.
And some of hoffs..deadest had the yips last night

Stumps wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:Charlie would have missed anyway so it really is irrelevant that the umpire called play on.......

trengove miss was the one that cost them.
And some of hoffs..deadest had the yips last night

Agreed with this.

His miss on half time, and even worse, his miss at the start of the last, were completely unacceptable.

Stumps wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:Charlie would have missed anyway so it really is irrelevant that the umpire called play on.......

trengove miss was the one that cost them.
And some of hoffs..deadest had the yips last night

Yep agree.
If Trengove kicked his it would have been hard for Geelong to win from there.

MW wrote:I don't know, that's why I want the footage.
Was he with an opponent which he is allowed to do?

Fair call, I may have overlooked where he was standing just before play on was called.

I just recall the camera angle changing when Dixon had begun deviating to his right to take the kick, and Duncan was just about in a position to lay the smother.

He may have been manning an opponent however, which you are correct in saying he is entitle to do.

The still shot that is being circulated shows a player clearly encroaching the 10m exclusion zone, but Dixon was a bit cheeky there, deviating towards said player to try and attract the 50.