WB Game Day V Collingwood R17 2023 Fri 7/7, 7:50PM - Marvel Stadium

[angelopetraglia]

The only thing I can think of is Cody being out of the game for the middle sections where Collingwood got right on top. Otherwise I thought he was excellent and if Elliott was deserving of votes Cody was as well.

There is not much more a small forward can do than kick four goals. Kicking four goals as a small forward is more difficult than getting 30 touches as a running defender.

You only need to see how many touches someone like Bailey Dale, JJ and recently Vanda can rack up across half back versus trying to have an impact as a forward.

[D Mitchell]

Spot on.

A front on free kick is where the offending player tries to prevent his opponent from marking by bumping from the front with the sole intent of impeding rather than contesting. The lead up to the incident was brilliant, forward handballs until West was released and kicked it low to the goalsquare. Ugle-Hagan and Murphy run in from the pocket, the former trying to push Murphy off. Both have eyes on the ball and arms in the air, Ugle Hagan turns his body, Murphy trying to spoil, both looking at the ball all the time. No free kick. See for yourself. it's at 1.44.19

https://www.afl.com.au/video/965645/...=1688776800001

I took the trouble to search that out because I didn't think it a free at the time yet poster after poster blame the umpire. I'm pleased I did, now. We can handball forward, Weightman is a real goer, never gives up, Smith would get a gig at C'wood with his run and overlap and Bont is a magician, he does things the naked eye, mine anyway, don't see.

[Grantysghost]

If you guys are talking about the Marra one late.

OMG that was a free.

[angelopetraglia]

If you guys are talking about the Marra one late.

OMG that was a free.

100% agree

[D Mitchell]

If you guys are talking about the Marra one late.

OMG that was a free.

Around 14 minutes to go. so around halfway. The vision is available, the link a couple of posts above. No free kick.

[D Mitchell]

There is not much more a small forward can do than kick four goals. Kicking four goals as a small forward is more difficult than getting 30 touches as a running defender.

You only need to see how many touches someone like Bailey Dale, JJ and recently Vanda can rack up across half back versus trying to have an impact as a forward.

Add to his own 4, the gift he gave to Naughton following his tackle on Moore, no one more surprisesd with the free than Weightman. What a work ethic.

[bornadog]

Around 14 minutes to go. so around halfway. The vision is available, the link a couple of posts above. No free kick.

There was a chopping of the hands in the third which gave them a goal. It something that happens throughout a game, ie both players, hands in the air and trying to mark. A joke of a free.

Chopping of arms came in as a rule to stop defenders purposely chopping at arms and preventing forwards from marking, but like many rules (like sliding rule), are now interpreted a different way. Two players going for a mark and one touches the arms of the other player should never be a free unless it is obviously a chopping motion. The players are not robots, arms are going to tangle.

[mjp]

There is not much more a small forward can do than kick four goals. Kicking four goals as a small forward is more difficult than getting 30 touches as a running defender.

Where were you when we were all arguing about best players after the NM game???

[EasternWest]

Where were you when we were all arguing about best players after the NM game???

Ha ha. Gold.

[bornadog]

Ha ha. Gold.

I had a good chuckle too

[D Mitchell]

There was a chopping of the hands in the third which gave them a goal. It something that happens throughout a game, ie both players, hands in the air and trying to mark. A joke of a free.

Chopping of arms came in as a rule to stop defenders purposely chopping at arms and preventing forwards from marking, but like many rules (like sliding rule), are now interpreted a different way. Two players going for a mark and one touches the arms of the other player should never be a free unless it is obviously a chopping motion. The players are not robots, arms are going to tangle.

So many rules require judgment of intention. The umpire has to work that out from his observations, where the player was looking, positioning before contact etc. Sitting in the stands, 100 metres or more away, whilst the umpire is trained, fit, on the move and 10 - 20 metres away, objectively it's far more likely that the close up umpire got it right rather than the distant, partisan supporter. Your Two players going for a mark and one touches the arms of the other player should never be a free unless it is obviously a chopping motion is correct. However what looks like touching the arm to an emotionally involved supporter from 100 metres plus away, of a lighting fast action, probably looks very different to a neutral, trained professional on the spot.

[bornadog]

So many rules require judgment of intention. The umpire has to work that out from his observations, where the player was looking, positioning before contact etc. Sitting in the stands, 100 metres or more away, whilst the umpire is trained, fit, on the move and 10 - 20 metres away, objectively it's far more likely that the close up umpire got it right rather than the distant, partisan supporter. Your Two players going for a mark and one touches the arms of the other player should never be a free unless it is obviously a chopping motion is correct. However what looks like touching the arm to an emotionally involved supporter from 100 metres plus away, of a lighting fast action, probably looks very different to a neutral, trained professional on the spot.

Whilst I agree with all you said, I just think the original intent of the rule is now mis-interpretated.

The other one that is again mis-interpreted is sliding rule. Originally the rule was to stop players sliding in for the ball feet first (ala Goodes), but now, if you bend over to pick up a ball and a player falls over you, even on your back, then you have given away a free. This has resulted in fewer players actually wanting to bend over anymore to pickup a ball

[D Mitchell]

Whilst I agree with all you said, I just think the original intent of the rule is now mis-interpretated.

The other one that is again mis-interpreted is sliding rule. Originally the rule was to stop players sliding in for the ball feet first (ala Goodes), but now, if you bend over to pick up a ball and a player falls over you, even on your back, then you have given away a free. This has resulted in fewer players actually wanting to bend over anymore to pickup a ball

The intention was, if I recall correctly, to protect the legs. I read somewhere that Aus orthopods and knee injury medicos are world's best because the girls' knees cop it in basketball, too (calm down, it was pre AFLW). Back in 19 mumble mumble I once had the privilege of access to the players rooms at White Hart Lane after a game. The players' legs cop a real bashing, gashes, blood. That's studs and boots, not shoulders. I think you are right.