Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

[Scorlibo]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

I'm generally fairly forgiving of the umpires but thought there were a few key decisions they made which hurt in the context of the game, that Richards one the obvious one. I can kind of understand that since he hit him as he was kicking it was arguably not downfield but it was a pretty reckless action and paying the freekick but not advantage severely disadvantaged us (plus arguably should have been a free to McNeil on the receiving end anyway for either chopping he arms or front on contact from Bicavs).

Yeah I don't begrudge them for not paying the downfield free, I thought it should have been advantage.

The umpires seem to struggle to pay advantage if no player has explicitly *taken* advantage. They'll happily pay it if a player handballs post-whistle but if the free kick recipient has kicked it 50m downfield in the same action as the incident there is no player electing advantage, so they don't pay it.

It's always been a tough rule to implement. Surely there's some rule of thumb that the umpires could lean on though. Perhaps if the ball has been moved forward more than 40m and drops to a contested situation, that's called advantage.

[Happy Days]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

So I obviously didn’t see enough for 3 of each but I wanna give one banker to Bailey Smith for throwing a headbutt, which fits the cool and hot guy badboy gimmick perfectly, and another one to Tuohy for no selling it and shaking his hand after the game. What a guy.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

100%. The first one they highlights was bad. He didn't even play it up that much, but the lack of anything constituting a freekick made it look terrible. His natural intensity and bounciness naturally wins him frees, I don't understand why he is so intent on playing for them as well. I think it actually makes him less of a handful when he isn't wholly committed to the contest.

It's been going on for a while.

Two things are either happening;

1. Nobody is pulling him up on it, which is really poor.
2. They are and he isn't listening.

Either way, he needs to change because he's a liability when he spends more time diving and laying on the ground. It's a really bad, selfish look.

[Bornadog]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

It's been going on for a while.

Two things are either happening;

1. Nobody is pulling him up on it, which is really poor.
2. They are and he isn't listening.

Either way, he needs to change because he's a liability when he spends more time diving and laying on the ground. It's a really bad, selfish look.

My bigger concern with Weightman is flying for the ball with Naughton. FFS, stay down and crumb the bloody thing. This happened several times up the end I was sitting ie right of screen. Geelong smalls stayed back or down and just cleared the ball.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

My bigger concern with Weightman is flying for the ball with Naughton. FFS, stay down and crumb the bloody thing. This happened several times up the end I was sitting ie right of screen. Geelong smalls stayed back or down and just cleared the ball.

Ultimately that's a coaching issue because again, they either aren't pulling him up on it or they are, he isn't listening, and he isn't being held accountable.

[GVGjr]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

My bigger concern with Weightman is flying for the ball with Naughton. FFS, stay down and crumb the bloody thing. This happened several times up the end I was sitting ie right of screen. Geelong smalls stayed back or down and just cleared the ball.

He's never been a crumbing small forward though relying more on marks. He's got to learn to pick his spots better of when to fly for a mark or when to wait and be more competitive when the ball is on the ground.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

Moderators could you please place this post in a more general position rather than the week's "Bankers and Anchors" please.
Dearest WOOFERs my dear brother Tim, The Banker after whom this thread is gracefully named, I love you GVGjr.
I was born on Tim's second birthday and he was told I was his birthday present.
I joined WOOF then told Tim.
He did not tell me he joined but when this new poster The Banker joined and contributed I posted a positive reply.
When I next met my brother he said it was amazing I was his first enthusiasic responder.
This is The Banker's legacy:

https://www.smh.com.au/national/dishwasher-turned-creative-visionary-in-two-cities-20120518-1yw58.html

[jeemak]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

Yeah I think he's improved a lot this year in terms of keeping his feet and staying in the contest, but last night was a step backwards.

Bankers

Libba - Huge game from our Bulldog. Always seems to sense the occasion.

Baz's third quarter - half chances turned into genuine looks with his tackle busting and gut running, exciting stuff that unfortunately went unrewarded

Dale - had a nightmare first half but was able to turn it around and still make a significant contribution. Sign of maturity.

Anchors

English - looked like he was going to be a big point of difference for us pre-game but was dominated around the contest by Stanley. Those advocating for Sweet to play might feel vindicated.

Gardner - did some good things, but his kicking was woeful at times under minimal pressure

Forwards/Entries - we only turned one third of our entries into shots on goal, and only half of those into goals, that's not good enough to win games. At those ratios we would have needed 90 inside fifties to score 100 points. There were some shocking entries, some of them from our better players in Macrae and Dunkley. Also plenty of non-contests from high balls and poor pressure when the ball hit the ground.

[Extra] Umpiring - Bringing the ball back 60m for Richards' hit at the end of the third was crushing, we had numbers around the ball in the fifty. Holding the ball decision on Gardner. Dissent only paid once for the game against Treloar. Holding the ball on Richards after Stengle (?) was caught moments earlier. Generally a lot of holding the man from the Cats that was let go.

You're a gun poster Scorlibo.

[jeemak]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

I'm generally fairly forgiving of the umpires but thought there were a few key decisions they made which hurt in the context of the game, that Richards one the obvious one. I can kind of understand that since he hit him as he was kicking it was arguably not downfield but it was a pretty reckless action and paying the freekick but not advantage severely disadvantaged us (plus arguably should have been a free to McNeil on the receiving end anyway for either chopping he arms or front on contact from Bicavs).

It's an interesting one because they usually use whether the contact affected the kick as a gauge as to whether it should be downfield, and the contact didn't impact the kick in any real way.

I thought last night there were different interpretations of holding the ball and/ or incorrect disposal across the teams, but the dissent one was really telling. Selwood copped a free against in the centre in the second, and gave the umpire an absolute ear full but was smart enough to not gesture with his arms and got away with it. Much worse than the Treloar one.

Geelong just seemed to be able to drop the footy when taking on tackles. It was really weird. At my boxing class this morning a few people called it out as the worst umpiring they'd seen for a while, I didn't think it was that bad but it was probably just annoying to me given how bad we were early.

[jeemak]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

Yeah I don't begrudge them for not paying the downfield free, I thought it should have been advantage.

The umpires seem to struggle to pay advantage if no player has explicitly *taken* advantage. They'll happily pay it if a player handballs post-whistle but if the free kick recipient has kicked it 50m downfield in the same action as the incident there is no player electing advantage, so they don't pay it.

It's always been a tough rule to implement. Surely there's some rule of thumb that the umpires could lean on though. Perhaps if the ball has been moved forward more than 40m and drops to a contested situation, that's called advantage.

See my most just now, it's usually paid downfield if the kick isn't affected by the contact as a general rule of thumb. Perhaps it's different with too high versus a body hit. Who *!*!*!*!ing knows.

[GVGjr]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

Moderators could you please place this post in a more general position rather than the week's "Bankers and Anchors" please.
Dearest WOOFERs my dear brother Tim, The Banker after whom this thread is gracefully named, I love you GVGjr.
I was born on Tim's second birthday and he was told I was his birthday present.
I joined WOOF then told Tim.
He did not tell me he joined but when this new poster The Banker joined and contributed I posted a positive reply.
When I next met my brother he said it was amazing I was his first enthusiasic responder.
This is The Banker's legacy:
https://www.smh.com.au/national/dish...518-1yw58.html

BID's I've posted the article on the Dogs Day board because it displays images so well.
I hope that is okay with you.

[jeemak]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

Moderators could you please place this post in a more general position rather than the week's "Bankers and Anchors" please.
Dearest WOOFERs my dear brother Tim, The Banker after whom this thread is gracefully named, I love you GVGjr.
I was born on Tim's second birthday and he was told I was his birthday present.
I joined WOOF then told Tim.
He did not tell me he joined but when this new poster The Banker joined and contributed I posted a positive reply.
When I next met my brother he said it was amazing I was his first enthusiasic responder.
This is The Banker's legacy:
https://www.smh.com.au/national/dish...518-1yw58.html

What a legend, and thank you for the oysters The Banker, thank you very much!

[Missing Dog]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

See my most just now, it's usually paid downfield if the kick isn't affected by the contact as a general rule of thumb. Perhaps it's different with too high versus a body hit. Who *!*!*!*!ing knows.

I'd like to see a different interpretation of this rule to protect the player kicking the ball. Being hit/bumped while in the process of kicking and being off balance can result in serious injury. We see this many times. The player should be *protected* when vulnerable, just like when a player is bent with their head over the ball. This type of tackle, late or not, has to be stopped and one way to achieve that is to award the free downfield, or to get a free with 50m.

[Bornadog]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

Yeah I don't begrudge them for not paying the downfield free

Watching the replay on this, the umpire blew the whistle as soon as Ed kicked the ball and was polaxed. However, a late hit and pretty sure to the head, should have given Ed a 50 metre penalty down field. At the time, I thought it should have been paid for down field, but now I think it was Ed's free plus the 50m

[Mantis]

Re: Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 12, 2022 vs Geelong

Watching the replay on this, the umpire blew the whistle as soon as Ed kicked the ball and was polaxed. However, a late hit and pretty sure to the head, should have given Ed a 50 metre penalty down field. At the time, I thought it should have been paid for down field, but now I think it was Ed's free plus the 50m

It definitely wasn't worth 50m.... it should've been a down the field free as he was hit after he had disposed of the ball.