The Collingwood rules

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: The Collingwood rules

Someone asked for an explanation as to the difference between the 2 examples.

I provided the explanation, simple as that.

Have you got any other excuses for why we lost on Friday night.

Apparently kicking the friggin' ball through the 2 big posts from 30 metres out was too difficult.

[Sedat]

Re: The Collingwood rules

For some, kicking over the man on the mark proved too big a stretch as well.

[Mofra]

Re: The Collingwood rules

For some, kicking over the man on the mark proved too big a stretch as well.

I though Will's opponent stepped over the mark in any case.

Shouldn't happened at all given Will's run up started from the opposition goal square. If the stupid crowd & stadium weren't in the way he would have needed a drink station halfway along his run up.

[LostDoggy]

Re: The Collingwood rules

2) This is fair enough, if the opposition player interferes with the ball to the extent that it falls out of that players arms, regardless of whether the contact is intentional or accidental, it is a 50m penalty every time.

No it isn't. This is the most obvious example of staging for a free-kick. A player can simply drop the ball everytime he feels contact on his arms. Giving a 50m penalty (the most severe on-field punishment there is in the game that often results in a goal) for incidental or accidental contact? That's too soft for words.

50m is too long in any case. A 20 or 30 still penalises a team severely but not to the extent of a certain goal in many cases, unless it's close enough to goal anyway. A 50m penalty means that an infringement deep in your attacking zone can result in a direct shot on goal for the opposition, which is ludicrous.