DIRTY TRICK TO GET 50 METRES

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,825]

Did other Demonlanders notice the underhanded ploy by the Tassie Hawks pretty-boy, Bateman on Sat. v. Geelong?

Geelong's Burns was trapped in the centre square under a pile of Hawks on his back, and penalised for holding the ball. Any one of about 5 Hawks equally would have qualified for the free, but the ump nominated one, not Bateman.

When the dazed Burns was able to stand up after they all got off his back, Bateman beckoned him to throw him the ball, which he did, assuming it must have been HIS free. But no.....he'd thrown it to the wrong player! The result....50m., goal!!!

Should we resort to this type of deviousness? Is it worth employing this type of tactic to try to convert a free in the centre square to an easy shot for goal.

Also, we should be alert to this, and be clear WHOSE free it is(it's usually anyone's guess!), before throwing the ball back.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Hardly new. Good on Chance Bateman. I would be rapt if an MFC player conned that.

Byrnes should have looked for direction from the umpire.

Any word on the kick ins this week? B)

[Redleg 42,182]

Did other Demonlanders notice the underhanded ploy by the Tassie Hawks pretty-boy, Bateman on Sat. v. Geelong?

Geelong's Burns was trapped in the centre square under a pile of Hawks on his back, and penalised for holding the ball. Any one of about 5 Hawks equally would have qualified for the free, but the ump nominated one, not Bateman.

When the dazed Burns was able to stand up after they all got off his back, Bateman beckoned him to throw him the ball, which he did, assuming it must have been HIS free. But no.....he'd thrown it to the wrong player! The result....50m., goal!!!

Should we resort to this type of deviousness? Is it worth employing this type of tactic to try to convert a free in the centre square to an easy shot for goal.

Also, we should be alert to this, and be clear WHOSE free it is(it's usually anyone's guess!), before throwing the ball back.

I saw that too and thought it was pathetic. Given that Bateman called for the ball the umpire should have used some common sense. Byrnes should also have explained to the umpire and even spoken to the other umpires to sort it out. That is not what footy is about.

[H_T 3,049]

Any word on the kick ins this week? B)

Don't encourage.

[e25 5]

I saw that too and thought it was pathetic. Given that Bateman called for the ball the umpire should have used some common sense. Byrnes should also have explained to the umpire and even spoken to the other umpires to sort it out. That is not what footy is about.

100% agree.

The umpire should be embarrassed to have not recognized he only did that after being prompted by Bateman.

Hope he gets a holiday.

Bateman on the other hand has only exploited the eagerness of umpires to penalize players for soft infringments.

Not honourable or sportsmanlike, but clever.

[The Chazz 4,077]

100% agree.

The umpire should be embarrassed to have not recognized he only did that after being prompted by Bateman.

Hope he gets a holiday.

Bateman on the other hand has only exploited the eagerness of umpires to penalize players for soft infringments.

Not honourable or sportsmanlike, but clever.

Are you serious??? This is a competition, you do whatever you can (generally within the rules) to get the upperhand.

What Bateman did was gold. I don't know how many times I've got a handball receive from my opponents after they take a mark, and I run behind them and call for it! Would I want the umpire to give it back in that case? Absolutely not!

Smart football Chance.

[scarlett 247]

davey did it earlier this year. called for the ball wen it wasnt his and went to give it to the player that had the free kick and we got 50m.

[beelzebub 23,392]

Did other Demonlanders notice the underhanded ploy by the Tassie Hawks pretty-boy, Bateman on Sat. v. Geelong?

Geelong's Burns was trapped in the centre square under a pile of Hawks on his back, and penalised for holding the ball. Any one of about 5 Hawks equally would have qualified for the free, but the ump nominated one, not Bateman.

When the dazed Burns was able to stand up after they all got off his back, Bateman beckoned him to throw him the ball, which he did, assuming it must have been HIS free. But no.....he'd thrown it to the wrong player! The result....50m., goal!!!

Should we resort to this type of deviousness? Is it worth employing this type of tactic to try to convert a free in the centre square to an easy shot for goal.

Also, we should be alert to this, and be clear WHOSE free it is(it's usually anyone's guess!), before throwing the ball back.

very "unsociable"

[e25 5]

Are you serious??? This is a competition, you do whatever you can (generally within the rules) to get the upperhand.

What Bateman did was gold. I don't know how many times I've got a handball receive from my opponents after they take a mark, and I run behind them and call for it! Would I want the umpire to give it back in that case? Absolutely not!

Smart football Chance.

Did you even read the post you replied to?

I've come to expect as much from you, but seriously, read a post first you damn fool.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Speaking of fooling the umpires...

Did anyone see that tool Mark Robinson decided that Jack Watts dived for his free kick, the one that got him his goal?

I don't know about anyone else. But I'm unusually and unreasonably [censored] at that slobbering mass of meat pies...

[The Chazz 4,077]

Did you even read the post you replied to?

I've come to expect as much from you, but seriously, read a post first you damn fool.

Sorry E25 - I'm reading your post as if you are agreeing that the tactics used by Bateman weren't in the "spirit of the game" and that the umpire who awarded the 50m penalty deserves a run in the bush because of such a decision.

Please, by all means, correct me if I have misread your post. More than happy to edit my post if I have misunderstood.

And also, I'm a DAMN FOOL? I've been warned for using less personal attacks on people, so I'm assuming in time you will receive that lovely email from the Mods. Keep up the good work!

[e25 5]

Sorry E25 - I'm reading your post as if you are agreeing that the tactics used by Bateman weren't in the "spirit of the game" and that the umpire who awarded the 50m penalty deserves a run in the bush because of such a decision.

Please, by all means, correct me if I have misread your post. More than happy to edit my post if I have misunderstood.

And also, I'm a DAMN FOOL? I've been warned for using less personal attacks on people, so I'm assuming in time you will receive that lovely email from the Mods. Keep up the good work!

YAWN.

You've actually not disagreed with me & in some cases agreed with me on some aspects.

It's up to you to figure out.

As for campaigning for mod intervention? Pathetic.

Just grow up & read posts more carefully in future before replying.

[The Chazz 4,077]

YAWN.

You've actually not disagreed with me & in some cases agreed with me on some aspects.

It's up to you to figure out.

As for campaigning for mod intervention? Pathetic.

Just grow up & read posts more carefully in future before replying.

Yawn is correct. You can't even answer a simple question?

I disagree with you in the fact that the umpire should get a holiday. As I implied in my post, if the umpires in my situation were to give the ball back after I conned my opponent in to handballing it to me I would be outraged. Ok, fair enough, bush footy is totally different to the AFL, but the principles are the same.

I disagree when you say that Bateman's antics were unsportsmanlike. The umpires make it clear who the free kick is awarded to, so if the Essendon player listened to Chance before the umpire, well, he's only got himself to blame. The players know the rules about giving it directly to the player who is awarded the free kick.

I do agree with you when you say Bateman was clever. Again, it's a competition, a sport, where you do whatever you can to obtain the upperhand.

So, to reverse your question - did you read my post? Quite clearly I read yours and answered appropriately, I feel sorry for you that you don't have the ability to do the same.

[Dnic 5]

Bateman beckoned him to throw him the ball, which he did, assuming it must have been HIS free. But no.....he'd thrown it to the wrong player! The result....50m., goal!!!

Reminded of Adam Schneider when playing for the Schwans against us a few years ago at the SCG: last qtr, free kick, had the ball thrown back to him but took his arm away at the last moment to make out that it hadn't been properly returned. The result....50m., goal!!!

Thankfully for us and the umps we got up that day. But that kind of scummy cheating sours your view of players. I still hate him for it.

[Redleg 42,182]

Speaking of fooling the umpires...

Did anyone see that tool Mark Robinson decided that Jack Watts dived for his free kick, the one that got him his goal?

I don't know about anyone else. But I'm unusually and unreasonably [censored] at that slobbering mass of meat pies...

Poor journalism as he also said in another article that all of the Dees 50 metre penalties were for minor cribbing on the mark. Actually most were blatant penalties for a player being taken to the ground after a mark. Also the inference has been that we got 7 goals dierectly from these penalties when in reality 2-3 of them were close to goal before the 50 was given and IMO made no difference.

PS. Gieschen and now all of the commentators have (reluctantly) said that all of the penalties were correct decisions.