Except Monday to Sunday.

Worst decision of the round.

Actually I felt there were much worse decisions throughout the game, it was a 50/50 and as it always does in Adelaide it went to the home team. Watts did take his eyes off the footy, I did feel like he actually collected Wingard but more got his arm and the Chad slapped himself in the face but when I saw it I was expecting the Port fans to get the umpire over the line.

Honestly I'm less worried about that decision and more interested in our decision making at the end. With a bit of poise we could've had 2-4 more wins this year, but hopefully that will come next year.

It was a charge. You must turn your back on your opponent in that situation. Jack made the spoil but he was face on which made it illegal. That's the ruling.

I felt Jack came in from the side, rather than with his back to the ball. He did collect the man on the way through and it's one of those ridiculously soft ones that are usually paid, even if Watts had started behind and punched.

Fair enough assessment but where were they all in the second quarter? I don't want players who play a quarter and a half. Give me 22 daniel cross types who go 120 mins.

Baghdad Bob is right though. There's a huge discord here on Demonland between this year's reality and this year's expectations.

In reality we are a 4-6 win team that sits 16th @ 73%. What matters to me is not the umpires, or Grimes, or Dawes, or Bail, or Jones, or a thousand other errors that Demonlanders can pick on and slash their wrists over every week throughout the season.

What matters to me is where we have come from and where we are going. I can only see positives this year, and personally I get sick and tired of the carping at specific players, and the disillusionment generally, over what has been a much more competitive outcome. I didn't expect any transition under Roos to be quick, but for the building blocks to start to come into place in his first year.

BTW, get 22 Daniel Crosses and you'd have a team like North Melbourne ... a bottom-of-the-8 team with a great, honest work ethic, but no one star who can break a game apart when it's really needed.

Couldn't see it mentioned but did anyone else see Jones hit a Port player (not sure who it was) in the upper body when they were both on the ground?

Would have been about 3 minutes left and it was 20 metres out from our goals. Haven't seen anything about it but we'd be in big trouble if he and Vince both were to get weeks.

Yep, noticed this too, D, he might get away with a fine, but could see him copping a week for it. We might be in big trouble without Jones, Vince and Cross. You'll certainly see Mitchie then.

Yep, noticed this too, D, he might get away with a fine, but could see him copping a week for it. We might be in big trouble without Jones, Vince and Cross. You'll certainly see Mitchie then.

Well thankfully I got it wrong.. MRP didn't even assess it. Vince was assessed but not forceful enough to constitute a penalty

Edited July 21, 201410 yr by JV7

Both Jones and Vince have been cleared by MRP. Jones: circumstances outside his control! Vince: insufficient force!

Baghdad Bob is right though. There's a huge discord here on Demonland between this year's reality and this year's expectations.

In reality we are a 4-6 win team that sits 16th @ 73%. What matters to me is not the umpires, or Grimes, or Dawes, or Bail, or Jones, or a thousand other errors that Demonlanders can pick on and slash their wrists over every week throughout the season.

What matters to me is where we have come from and where we are going. I can only see positives this year, and personally I get sick and tired of the carping at specific players, and the disillusionment generally, over what has been a much more competitive outcome. I didn't expect any transition under Roos to be quick, but for the building blocks to start to come into place in his first year.

BTW, get 22 Daniel Crosses and you'd have a team like North Melbourne ... a bottom-of-the-8 team with a great, honest work ethic, but no one star who can break a game apart when it's really needed.

i would say that Harvey has been that for them for over a decade now, but he is aging and they need to sotp relying on him. I get what you mean though.

Both Jones and Vince have been cleared by MRP. Jones: circumstances outside his control! Vince: insufficient force!

Stewart was cleared of bumping Jones, not the other way around. Jones more or less runs at Stewart, who for mine raised an elbow deliberately and made contact to the head. But there is probably some room for doubt (at always with the MRP )

Umps cost us at least 5 goals. The commentators are so gutless for not pointing it out. How was the HTB against Viney in the first qtr?

I'm going to make a highlights video of this game and point out all the garbage.

Grimes should be beheaded

Had a gutfull of Dawes, he gets about 3 touches a game and then fluffs simple set shots with them

Watts what in the name of God is wrong with this bloke's head? He can play an absolute blinder of a qtr and do zero for the other 3

Massive error having Kent as the sub

That's SIX losses by 20 points or less, had we won them all we'd be 6th on the ladder. FMD.

I am not excusing, or even becoming satisfied with "honourable losses" but after the previous few seasons we have made enormous progress. Built a platform on which to impsovre over the next few seasons. Roos will not become self satisfied, or allow the players to do so, as some in the past may have.

That's just not true. The players will learn from a tough, tight loss far more than you think. The reality is that we have been getting flogged in the last few years and it does take time to learn how to win the close ones. It's too easy to regard the loss as a waste of a game.

Agreed, but it is imperative that somehow, somewhere, our team actually learns how to win, and especially the close ones. (Clearly Casey is no such place).

Edited July 21, 201410 yr by monoccular

Both Jones and Vince have been cleared by MRP. Jones: circumstances outside his control! Vince: insufficient force!

Fantastic news.

RE Jones, 'circumstances outside his control'? He turned around and gave the bloke a jab in the chin!

Very glad to hear Jones and Vince are in the clear from the MRP, you just never know with them!

On the back of this week the team should focused and busting to beat the Lions and GWS. I want those wins.

RE Jones, 'circumstances outside his control'? He turned around and gave the bloke a jab in the chin!

That Jones incident wasn't even reviewed.

The incident that was reviewed (involving Jones) was actually on Stewart of PA.

That Jones incident wasn't even reviewed.

The incident that was reviewed (involving Jones) was actually on Stewart of PA.

Oh okay. Must have looked a lot worse than it was then.

Honestly, if Riley keeps playing the way he does, MANY will sit up and take notice!

This guy is a battering ram and shows no fear - love him!

Now, for the FD to work on his engine and footy skills.

I think Stewart is quite lucky to get off. It could potentially be argued that he "braced" but it looked like a bump to me

That isn't the rule, it is just commonly a free kick because it's very risky.

If you spoil the ball (ie, clean contact), rather than hit the player, it isn't a free kick. The rule is that if you are not looking at the ball and make contact with the player (and not the ball) then it is a free kick.

As it was, the umpire paid the free kick for high contact, not for having his back to the ball.

I don't believe not looking at the ball is in the rule book, and if it is it shouldn't be. Actions with the body cause free kicks, not the eyes, although it is a useful guide for umpires so I understand why they use it.

There were 2 potential frees at play:

1. Front on contact - you can't make contact to someone from the front unless you get the ball as you've taken them out otherwise. This wasn't paid and rightly so as Watts got the ball. Otherwise great marks like Riewoldt and Brown's famous marks aren't valid.

2. High contact - this was paid. But I don't know if it should be. Much like if you step on someones back or head when taking a screamer it's not a free kick. Or if you take a mark and clean someone up with an elbow on the way down it's not a free kick. Now when you spoil from behind and hit the head or over the shoulder it's a free. But when coming from different angles like Watts and Wingard were I think whoever gets the ball first has a right to make accidental contact.

The only case for Wingard getting a free is because he was hit in the head. But the contest was over, the ball was gone. The high contact didn't stop him getting the ball, the spoil did. My personal preference would be that Watts plays the ball and Wingard is late to the contest, therefore any contact made by Watts in playing the ball isn't a free. But I'm not even sure on the exact ruling.

I think Stewart is quite lucky to get off. It could potentially be argued that he "braced" but it looked like a bump to me

Looked like a bump to me and even still there's no reason to brace when a guy is slipping off a tackle. Jack Viney's now infamous brace came when he attacked the ball and was a defensive mechanism to stop him getting hurt.

Stewart, if not bumping, is at least blocking Jones and makes no effort to do anything but connect straight with shoulder to Jones' head. Sure he has a right to shepherd for his man but I thought it was the definition of a negligent action.

If it was the same action when playing the ball then I'd understand giving him the benefit of the doubt. The game needs to keep aggressive attacks on the ball. But the game isn't softer for players not being so physical in off the ball stuff.

Did anyone else think Schultz's last mark was touched by Dunny ? I thought the ball actually deviated off his hand before falling into Schultz's arms .Dunny thought so,too, and the ump must have had some doubt, or he would have penalised Dunn for tackling him after taking the mark.

It wasn't obvious from a different angle in slow motion, but in real time, I was sure it was touched.(before I saw Dunny claiming touched).

Similarly, with the Wyngard free from Watts, the ump tried to "soften" the decision against Watts by putting Wyngard on a far greater angle than he should have been on. There must have been doubt in his mind. If Watts wasn't watching the ball, how did he knock it away so cleanly.?? Error.

And early in the game when Stewart bumped Jones in the head, then Port got a soft free for a goal.

Don't try to tell me that the result wasn't affected by the umpiring.

Meanwhile, I thought it was our best performance of the season.

Edited July 22, 201410 yr by Jumping Jack Clennett

That's 5 maybe even 6 games this year we have held the lead in the last quarter and been beaten. Is this a fitness, composure or belief thing, I think a combination of all three, I think we are another preseason away from having the fitness to play the two way game that is required that is why we have lapses, we still have to many players that just make wrong decisions and we lack the killer instinct to put side away.

Yesterday was stupidity, once again dumb dumb dumb, we panicked when we needed to control the tempo of the game, we tried for the killer blow at the wrong time when we just needed to take time of the clock and once again it wasn't our youngsters it was our leaders they need to learn what is needed to win.

Take away that we played badly for 40 mins of the first and second quarters, we still had a chance to win and we made bad decisions.

Did anyone else think Schutz's last mark was touched by Dunny . I thought the ball actually deviated off his hand before falling into Schultz's arms .Dunny thought so,too, and the ump must have had some doubt, or he would have penalised Dunn for tackling him after taking the mark.

It wasn't obvious from a different angle in slow motion, but in real time, I was sure it was touched.(before I saw Dunny claiming touched).

Very rarely have i seen marks that are touched by the man in front not paid. I dont doubt that it was touched- I never thought the umpire wouldn't pay it though

Fair enough assessment but where were they all in the second quarter? I don't want players who play a quarter and a half. Give me 22 daniel cross types who go 120 mins.

The players have had a meeting and decided to take the JW approach,its worked for him over 80 games,why not the rest of the team.

Very rarely have i seen marks that are touched by the man in front not paid. I dont doubt that it was touched- I never thought the umpire wouldn't pay it though

Agreed, i believe it was touched, but from that angle it would have been way too hard from the umpire to spot it...

I have been trying to get onto the MFC site to check if there is any news on the knee injury to Tappscot.

It has been down all day.

Anyone heard anything?

That's 5 maybe even 6 games this year we have held the lead in the last quarter and been beaten. Is this a fitness, composure or belief thing, I think a combination of all three, I think we are another preseason away from having the fitness to play the two way game that is required that is why we have lapses, we still have to many players that just make wrong decisions and we lack the killer instinct to put side away.

Yesterday was stupidity, once again dumb dumb dumb, we panicked when we needed to control the tempo of the game, we tried for the killer blow at the wrong time when we just needed to take time of the clock and once again it wasn't our youngsters it was our leaders they need to learn what is needed to win.

Take away that we played badly for 40 mins of the first and second quarters, we still had a chance to win and we made bad decisions.

Good teams train for all sorts of end of game scenarios. But I expect Roos has had to train this squad in so many far more basic matters that worrying about how to play the last couple of minutes of a tight game isn't one of the things he's got around to yet. Presumably with time he'll get around to it. And then we'll be far better placed to win close games.

Baghdad Bob is right though. There's a huge discord here on Demonland between this year's reality and this year's expectations.

In reality we are a 4-6 win team that sits 16th @ 73%. What matters to me is not the umpires, or Grimes, or Dawes, or Bail, or Jones, or a thousand other errors that Demonlanders can pick on and slash their wrists over every week throughout the season.

What matters to me is where we have come from and where we are going. I can only see positives this year, and personally I get sick and tired of the carping at specific players, and the disillusionment generally, over what has been a much more competitive outcome. I didn't expect any transition under Roos to be quick, but for the building blocks to start to come into place in his first year.

BTW, get 22 Daniel Crosses and you'd have a team like North Melbourne ... a bottom-of-the-8 team with a great, honest work ethic, but no one star who can break a game apart when it's really needed.

I don't like your choice of comparison.. North have beaten the top 4 teams - its just they also have been beaten by teams below them. They have head problems.