15 minutes ago, Dockett 32 said:

We used to call it staging and used to have umpires who were smart enough to never pay it, so it went away!

Like the peerless Glenn James, maybe it's just my romanticised notion of the man, but he seemed to have the utmost respect of players and supporters alike, can't remember him getting sucked in the way many seem to. Only paid what he saw.  My real gripe with most umpires is that it's clear that many of them have never really played the game since U 12s.

Dawes should learn from Buddy, Buddy rarely sticks overhead marks but he goes at them with soft hands and then juggles them lower so he can secure them.

21 hours ago, CBDees said:

Just looked at the AFL statistincs from yesterday's game which are quite telling:

a) Both teams had similar possessions yet we had sixty extra handballs vs their sixty extra kicks

b) The Hawks had twice as many marks as us (80 vs 40)

c) The Hawks had over forty extra tackles to us ( and 26 vs our 8 inside 50 tackles )

This seems to send a message about "kicking the ball" and "forward pressure"!

The telling one for me CBD Is the extra pressure they're forwards put on Inside 50. Wonder If this has been the case with most of our games so far. Have we ever got the forward pressure side to a decent standard In this regard since It arrived big time I wonder?

 

Edited June 5, 20169 yr by Rusty Nails

10 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

How many?  3 missed from the 3 free kicks for ducking into the tackler all dead in front...got what they deserved and nothing to do with competitiveness.

How many others?

The original question was about score (behinds) differential and competitiveness.  Do you have an answer or just prefer to nit pick that of other posters and offer platitudes like 'we should have done better' or 'to(o) many passengers' instead?   

One of the high free kicks was wrong, the rest were correct, whether you agree with the rule (or lack of) or not. 

Without watching the replay Breust missed a couple he would of normally kicked from set shots, Mcevoy missed from close range, O'Briens kick after the siren wasn't hard, Gunston missed a relatively simple kick.

I beg to differ regarding their missed shots, nothing to do with pressure or forcing them on tough angles, but each to their own. We would just be going around in circles.

If you think that was a competitive team effort, then I don't know what to tell you. We had the 3 best players on the ground and lost, how often does that happen? 

11 hours ago, Deecisive said:

Afraid it wont stop within a week, too may players have been playing for this for too long and are well practiced at lifting the arm, dropping the knees, bending the head down and throwing the head back. All of it needs to see as the player trying to draw / stage for a free kick.

The umpires need to study the tapes during the week and be mindful of which players are doing this. Pay holding the ball against them and it will stop quick smart otherwise they'll cop a hiding from their coaches.

Campbell Brown in his jumper presentation apparently bagged Melbourne and said something along the lines of saying we were soft and always have been. Must have forgot the coach played for us along with 3 of his assistance Neita, Bruce and Yze.

2 minutes ago, scarlett said:

Campbell Brown in his jumper presentation apparently bagged Melbourne and said something along the lines of saying we were soft and always have been. Must have forgot the coach played for us along with 3 of his assistance Neita, Bruce and Yze.

Coming from someone with the IQ of plankton.

15 hours ago, Is Dom Is Good said:

Beggars belief why he was played as a forward for so long when he obviously struggled there?

I would've preferred to play Watts and Hogan and a bunch of smalls than Frost forward.

They wanted him to be a second ruck. With his athletic traits he would have the potential to be a brutal 5 minute per quarter ruck/on baller. With Pedersen sick we're now playing Watts in this role which is clearly a compromise, and Pedersen is a 29 year old journeyman footballer anyway. It's not that much of a mystery why we hoped Frost would come on - he's got the right traits and we have a long term need. Defenders are a lot easier to find.

Happy to see him settle as a defender; there's no reason why his athleticism can't be uses as a weapon there as well, but I can see why they persisted for as long as possible, until it was clear it wasn't working. 

Unbelievable that we lost that game with the best three players on the ground, as well as the dominant ruckman. No doubt Hawthorn played the conditions better than we did, but it also shows how poor our worst 8 or so players were.

Amazing that Roos finally puts Vince back in the middle, and Frost down back, and both performed well. You can sure see why he earns the big bucks (even though most people were calling for both to happen ten weeks ago.

Our defense made some calamitous errors, but overall did okay. Our forward line was poor again. The Dawes selection was dumb given the conditions, but more so I just don't think that he and Hogan can play in the same team. Particularly if Dawes can't ruck, and won't play near his man when we are defending. Pedersen and Hogan is a much better combination.

Garlett clearly needs some incentive to perform, as he has been putrid since signing his contract. Harmes was horrible again and needs to head back to Casey. At least Kent attacked the ball this week, but his influence was neglible. I'd send him back to Casey too. I have no idea what Bugg was meant to be doing this week, but he had no impact. Wagner makes bad decisions consistently. Oliver's impact is excellent given his time on ground, but lacks the endurance at this point.

Great to see Trengove make it through seemingly unscathed. He didn't have a huge impact, but he can find the footy okay. He'll be better with each game he plays.

The disappearance of the kicking in danger rule is just bizarre. Clearly the AFL are waiting until someone gets a broken hand, then they will clamp down so hard that players will be scared to ever kick off the ground. If they had paid it the first time it happened, I'm sure it wouldn't have been an issue thereafter.

11 hours ago, grazman said:

Like the peerless Glenn James, maybe it's just my romanticised notion of the man, but he seemed to have the utmost respect of players and supporters alike, can't remember him getting sucked in the way many seem to. Only paid what he saw.  My real gripe with most umpires is that it's clear that many of them have never really played the game since U 12s.

How would you know how much they played though? There are two umpires in the AFL who played at the very top level (Fisher and Bannister) and they're hardly better. I bet there is a poor correlation in umpiring between games played since under 12s and false free kicks (either paid or unpaid).

1 minute ago, Nasher said:

How would you know how much they played though? There are two umpires in the AFL who played at the very top level (Fisher and Bannister) and they're hardly better. I bet there is a poor correlation in umpiring between games played since under 12s and false free kicks (either paid or unpaid).

Well I'm guessing of course, But here in Canberra they are required to learn to umpire at a young age and then move to Melbourne if they want to pursue their career as an AFL umpire. Small sample I know, but despite the free on the weekend l think you get better umpires if they've played the game. 

I don't think there is any correlation between umpires who have played the game and those who haven't. Just a well rounded understanding of the game and rules applied with common sense will suffice. Some will always be naturally  better than others. Also umpires should be encouraged to reverse their decisions if they feel they have made a mistake. Should be no shame attached. Due to the speed and pressure of the game brain fades happen in an instant.  I am sure many realise almost immediately when they have made a mistake. 

Edited June 5, 20169 yr by america de cali

Am i correct in assuming I was not the only one watching Frost play on Saturday thinking something along the lines of "Thank God! Why wasnt he playing there from round 1!" He is strong, quick, mobile and uses his athleticism to run forward with the ball. I thought it was one of the better games I've seen him play. I know he lacks some plolished skills, but he gave real stucture to a backline that had stuggled in recent times, particular against talls.

Would rather him on second tall than O mac at least he competes and has a sence of urgency

I like his game on the whole except his couple of turnover kicks but he wasnt alone there I  also like his run and carry

 

2 hours ago, Nasher said:

How would you know how much they played though? There are two umpires in the AFL who played at the very top level (Fisher and Bannister) and they're hardly better. I bet there is a poor correlation in umpiring between games played since under 12s and false free kicks (either paid or unpaid).

It was Bannister who paid that ridiculous ducking free kick in front of goal, for what it's worth.

2 hours ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Am i correct in assuming I was not the only one watching Frost play on Saturday thinking something along the lines of "Thank God! Why wasnt he playing there from round 1!" He is strong, quick, mobile and uses his athleticism to run forward with the ball. I thought it was one of the better games I've seen him play. I know he lacks some plolished skills, but he gave real stucture to a backline that had stuggled in recent times, particular against talls.

Yes in all aspects. I wasn"t against him being given a run as a tall forward, but he is clearly more at home in defence.

15 hours ago, P-man said:

Agree with most of that, but referencing the shots on goal as evidence they could've flogged us is folly. A lot of them were rushed behinds, and when you score a behind you get an opportunity to set up and create another scoring opportunity. The 58-50 inside 50 count provides a better reflection of the evenness of the contest.

Their tackling inside forward 50 was a key difference. Kent and Harmes haven't been good enough of late in this aspect especially.

Great summary. There were a heap of rush behinds and that's credit to Hawthorn's pressure inside 50, which was great.

They were also able to spread better and take more marks, particularly early on. Our skills were below par which prevented us doing the same... missed targets and dropped marks a plenty.

18 hours ago, bing181 said:

He did take ruck duties a few times last year, and unless I'm mistaken, rucked a few times yesterday. I suspect it's a combination of a) FD feel he offers more as a forward and b) concern with injuries.

In any case, it's the coaches' call, not Dawes.

I would be far far more concerned were JW#4 to get injured doing unfamiliar ruck duties than CD#6 - we have coped pretty well without the latter, but the former has been pretty important this season.

2 hours ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Am i correct in assuming I was not the only one watching Frost play on Saturday thinking something along the lines of "Thank God! Why wasnt he playing there from round 1!" He is strong, quick, mobile and uses his athleticism to run forward with the ball. I thought it was one of the better games I've seen him play. I know he lacks some plolished skills, but he gave real stucture to a backline that had stuggled in recent times, particular against talls.

Don't feel lonely - I am sure there are many who share your thoughts but have not chosen to articulate them.

Frost offers far more than Garland, who I suspect is in terminal decline due to inability / unwillingness to adapt to the new order.

4 hours ago, chook fowler said:

Coming from someone with the IQ of plankton.

Insult to plankton

We have to remember, the likes of Glenn James, Robinson and Cameron et al; umpired at a time when the game was slower.  The game is now largely 'umpired' by the media.  There are so many programs available now which dissect games from every possible angle.  Umps miced up, as well as some players, means there is more scrutiny on both players and umps than ever before.  Unfortunately, the result of all of this is that the AFL becomes super sensitive to anything which may appear negative, as portrayed by the media. Given the media largely fund the game we love, the AFL will often bunker down when a particular part of the game or a rule becomes controversial.

The unfortunate part of this outcome is that both players and coaches become confused and frustrated.  As a result, I understand that players with the ability to do  so, will use their skills to play the rules to their own advantage.  Who can blame them really?

But what I would like to come back from the 'good ole days' - and it won't happen with the oversight of the sensationalist media scrutiny- is a mature relationship existing again between the players and the umps.  Of course, footy is a passionate game. We want/demand our players to play with passion.  Little wonder then that occasionally, players will utter words to an umpire, which one might say are somewhat injudicious.  In days of yore, an ump would just say to a player, words to the affect, "say that to me again son, and I'll make sure you get nothing from me for the rest of the day".  Job done.  Beer after the game and best of mates, with respect for each other.  Now you get a free kick against you for abuse. 

More than the ducking of the head, the holding the ball/incorrect disposal rules upset me most.  The bloke making the play seems to get no protection these days and when 3 or 4 blokes jump on top, how is he expected to get rid of it?  As for the deliberate rule, John Beckwith would not have a hope in hell these days.  There is no real feel for the game anymore from most of the umps.

Edited June 6, 20169 yr by iv'a worn smith

7 hours ago, scarlett said:

Campbell Brown in his jumper presentation apparently bagged Melbourne and said something along the lines of saying we were soft and always have been. Must have forgot the coach played for us along with 3 of his assistance Neita, Bruce and Yze.

He may be an idiot but idiots are right occasionally. And only an idiot would say that publicly.  Wiser heads would just say nothing because they would like to see us continue to drink our own bath water rather than wake up.

1 minute ago, america de cali said:

He may be an idiot but idiots are right occasionally. And only an idiot would say that publicly.  Wiser heads would just say nothing because they would like to see us continue to drink our own bath water rather than wake up.

Nah  Brown's just an idiot ....fullstop .

Vince cleared, Ceglar one week for striking Hogan

12 minutes ago, Copuchas said:

Vince cleared, Ceglar one week for striking Hogan

I hope Pannell got fined for wasting everyone's time with such a poor report.

Edited June 6, 20169 yr by Ethan Tremblay