Jump to content
  • Demonland Interviews

biggestred

Max Gawn

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, goodoil said:

15.4.3 Permitted Contact Other than the Prohibited Contact identified under Law 15.4.5, a Player may make contact with another Player: (a) by using their hip, shoulder, chest, arms or open hands provided that the football is no more than 5 metres away from the Player; (b) by pushing the other Player with an open hand in the chest or side of the body provided that the football is no more than 5 metres away from the Player; (c) by executing a Correct Tackle; (d) by executing a Shepherd provided that the football is no more than 5 metres away from the Player; or (e) if such contact is incidental to a Marking contest and the Play

You are agreeing with me then? Its not printed anywhere about stiff arm vs bent arm. More AFL bulldust

BTW these are for shepherding not for ruck contests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Demon77 said:

You could clearly hear the umpire mention multiple times it was Vineys free kick prior to Tyson handing the ball back, honest mistake by the Saints player, obviously didn't hear the ump.

and in handing it back he elected to handball it, not throw it back, and i think this action prompted the aints player to think it was play on despite no umpire calling play on..

it certainly was 'unlucky' but then many legitimate frees are 'unlucky' one way or another, that's footy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Redleg said:

True.

This is just karma to the saints for when Nick reiwoldt tricked ( I think)  a freo player a few weeks ago at Domain Stadium by calling for the ball when it wasn't his free kick.  Saints awarded a 50m, and goal.  Everyone on the saints team thought it hilarious. 

Just like I do with this one.

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11.3.5 Contesting the Centre Bounce

  1. (a)  The centre bounce or throw up of the football shall be contested

    by one nominated Player from each Team. The Player nominated to contest the centre bounce shall be positioned in their Team’s defensive half of the Playing Surface and with both feet within the 10-metre circle until they contest the bounce or until the Umpire calls ‘Play On’ due to an “offline bounce”. The Player may only enter the Team’s attacking half after the football touches the ground, in the act of bouncing, or leaves the field Umpire’s hand, in the act of being thrown up. The Player shall not be permitted to block an opponent’s approach to the contest. No other Player may enter the 10-metre circle until the football touches the ground, in the act of bouncing, or leaves the field Umpire’s hand, in the act of being thrown up.

  2. (b)  Where a Player contravenes Law 11.3.5 (a), the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick to the Ruck on the opposing Team. 

 

Max could try and jump at the bounce each time as the free kicks were awarded when he stayed on the ground. This may be being interpreted as blocking.

 

Apologies if this was posted earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Demon77 said:

I should have been clearer, watching the replay you can hear the ump stating it was a free to Viney. They had to award the 50 even though I doubt very much the Saints player heard the call.

Sheer bad luck on their end, but if they didn't pay it I guess we would have players all the time saying they didn't hear calls as excuses. 

But wait. Is there an onus on the players to know the names of each and every one of their opponents?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, felixdacat said:

11.3.5 Contesting the Centre Bounce

  1. (a)  The centre bounce or throw up of the football shall be contested

    by one nominated Player from each Team. The Player nominated to contest the centre bounce shall be positioned in their Team’s defensive half of the Playing Surface and with both feet within the 10-metre circle until they contest the bounce or until the Umpire calls ‘Play On’ due to an “offline bounce”. The Player may only enter the Team’s attacking half after the football touches the ground, in the act of bouncing, or leaves the field Umpire’s hand, in the act of being thrown up. The Player shall not be permitted to block an opponent’s approach to the contest. No other Player may enter the 10-metre circle until the football touches the ground, in the act of bouncing, or leaves the field Umpire’s hand, in the act of being thrown up.

  2. (b)  Where a Player contravenes Law 11.3.5 (a), the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick to the Ruck on the opposing Team. 

 

Max could try and jump at the bounce each time as the free kicks were awarded when he stayed on the ground. This may be being interpreted as blocking.

 

Apologies if this was posted earlier.

"And in my client's defence, your Honour, I would argue that the opposition's ruckman, Mr Longer, by jumping onto my client blocked his approach to the contest.  If the umpires had correctly interpreted the rule, the free kicks in each instance should have been awarded to my client, Mr Gawn."

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-08-15/confused-dees-get-straight-answer-on-gawn-frees-

Quotes:  '...that Gawn's use of a "straight arm" block to keep Longer from contesting the ruck was the major reason the Demon was penalised so heavily.

"We haven't been paying many of them at all. If you go through the stats, there might have been one a game.

"There hasn't been any particular focus on it. It just so happened that in this particular game there was a little bit more evidence for the umpire."

Sounds like a new interpretation of 'blocking'.  Dare I say it seems premeditated by the umpires - like one or more of them were on the lookout for it!  Rule of the Week has gone to Interpretation of the Week, or The Max Tax to be applied only when the Demons look like running away with a game...

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pity the AFL's own article didn't go a bit further and provide the wording of the specific rule. Leaves one wondering whether they were making up the straight arm "interpretation" to justify the decisions made. They wouldn't do that, would they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Skuit said:

But wait. Is there an onus on the players to know the names of each and every one of their opponents?

Wouldn't have though so but Durrrwayne Russell should know the players, he called T Mac James McDonald during the call.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Demon77 said:

Wouldn't have though so but Durrrwayne Russell should know the players, he called T Mac James McDonald during the call.

Jomald!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm not saying it was incorrect; only that we were lucky.

Having said that, while it was definitely correct, I'm not comfortable with the rule in the first place. Sure, if a player's encroachment into the protected area impacts the player with the ball, I'm all for it. But the number of times it has no impact but a 50 metre penalty is awarded seems to me to unfairly damage the team without the ball. I guess that's the price we have to pay for wanting "black and white" rules which are not subject to the umpires' interpretation. 

Yes. We are lucky to get the frees we deserve most weeks. 

50 minutes ago, Skuit said:

But wait. Is there an onus on the players to know the names of each and every one of their opponents?

Not sure, but I strongly suspect that the Saints players know Viney and Tyson. 

36 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-08-15/confused-dees-get-straight-answer-on-gawn-frees-

Quotes:  '...that Gawn's use of a "straight arm" block to keep Longer from contesting the ruck was the major reason the Demon was penalised so heavily.

"We haven't been paying many of them at all. If you go through the stats, there might have been one a game.

"There hasn't been any particular focus on it. It just so happened that in this particular game there was a little bit more evidence for the umpire."

Sounds like a new interpretation of 'blocking'.  Dare I say it seems premeditated by the umpires - like one or more of them were on the lookout for it!  Rule of the Week has gone to Interpretation of the Week, or The Max Tax to be applied only when the Demons look like running away with a game...

Was the umpires' huddle checked for Visy type brown paper bags at the quarter break?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-08-15/confused-dees-get-straight-answer-on-gawn-frees-

Quotes:  '...that Gawn's use of a "straight arm" block to keep Longer from contesting the ruck was the major reason the Demon was penalised so heavily.

"We haven't been paying many of them at all. If you go through the stats, there might have been one a game.

"There hasn't been any particular focus on it. It just so happened that in this particular game there was a little bit more evidence for the umpire."

Sounds like a new interpretation of 'blocking'.  Dare I say it seems premeditated by the umpires - like one or more of them were on the lookout for it!  Rule of the Week has gone to Interpretation of the Week, or The Max Tax to be applied only when the Demons look like running away with a game...

And they say this with a straight face? Wow! Some of this guff would give diarrhoeia the sh!ts. How can one ruckman block another when they start on either side of the circle with the ball between them? If the ball bounces towards one ruckman, who then puts out an arm to stop getting knocked over by the other, it is then a block? I really shouldn't be surprised, but sometimes I still feel the need for a double facepalm with twist and pike ...

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"They're difficult ones for the umpire to pick up, especially in the centre because if you imagine what's happened, they've bounced the ball and they've backed out so they're only a small distance away from the play," Kennedy said.

Huh? They are right on the spot, so that makes it difficult for them to see? Should have gone to SpecSavers ... :rolleyes:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-08-15/confused-dees-get-straight-answer-on-gawn-frees-

Quotes:  '...that Gawn's use of a "straight arm" block to keep Longer from contesting the ruck was the major reason the Demon was penalised so heavily.

"We haven't been paying many of them at all. If you go through the stats, there might have been one a game.

"There hasn't been any particular focus on it. It just so happened that in this particular game there was a little bit more evidence for the umpire."

Sounds like a new interpretation of 'blocking'.  Dare I say it seems premeditated by the umpires - like one or more of them were on the lookout for it!  Rule of the Week has gone to Interpretation of the Week, or The Max Tax to be applied only when the Demons look like running away with a game...

And there is the problem, was it pre meditated umpiring. One of the footy shows suggested clubs had complained to the umpires department about Max. If the umpires department directed this we have a serious problem. Certain clubs would be controlling umpiring. Fantastic.

  • Like 4
  • Angry 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the maggots threw the ball up straight Gawn wouldnt have a 100kg 200cm monster jumping over him as he bent backwards trying to tap the ball. Surely you are allowed to protect your head?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their response is as poor as the umpiring.  It shows they have NO CLUE.  Honestly, this over officiating specifically against a player is stupid.  So how does Dusty Martin not get in trouble for all the straight arming he does on players, to the cheers of all and sundry?  Is that not 'blocking'?  Anyway, the idea of penalizing a specific player is fine - if is not Dangerfield, Dusty or Cyril.

We are so the biatches of the AFL.  I HATE it.

  • Like 3
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Redleg said:

And there is the problem, was it pre meditated umpiring. One of the footy shows suggested clubs had complained to the umpires department about Max. If the umpires department directed this we have a serious problem. Certain clubs would be controlling umpiring. Fantastic.

It seemed premeditated to me - if they rarely pay it but suddenly penalise the same player 5 times in one game because 'there was more evidence in this game' strongly suggests they were looking for it.

That other clubs have complained is very troubling.  Did the footy commentators  say what the nature of the complaint was?  Or did the umpires pull this new interpretation out of thin air so they could penalise Max in some way?

Edited by Lucifer's Hero
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just did a search of the Laws of AFL and surprise surprise, the word "straight" only appears in entirely different contexts than anything remotely to do with this .  They make it up as they go along.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

It seemed premeditated to me - if they rarely pay it but suddenly penalise the same player 5 times in one game because 'there was more evidence in this game' strongly suggests they were looking for it.

That other clubs have complained is very troubling.  Did the footy commentators  say what the nature of the complaint was?  Or did the umpires pull this new interpretation out of thin air so they could penalise Max in some way?

No, they just said that they believed some clubs had complained about his rucking. 

This actually could be a serious issue and needs investigation after the season has finished.  

If umpires have been directed to penalise a player, we have a real problem.

The Club should look into this after our season has ended.

It is very strange to say the least.

Edited by Redleg
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Redleg said:

No, they just said that they believed some clubs had complained about his rucking. 

This actually could be a serious issue and needs investigation after the season has finished.

it is very strange to say the least.

Thanks. 

You would think the least they would do is alert the club to problem's with Max's technique before they went on the rampage over it. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just reported on channel 7 news, max opened talks about contract extension and is seeking a deal that will see him a demon for life. Let's hope he gets it done. 

  • Like 8
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Thanks. 

You would think the least they would do is alert the club to problem's with Max's technique before they went on the rampage over it. 

Yes you would think so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reported on 7 news maxy has begun contract negotiations to stay a dee for life looking at $800k a season but is a free agent next year so could command $1mil at another club, he won't go anywhere 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Thanks. 

You would think the least they would do is alert the club to problem's with Max's technique before they went on the rampage over it. 

Absolutely. Remarkable tbey didnt given we are near seaaons and hw has rucked that way for years. Not doing so could have cost us a finals spot given maxy's comment that he gave up rucking for fear of giving away a free kick (as evidenced by the hit out stats) and the fact that at least one free resulted in a goal.

I dont normally advocate this but pj should speak to gil

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Social Media

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles

    SOCIAL DISTANCING by George on the Outer

    It was good to see the MFC players practicing the directives about social distancing at the game against West Coast.  Pity was that they continued to do so after the first bounce of the ball, as they allowed numerous WCE players run around un-hindered, with not a Melbourne player within 1.5 metres of them! They then found themselves looking at nearly a 5 goal deficit at the first break, which was to be essentially the final margin for the game. It is difficult to judge exactly what is going

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    BEST IN SHOW by Whispering Jack

    I am writing this knowing that the AFL has deemed that the opening round of competition will proceed but fully believing that it should not.  The world is going through cataclysmic change as a result of the overwhelming spread of the Covid-19 virus and I agree that a distraction like sport would be good for the public. However, while the physical threat to the population is bad enough, there are other  issues to be addressed including the mental health of the community and the effects on th

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    TASSIE DEVILS by Van Demon

    If you were looking for something new from the Demons that wasn’t there last year, you didn’t have to look further than the perfectly trimmed grass surface of UTAS Stadium last night as the team steamrolled the Hawks to record a comprehensive 32-point victory to complete their Marsh Community Series commitments for 2020. One new thing was the fact that for the second Marsh game in a row, the team finished full of running and they dominated the second half without the presence or the dominan

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    SOUTH OF THE BORDER by Paddy Gosch

    The Demons will go into their final Marsh Series match with a strong lineup against the Hawks in Tasmania. Both Max Gawn and Steven May, who were recovering from injuries in first Marsh Series match, have both been named. It is unclear whether Max will be on restricted minutes and will likely get breaks in the ruck with Sam Weideman and rookie Luke Jackson getting their turns in the middle. Angus Brayshaw will be getting his first taste of competitive football despite playing in last week’s

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    KANGAROO CAUGHT by Whispering Jack

    There was a fair amount of debate in our area as to whether the game warranted a full blown match report because it was felt that it was really an elevated version of a training session with match simulation but against a team in opposition colours. Although notionally the stronger side, North seemed to be using the occasion for the purpose of working on aspects of their game plan, one of the features of which seemed to be based on taking the longest possible route out of defence and good luck w

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    JUST AN ABERRATION by Whispering Jack

    Melbourne unveiled its top recruits with new fitness boss Darren Burgess and mid-sized bull Christian Petracca sharing top billing in the team’s Marsh Community Series opener in front of 3,095 football starved fans at Casey Fields and thousands of others watching on screens of various shapes and sizes.  What they saw was a different Melbourne to the one that failed to run out its JLT Series games last year and then crashed in a heap early in the season proper with performances lacking the z

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports 4

    CROWDOWN by Paddy Gosch

    The Demons open their 2020 season account with a "home" game against the Adelaide Crows at Casey Fields. It’s been more than 5 and half agonising months for the team and supporters who are eager to atone for the disappointing 2019 season which saw the Dees go from Preliminary Finalist to 2nd bottom on the ladder. The preseason campaign has been a hard slog with the addition of respected High Performance Manager Darren Burgess. We caught a glimpse of the gut busting sessions in the Melbourne

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    THE YEAR THE SKY FELL by The Oracle

    After a number of years of linear movement up the ladder, the Melbourne Football Club unexpectedly went into serious decline in 2019, slumping from fourth to 17th in a season that coach Simon Goodwin described “a complete wipe-out”. Those around the club who tried to analyse the apocalyptic events that unfolded during the year were hard pressed to find a single reason for the debacle but the most plausible explanation was that the club’s troubles stemmed from a lack of fitness and injuries that

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features

    BACK IN STYLE by Whispering Jack

    From the moment when the Elton John character in the movie “Rocketman” burst into its opening scene dressed as a flamboyant demon on his way to an addiction rehabilitation session, the game was on. Here was yet another film about a person gifted with a meteoric rise to stardom finding coke, booze and a hedonistic lifestyle that led directly to a destructive crash into the abyss. Ultimately, these stories end in total disaster (“A Star is Born”, “Bohemian Rhapsody”, “Judy”) but this one resulted

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features

    THE TRADING CHRONICLES 2019

    PART ONE - OVERTURE  I have a disclaimer at the outset. I’m not a fan of the races - be they horses or motors of any kind. Once the final siren sounds on the football season, I find the month or so that follows and corresponds roughly with the Spring Racing Carnival to be the most boring time of the year for sports fans. You turn on the radio and you’re confronted by the monotonous drone of a self-proclaimed racing expert or by the nasally twang of an ex-jockey banging on about the equine p

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features 8

    CHANGES 2019 by The Oracle

    PART 1 - IT’S A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED THIS TIME This year’s free agency, trade and draft period will see the usual drama and upheaval as the AFL’s 18 clubs seek to better their lists in order to challenge for finals and possibly premiership honours. Long before the final siren sounded on the season just over a week ago, the maneuvering was under way with player agents and clubs discussing possible player movements and in some cases, deals had already been done.  Yesterday, the r

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features 2

    HOW FAR SOUTH? by George on the Outer

    It was appropriate that Melbourne was playing its last game of season 2019 in Hobart.  After all, how much further south could the team go? And much as it has done in many of the previous 22 games, the side managed to extract a loss from a winning position by simply giving the ball back to the opposition time and time again. In fact, they gave it back to the opposition to the tune of 53 points from turnovers while, by way of contrast North Melbourne contributed  only 17 points to their oppo

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

×
×
  • Create New...