3 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Yeah the more I think about it I think you are right. 

So with no clear evidence the ball hit the post how in the hell have they called it a point?

Because maggots have a sixth sense when they are near wood...

1 hour ago, Wiseblood said:

While it's hard to gauge against a side like Freo, I think the midfield have been able to work out the clearance issues we were having a few weeks ago.  Last night we won the clearances 42-28, but this time it felt as though we weren't getting in each others way as much.  It felt as though we spread much better, giving us an outlet handpass that we could then use to run out of the stoppage.  It did help that Gawn was able to dominate Darcy and Apeness, but it seems as though we're working far better in there than previous weeks.

The spread when we won the ball around the stoppages looked much more cohesive. I actually thought Petracca was particularly good in that regard. Definitely his best midfield game this season. He seemed more calm with ball in hand and didn't rush like he has been this season. Very promising.

4 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

No the umpire (incorrectly) thought it hit the post so that is what the video evidence needed to contradict - I thought it did contradict it but apparently not.

No he was asked and said I thought it was a goal, can you see if it touched the post.

4 hours ago, daisycutter said:

jeffy's set shots are not too hot. he is better on the run

Any stats to back that DC?

4 minutes ago, Yung Blood said:

The spread when we won the ball around the stoppages looked much more cohesive. I actually thought Petracca was particularly good in that regard. Definitely his best midfield game this season. He seemed more calm with ball in hand and didn't rush like he has been this season. Very promising.

Agreed.

The other thing I felt we did more of was work on not having multiple mids go inside and no one wait for the handball receive on the outside. Just felt like I noticed more players holding off on the contest and waiting to be the outlet option (Brayshaw in particular I recall doing this well).

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

I know for sure that when a goal ump is standing in front of the post and the ball hits him/her then it is deemed a point. I am not sure what the same ruling is for a player though. Having said that I think it was reasonably clear that the ball didn't touch the post so the only option is that Tracc's arm (that was holding the ball) hit the post - he seemed to push off with that arm.

As usual the AFL Rules of the Game don't mention this at all. Like so many things they make it up as they go...

 

This is the Rule : if the player touches the post but not the ball it is play on.

The goal umpire in this incident called it a goal and asked for a review, to see if the ball touched the post earlier, when CP touched the post.

If the video we saw was used as the only video, then we have a wrong call, as it didn't show the ball touching the post and the umpire's call should have stood..

If there were different views and they showed the ball touching the post, correct call.

However, as this was Darwin and there would be less cameras and maybe an inexperienced camera umpire, he may have guessed and it was an incorrect call.

Nothing we saw on the TV showed the ball in contact with the post, so I think there is a strong chance we got dudded.

Edited July 8, 20186 yr by Redleg

41 minutes ago, Redleg said:

This is the Rule : if the player touches the post but not the ball it is play on.

The goal umpire in this incident called it a goal and asked for a review, to see if the ball touched the post earlier, when CP touched the post.

If the video we saw was used as the only video, then we have a wrong call, as it didn't show the ball touching the post and the umpire's call should have stood..

If there were different views and they showed the ball touching the post, correct call.

However, as this was Darwin and there would be less cameras and maybe an inexperienced camera umpire, he may have guessed and it was an incorrect call.

Nothing we saw on the TV showed the ball in contact with the post, so I think there is a strong chance we got dudded.

We were.

56 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Any stats to back that DC?

no, just that i see him miss gimme set shots often and kick miracles on the run

6 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

No the umpire (incorrectly) thought it hit the post so that is what the video evidence needed to contradict - I thought it did contradict it but apparently not.

I must have been mistaken.

7 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

No the umpire (incorrectly) thought it hit the post so that is what the video evidence needed to contradict - I thought it did contradict it but apparently not.

I dont believe the ump said "it hit the post" rather he wanted to "make sure it hadn't hit the post".

We were dudded.

3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

according to demonland jones sits 5th in the voting

Viney & TMac would both be ahead of him if they had played all matches.

Lewis sits at 16th and Vince not in top 22.

While Jetta has been great the last few years, has seemed to be injured.

We only have four players 29 and over in Lewis, Vince, Jones & Jetta, and are already replacing Vince in the team this year, and Lewis will be next year. Jetta & Jones both have 2-3 years to go, maybe more, so I don’t agree with your concern re Age!

We lose Max, yes major concern, but can pick a dominate player from most teams, whose loss would really hurt them!

 

I haven't been able to watch the game apart from the highlights on the website, but from what I've seen and read we destroyed them in every area except the scoreboard and eventually that caught up to them as well. This could and should have been a 100+ victory but ultimately we just needed to get back on the winning side of things and I'm sure we'll take the positives of our around the grounds dominance to the MCG v Doggies.

I'm a firm believer that we need Garlett in the team, he is a spark that creates magic. I understand why he was dropped and kept out for so long but in the back half of the year I feel we need him to be able to not only make the 8 but make it count.

Goal kicking sucked, but the last time we were in the NT we couldn't miss so those days happen. It didn't cost us the win, but it cost us valuable percentage. What maybe the coaches need to do is address how to stop the yips from spreading.

One piece of footage I have seen in Lewis's elbow. That has to be the final straw, he is meant to be a LEADER, and he pulls that crap regularly. Drop him. The club is working hard to create a culture and it shouldn't include that kind of utter stupidity.

 

Thanks for those highlights Petraccattack, I'm really glad I wasn't able to watch this live. I would've been tearing my hair out. Some of those misses are just ridiculous.

But the bit of play that nails my belief that Lewis MUST be dropped started with him not wanting to properly shepherd, then lazily kick the ball in danger, and give up a 50 metre penalty that ends in a goal. Disgusting from a leader and unacceptable. 

Let's get our kicking boots on for next week.

8 minutes ago, Pates said:

Thanks for those highlights Petraccattack, I'm really glad I wasn't able to watch this live. I would've been tearing my hair out. Some of those misses are just ridiculous.

But the bit of play that nails my belief that Lewis MUST be dropped started with him not wanting to properly shepherd, then lazily kick the ball in danger, and give up a 50 metre penalty that ends in a goal. Disgusting from a leader and unacceptable. 

Let's get our kicking boots on for next week.

Lewis opted to try and hack the ball out of mid air rather than pick it up at least 3 times last night, being pinged for in danger the final time. Not sure if laziness or he just has an old man's back (or thought it was a better option given the conditions) but it stood out

1 hour ago, Pates said:

I haven't been able to watch the game apart from the highlights on the website, but from what I've seen and read we destroyed them in every area except the scoreboard and eventually that caught up to them as well. This could and should have been a 100+ victory but ultimately we just needed to get back on the winning side of things and I'm sure we'll take the positives of our around the grounds dominance to the MCG v Doggies.

I'm a firm believer that we need Garlett in the team, he is a spark that creates magic. I understand why he was dropped and kept out for so long but in the back half of the year I feel we need him to be able to not only make the 8 but make it count.

Goal kicking sucked, but the last time we were in the NT we couldn't miss so those days happen. It didn't cost us the win, but it cost us valuable percentage. What maybe the coaches need to do is address how to stop the yips from spreading.

One piece of footage I have seen in Lewis's elbow. That has to be the final straw, he is meant to be a LEADER, and he pulls that crap regularly. Drop him. The club is working hard to create a culture and it shouldn't include that kind of utter stupidity.

Agree Pates except for the last para, as in a tight game i couldn't think of anyone i would rather have kicking for goal. That said, i do not want us to start a game tentatively like that again for the rest of the year..........

7 hours ago, jnrmac said:

The ump said "I think its a goal but I just want to make sure tha ball didn't hit the post earlier"

There was no evidence that we saw where it shows the ball hitting the post but you could clearly see Tracc's arm holding the ball hit the post.

If I am standing with my back against the post and the ball hits me, its my understanding that this is called a point. Anyone know if this is correct and if this is the basis a point was called?

I too thought that if you hit the goal post whilst holding the ball it was a point (or out of bounds if it were the behind post). Might be mistaken, though

1 minute ago, Moonshadow said:

I too thought that if you hit the goal post whilst holding the ball it was a point (or out of bounds if it were the behind post). Might be mistaken, though

That's alright, but didn't the Goal Umpire say that "he just wanted to see if the BALL hit the post"?

4 minutes ago, willmoy said:

That's alright, but didn't the Goal Umpire say that "he just wanted to see if the BALL hit the post"?

I think he called Jeffy's soccer kick a goal but wanted to see if Trac hit the post with it immediately before. That was my understanding anyway.

If it's a behind when running into the goal post when holding the ball, then the correct decision was made in review, which should be all that matters

Edited July 8, 20186 yr by Moonshadow

3 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

I too thought that if you hit the goal post whilst holding the ball it was a point (or out of bounds if it were the behind post). Might be mistaken, though

I saw that incident in the highlights, I wondered whether it had been called a behind first or they needed to see if hit the post. If they needed proof to overrule it then there was clearly none, there was no clear evidence it hit the post.

Yep Dr Gonzo well said. What a f#€*ng joke this game is becoming

27 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Lewis opted to try and hack the ball out of mid air rather than pick it up at least 3 times last night, being pinged for in danger the final time. Not sure if laziness or he just has an old man's back (or thought it was a better option given the conditions) but it stood out

I can recall a few years ago we played Hawthorn in the wet and we bemoaned our lack of ability to just hack the ball forward at all costs.  We played too cute, while the Hawks had smart players who, in 50/50 situations, just kicked the ball forward off the ground to gain ground for their side.

Now, we have Lewis doing the same thing many of us asked for a few years back, and we're potting him for it.  Okay, he missed one, but he also connected with a couple as he tried to play the percentages in those 50/50 contests - instead of risking it with the slippery ball, he tried to simply get it forward to give us a chance and to keep it out of their forward half.  I don't see what's wrong with that.  

If he was doing it on a day with perfect conditions then yes, it's very lazy footy.  But not when the ball is as slippery as it was.  He was attempting to do the right thing, even if it didn't always come off.

27 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Lewis opted to try and hack the ball out of mid air rather than pick it up at least 3 times last night, being pinged for in danger the final time. Not sure if laziness or he just has an old man's back (or thought it was a better option given the conditions) but it stood out

That’s the right thing to do in those conditions. The humidity meant the ball was slippery, so you likely won’t be able to pick it up cleanly and are better off just keeping it moving forward like the Tigers (and Hawks of yesteryear) do so well. The players interviewed after the game said the conditions were akin to a wet game after a downpour.

The lack of sheperd is also not the worst, as he trusted Trac to win the ball and get it out to him. Too often this year all our players get sucked into the contest and no one is left on the outside to receive and distribute. While it doesn’t look great on review, it was the right thing to do and would’ve worked in better conditions.

Did ball hit the goal post.

I thought Tracs was going to roll over the goal post (knocking it over in the style of Lee Mathews, 1982) and kick the goal.

38 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

I too thought that if you hit the goal post whilst holding the ball it was a point (or out of bounds if it were the behind post). Might be mistaken, though

You are.