NON MFC: Rd 01 2021

[Elegt 872]

1 minute ago, Deestroy All said:

Players moving on the mark quite a few times, no free. 

I bet one of ours will scratch their [censored] and a free will get called. 

Umpires letting the game flow tonight,  no doubt a directive from afl, I don't mind it so long as it is consistent 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Love the man on the mark rule.

[640MD 3,429]

Blue baggers playing well

[640MD 3,429]

Not sure I expect much on Saturday but if we show the endeavour of the blues this early I think we will win easily after the show 4 quarters 

I expect us to start slow then ru right over the top

[Sir Why You Little 37,128]

Richmond’s Forwardline is awful and they are still close. 
will it Click soon

[640MD 3,429]

Cobwebs and class so yes they should win but the blue boys are having a good dip 

[trout 385]

Carlton are definitely on the up, they may miss out on finals but they are going to be battling the likes of us for a spot in the eight that’s for sure.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Disgusting deliberate decision, absolutely incompetent umpiring.

[Seraph 1,824]

1 minute ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Disgusting deliberate decision, absolutely incompetent umpiring.

How about the non-call after the 2 bounces from McIntosh

It was somewhere between HTB or a trip and the ump just called play-on because he couldn't decide

Absolutely laughable

[BDA 22,880]

1 minute ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Disgusting deliberate decision, absolutely incompetent umpiring.

Looked like an obvious deliberate to me

[Earl Hood 6,101]

Umpires loosing the plot here. And the over the shoulder decision was [censored]. 

[Sir Why You Little 37,128]

Dusty Goal

number one Player

[BDA 22,880]

Classic Martin goal. The don;t argue, and snap for goal.

[DubDee 26,117]

Tigers player manning the mark inside 50 walks off, no fifty. 

carlton player manning the mark runs backward to defend. It’s a 50!?! What the actual [censored]

[FireInTheBennelly 4,099]

32 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Love the man on the mark rule.

Still love it?

[Deeko2 844]

I didn't realise how much I missed footy!  Stoked its back.  Couldn't give a stuff about the result, just happy to watching the real stuff again.

I've forgotten how good Cripps is.  He's just been a bull tonight busting through tackles and using it beautifully.  He's everything I want Oliver to be.

As for Dusty, imagine the luxury of leaving him forward where he's your most dangerous player and then roll him through the guts when you need some clearances.  I still think he's the best player in the comp.  He's everything I want Trac to be.

 

[Elegt 872]

5 minutes ago, FireInTheBennelly said:

Still love it?

Players should be allowed to go backwards, I like the rule but ridiculous that they can't move backwards

[Sir Why You Little 37,128]

3 minutes ago, Elegt said:

Players should be allowed to go backwards, I like the rule but ridiculous that they can't move backwards

Agreed. They should be able to move backwards 

[Forest Demon 4,681]

So far there has been 50m penalties or warnings for the new stand on the mark rule, inside the protected area and also starting zones. Honestly, they have made it so complicated for umpires (who still aren’t full time professionals mind you), is there really any wonder it is all applied so inconsistently? On top of all that rubbish, they need to adjudicate the actual game with holding the ball, chopping the arms, in the back, front on contact, sliding in, the list goes on. What a mess.

[sue 9,143]

5 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Tigers player manning the mark inside 50 walks off, no fifty. 

carlton player manning the mark runs backward to defend. It’s a 50!?! What the actual [censored]

Ridiculous that a player on the mark can't run directly backwards.   We've seen a Richmond player on the mark swap by running backwards and being replaced without penalty.  Was that because the umpire has not yet called stand to the first player?  If so, as long as you immediately get a bit back from the actual mark, you can run backwards because surely the umpire can't call stand if you are not on the mark.  Confused.  

[FireInTheBennelly 4,099]

6 minutes ago, Elegt said:

Players should be allowed to go backwards, I like the rule but ridiculous that they can't move backwards

Agreed. It's absolutely ridiculous

[loges 6,767]

1 minute ago, sue said:

Ridiculous that a player on the mark can't run directly backwards.   We've seen a Richmond player on the mark swap by running backwards and being replaced without penalty.  Was that because the umpire has not yet called stand to the first player?  If so, as long as you immediately get a bit back from the actual mark, you can run backwards because surely the umpire can't call stand if you are not on the mark.  Confused.  

Wasn't over the mark , didn't move sideways, ridiculous decision.

[Demon_spurs 1,867]

New Years Resolution....Don't get stressed about umpiring decisions.....Lets see how long that last?

 

Edited March 18, 2021 by Demon_spurs

[FireInTheBennelly 4,099]

Silvagni concussed?

[loges 6,767]

Oscar is on.