10 hours ago, Win4theAges said:

Devon smith ran with the 50 and did not move out of the zone once he arrived at its point, a clear and blantant 2nd 50m penalty f'n stupid football by Devon.

Clear and simple.

Correct. Umpire 3 times told him to move away and gestured 3 times with his arms. Blatant.

I think it was Heppell who then told Smith off. Gave the umpire no choice after 3 warnings. 

10 hours ago, binman said:

That may be the case but as I couldn't get a ticket I had to watch it on TV.

And when they replayed it you could hear the umpire tell Smith it (the second 50) was for abuse

I didn’t hear that. Will listen carefully when I replay it.

On 6/24/2021 at 3:55 PM, Luther said:

If our forwards are dollar shop they picked theirs up from the tip!

How about their dollar shop supporters......

Im amazed they can write that many sentences...

What they should be saying “proud of the efforts of the team. Did well to hold one of the best sides in the competition to under 2 goals loss. Need to tidy up our kicking going inside 50” 

What they are actually saying “wahhh boooooo”

10 hours ago, deanox said:

I was comfortable with that goal. The ball has to be all the way over the line before it is a score. So as long as some part of his foot touches the ball before the ball is all the way over I think that's in the spirit of the rules (I don't know of technically the ball needs to leave the footy to be considered a kick).

 

If the ball is in contact with the foot as it crosses the line, it's touched over the line and therefore a point.

Not that the AFL care anything about their own rules if there's a bit of theatre involved. They are hypocrites and fraudsters. 

1 hour ago, pineapple dee said:

If the ball is in contact with the foot as it crosses the line, it's touched over the line and therefore a point.

Not that the AFL care anything about their own rules if there's a bit of theatre involved. They are hypocrites and fraudsters. 

That’s correct. The review umpire as well as the commentators are confusing the foot contact on the line with a touched or marked ball on the line. Totally different aspects of the game. There had to be a clear separation between foot and ball before the ball entered the plane of the line. In the Jones case there wasn’t. It was clear his foot and ball were still connected on the out of play side of the line as he completed his kick.

Edited June 27, 20214 yr by John Crow Batty

1 hour ago, pineapple dee said:

If the ball is in contact with the foot as it crosses the line, it's touched over the line and therefore a point.

Not that the AFL care anything about their own rules if there's a bit of theatre involved. They are hypocrites and fraudsters. 

I've always thought the foot has to be inside the line in these instances.

Even Harrison Jones thought it was a point after he saw the replay,  you could see him set up for the kick in,  then his surprise when it was confirmed a goal 

mods should really consider changing the title of this thread to …

What they’re crying about at windy hill 

Edited June 27, 20214 yr by Delusional demon 82

I also thought they got 2 dubious marks paid which resulted in shots on goal, fortunately they only kicked one.

I was at the ground and in my area it was about three Essendon supporters for every Demon. Within the first five minutes they were squealing and it only got worse.   Too me it was over the top but consistent for the Essendon crowd over the last 30 years. They are supreme whingers. 

5 minutes ago, deegirl said:

I was at the ground and in my area it was about three Essendon supporters for every Demon. Within the first five minutes they were squealing and it only got worse.   Too me it was over the top but consistent for the Essendon crowd over the last 30 years. They are supreme whingers. 

Yep Essendon & Richmond supporters are the worst. Always find them so rude, annoying & horrible

See the bombers fly.....oh. 

Read (with a fair dose of Schadenfreude )the comments on Bombersblitz .What a disgusting combination of  indescribably vile vitriol and completely irrational argument  .Glad to get back on Demonland.

2 hours ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

See the bombers fly.....oh. 

Ummm, so…

Were the people ok?

It was CGI, yeah, that makes feel better, I’m good now. It was CGI.

1 minute ago, rpfc said:

Ummm, so…

Were the people ok?

It was CGI, yeah, that makes feel better, I’m good now. It was CGI.

RPFC I had to sift through a few similar gif's before I chose this one and a lot of them looked disturbingly real, including this one. My guess is that most of them would be from Russia after they deregulated Aeroflot. 

19 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

RPFC I had to sift through a few similar gif's before I chose this one and a lot of them looked disturbingly real, including this one. My guess is that most of them would be from Russia after they deregulated Aeroflot. 

That’s the TransAsia crash in Taiwan 2015. 38 people died and it was a miracle 15 people survived. The plane was an ATR 72.The plane crashed because the pilot switched off the wrong engine after the other flamed out  after takeoff.

Edited June 27, 20214 yr by John Crow Batty

2 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

That’s the TransAsia crash in Taiwan 2015. 38 people died and it was a miracle 15 people survived. The plane was an ATR 72.The plane crashed because the pilot switched off the wrong engine after the other flamed out  after takeoff.

he won't make that same mistake twice ?

3 hours ago, rpfc said:

Ummm, so…

Were the people ok?

It was CGI, yeah, that makes feel better, I’m good now. It was CGI.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransAsia_Airways_Flight_235

 

WIKI has it as TransAsia Airways Flight 235

 

Im not normally one to whine about gifs, but I think maybe this is a bit harsh and the poster should have a re-think.

Essendon fans ringing SEN to say they are not in the 8 because of the umpires. Yes that's right Essendon, you lost 8 games this year and the umpires are to blame for you not being in the 8.

The umpires are also to blame for why we haven't won a flag since 1964 

46 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Essendon fans ringing SEN to say they are not in the 8 because of the umpires. Yes that's right Essendon, you lost 8 games this year and the umpires are to blame for you not being in the 8.

The umpires are also to blame for why we haven't won a flag since 1964 

And climate change. Don’t forget climate change. The umpires are to blame for that too. 

1 minute ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

And climate change. Don’t forget climate change. The umpires are to blame for that too. 

And Covid. No wait that's Victoria's fault. 

23 hours ago, pineapple dee said:

If the ball is in contact with the foot as it crosses the line, it's touched over the line and therefore a point.

Not that the AFL care anything about their own rules if there's a bit of theatre involved. They are hypocrites and fraudsters. 

Your last statment is definitely true.  But where in the rules does it say that?   The definition of a kick says nothing nor does what makes a goal a point as far as I can see?

Rules are hidden by the AFL as far as possible.  https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2021/03/22/821e4724-d9f4-48b5-8210-aba038553024/2021-Laws-of-the-Game-WEB.pdf

6 minutes ago, sue said:

Your last statment is definitely true.  But where in the rules does it say that?   The definition of a kick says nothing nor does what makes a goal a point as far as I can see?

Rules are hidden by the AFL as far as possible.  https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2021/03/22/821e4724-d9f4-48b5-8210-aba038553024/2021-Laws-of-the-Game-WEB.pdf

i don't think the rules cover this situation precisely

it's just a grey area and the afl should clarify it in the rules

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

i don't think the rules cover this situation precisely

it's just a grey area and the afl should clarify it in the rules

Well on my reading there is nothing to say that the ball has to leave the boot before it passes the outside of the line.  The definition of a kick is simply contact below the knee, nothing about a kick requires the ball to leave the boot.   So I think it is clear that is was a goal, though the frame rate of the AFL's cameras is far too low to be really sure.

I note that it is clear that if another player is touching the ball as it is kicked, it is not a goal.  

I didn't spot anything in the rules about  video reviews checking on goals etc.  But it seems to be a 'rule' that the umpire is only overridden if the video review is definitive.  How does a professional organization not include that in its 2021 laws of the game?

11 minutes ago, sue said:

Well on my reading there is nothing to say that the ball has to leave the boot before it passes the outside of the line.  The definition of a kick is simply contact below the knee, nothing about a kick requires the ball to leave the boot.   So I think it is clear that is was a goal, though the frame rate of the AFL's cameras is far too low to be really sure.

I note that it is clear that if another player is touching the ball as it is kicked, it is not a goal.  

I didn't spot anything in the rules about  video reviews checking on goals etc.  But it seems to be a 'rule' that the umpire is only overridden if the video review is definitive.  How does a professional organization not include that in its 2021 laws of the game?

agree with this

i would have paid the goal despite the video being too fuzzy based on umpire decision stands

i would pay goal if foot made contact whilst ball not completely over line  i.e. ball still in play 

but this is just my opinion