How do Bulldogs do it?

[AllMyTeamsAreWank 564]

As another poster said, I think it just comes down to the way they play. There was some poor free kicks yesterday, but they have a habit of playing in front and they are usually the team being chased. 

[Demonland 71,622]

37 minutes ago, AllMyTeamsAreWank said:

As another poster said, I think it just comes down to the way they play. There was some poor free kicks yesterday, but they have a habit of playing in front and they are usually the team being chased. 

That may be true but it doesn't account for some of the non-free kicks to Sydney that I witnessed yesterday for things that were awarded free kicks to the Bulldogs. Admittedly I was wearing a one eyed Sydney hat so that could explain my outrage.

[Sydee 4,384]

The number of blatant throws that were not paid yesterday was amazing - so much so I started to focus on where the umpires were relative to contested ball

[Dr. Gonzo 24,192]

I agree however we've had an OK run this year I reckon - other teams will point to Spargo (ducking) Oliver (throwing) etc 

Dogs can do what they want but they can't handle pressure when teams like us bring it, they fall to pieces

[faultydet 7,594]

11 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

I'm not buying the conspiracies. 

I reckon it's a number of factors:

1. Nice guys:
Some of their best players - Macrae, Bont etc are nice guys and fair players. Compared with some of ours - Gawn used to give the umps a serve, Oliver was awful - you get the umpires onside or off by your behaviour, that's human nature.

2. The Duckers and divers:
Lachie Hunter is the number 1 transgressor. Weightman's not a bad prototype. McLean an all time classic. We have Spargo but that's about it.

3. Aggressive zone defending. The Dogs backline often play in front and pretty much play as the forwards. That means they get the free kicks for pushes in the back or chop of the arms and also means they don't give away the same free kicks by playing from behind. Someone like Lever will always have a better for/against than Steven May, just from the way they play and the Dogs whole side is more like Lever.

I think the main one for us to take from them is to be more professional and respectful to the umps. Gawn has matured in that way and probably gets looked after a bit better now - although not nearly as well as he should. Oliver and even Petracca can probably improve a lot there.

I would detest Spargo if he played for another side.  He throws his head back every time he is tackled.

Only consolation would be Spargs receiving a free kick to win a grand final fŕom staging against Hunter or the faux tough guy from Brisbane who can't kick.

These head thrower-backerers and knee benderers really get my goat. Except Spargo. (Apart from the times he throws his head back. That really annoys me)

[Redleg 40,843]

12 hours ago, A F said:

I really hate the way they play. Not only do they throw it most times, the way they constantly milk free kicks, some will say it's clever, I don't like it.

Either do I.

Hunter and Daniel match Selwood for ducking.

Both again got frees for it yesterday.

Commentators just laugh.

Libba's throw was a beauty.

Also loved Daniel running about 35 metres without a bounce from a kick out. Hilarious. Then the umpires call an 8 meter kick 15. So what do they think Daniel's run was?

[Clintosaurus 7,838]

In 2016 Beveridge defended the umpires after a game against Adelaide where they won the free kick tally 28-12, which included Troy Pannell awarding 17 to the Bulldogs and 1 to Adelaide. They have had a charmed run since about that time. The 2016 GF was also a magnificent display of umpiring.

[radar 1,865]

13 hours ago, praha said:

I swear this has been the case since I was a kid. Still have nightmares of a match in 94 at the MCG when Iligia Grgic would get a free kick at pretty much every ruck contest. 

Woulda been against Schwartz. Him and Crackers most ever umpired against players. Ox especially 

[Ted Lasso 19,311]

There is something to be said for being ahead of the curve in terms of what the umpires are really focusing on, and being able to disguise things so you don't get caught as often. 

Not sure how they get away with the throws though, the Umpires definitely know they do it. they just seem to get a free pass. 

[drdrake 3,162]

The bulldogs are a bit touched at the moment, not only did they get the No 1 pick in the draft for basically a couple of second round picks, they also have a Father/Son Luke Darcy kid that looks like he will slot nicely into a future forward line, again they will get him for unders.

 

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,778]

5 hours ago, AllMyTeamsAreWank said:

As another poster said, I think it just comes down to the way they play. There was some poor free kicks yesterday, but they have a habit of playing in front and they are usually the team being chased. 

"The team being chased"????  They had less possessions than the Swans. You don't get chased when you haven't got the ball.

[daisycutter 29,604]

4 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I agree however we've had an OK run this year I reckon - other teams will point to Spargo (ducking) Oliver (throwing) etc 

Dogs can do what they want but they can't handle pressure when teams like us bring it, they fall to pieces

throwing the ball has become endemic in the game. either the super quick throw off the toes simultaneous with ball contact or the many dubious over the head etc throws.

the problem really is that these throws are so fast the umpires are either unsighted or don't have slomo vision.

i would love the afl to have a scientific forensic study of video archives to properly analyse this issue but i don't think the afl care or have a solution. all they want is continuous flow regardless of rules. this is also why scrimmages are allowed to go on and on and why players with the ball and no prior are given endless time to get rid of the ball.

it may be the only solution is to admit defeat and l throwing to be legal....but only if it is a two-handed throw (i.e. no nfl style throwing 

what do posters think?

[Redleg 40,843]

6 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

throwing the ball has become endemic in the game. either the super quick throw off the toes simultaneous with ball contact or the many dubious over the head etc throws.

the problem really is that these throws are so fast the umpires are either unsighted or don't have slomo vision.

i would love the afl to have a scientific forensic study of video archives to properly analyse this issue but i don't think the afl care or have a solution. all they want is continuous flow regardless of rules. this is also why scrimmages are allowed to go on and on and why players with the ball and no prior are given endless time to get rid of the ball.

it may be the only solution is to admit defeat and l throwing to be legal....but only if it is a two-handed throw (i.e. no nfl style throwing 

what do posters think?

NO!

[daisycutter 29,604]

Just now, Redleg said:

NO!

i never said i liked it, red.

but it's happening and won't go away. they'll never bring in video reviews.

so what is your solution?

[Redleg 40,843]

Pick umpires who know the difference between a handball and a throw and are professional enough to pay what they see.

[daisycutter 29,604]

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

Pick umpires who know the difference between a handball and a throw and are professional enough to pay what they see.

i wish

they don't exist.......even i can't always tell these days without the aid of video.....some apparent throws are actually technically handballs and some seemingly valid handballs turn out to be throws

i'm afraid the players have got too good and quick at disguising it......and we keep seeing more and more throws.......and you, me and many others get more incensed

 

[Redleg 40,843]

4 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i wish

they don't exist.......even i can't always tell these days without the aid of video.....some apparent throws are actually technically handballs and some seemingly valid handballs turn out to be throws

i'm afraid the players have got too good and quick at disguising it......and we keep seeing more and more throws.......and you, me and many others get more incensed

 

I am happy to allow throws that look like handballs to most observers, as that is the way sport is umpired. They can't see everything and get every decision right. I am more concerned at blatant incorrect decisions, like ducking, push in the back, htb etc.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

17 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

it may be the only solution is to admit defeat and l throwing to be legal....but only if it is a two-handed throw (i.e. no nfl style throwing 

what do posters think?

The custodians of the game would be surrendering to the coaches if they made throwing legal.

The AFL had no problem going scorched earth on deliberate OOB. Why they are so timid on throwing beats me.

The rules say "Handball: the act of holding the football in one hand and disposing of it by hitting it with the clenched fist of the other hand." The umpires can say "I didn't see you holding the ball in one hand, so, illegal disposal." OR "I didn't see you hitting it with a clenched fist, so, illegal disposal."

The umpires department has adopted a bleeding heart approach that every time a legal handball gets penalised as a throw, then a puppy dies. So we have to be lenient. They should do it the other way. Scorched earth. So what if an occasional handball gets mistaken for a throw. (Umpires have never been perfect and never will be.) Anything that even resembles a throw should be penalised. Watch the players clean up their act within one round of football.

[daisycutter 29,604]

4 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I am happy to allow throws that look like handballs to most observers, as that is the way sport is umpired. They can't see everything and get every decision right. I am more concerned at blatant incorrect decisions, like ducking, push in the back, htb etc.

well, i suppose like most things, the afl won't do anything about it until tyhey can admit it is a problem. which they won't do without irrefutable proof.

that is why i said previously that i'd like to see a scientific forensic analysis of real footage to quantify the issue (one way or the other). ideally the afl would undertake this but any group like champion data, ch7, sen etc could do this.

[old dee 23,781]

3 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I am happy to allow throws that look like handballs to most observers, as that is the way sport is umpired. They can't see everything and get every decision right. I am more concerned at blatant incorrect decisions, like ducking, push in the back, htb etc.

It now seems it is legal to ride a play to the ground and roll around on his back.

I swear there were 30-40 incidences of this in the seconds game I went to on Saturday and as for pushing in the back as the player kicks the ball I have never seen this relayed down field. It seems the only way a push in the back is awarded these is the most blatant push when going for a mark.

Holding in the ruck! The Werribee Ruckmen held Daw on ever occasion. Not one free all day.

[John Crow Batty 8,861]

Maybe just throw the throwing rule out and let players throw the ball but can only use one hand and throw below the shoulders. No above the shoulder quarterback style throwing allowed. I suspect there will be better ball movement and we won’t see as much congestion as it reduces the opportunity to lock a ball into a tackle. Will be a lot easier rule to enforce as well. I know it is a radical proposal but the the handball rule now is a total farce and a corruption of the initial intent. 

Edited July 12, 2021 by John Crow Batty

[daisycutter 29,604]

4 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

The custodians of the game would be surrendering to the coaches if they made throwing legal.

The AFL had no problem going scorched earth on deliberate OOB. Why they are so timid on throwing beats me.

The rules say "Handball: the act of holding the football in one hand and disposing of it by hitting it with the clenched fist of the other hand." The umpires can say "I didn't see you holding the ball in one hand, so, illegal disposal." OR "I didn't see you hitting it with a clenched fist, so, illegal disposal."

The umpires department has adopted a bleeding heart approach that every time a legal handball gets penalised as a throw, then a puppy dies. So we have to be lenient. They should do it the other way. Scorched earth. So what if an occasional handball gets mistaken for a throw. (Umpires have never been perfect and never will be.) Anything that even resembles a throw should be penalised. Watch the players clean up their act within one round of football.

i sorta half agree with this........err on the side of caution.....if it looks like a throw it's a throw

but they seem to show no inclination to get tough....in fact quite the opposite

again, why i would like to see some forensic evidence.....to quantify the problem

[Smokey 4,389]

24 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Pick umpires who know the difference between a handball and a throw and are professional enough to pay what they see.

If only the world and football were as simple as you're making it out to be ... 

[John Crow Batty 8,861]

6 minutes ago, Smokey said:

If only the world and football were as simple as you're making it out to be ... 

Yes it’s a unicorn hunt.

[Mt. Dee-Maaan 607]

its shaky ground for us dees supporters to call out other teams for throws and ducks when we have oliver, harmes, ANB (throws) & kozzy & spargo (ducks).. like others have said, its unfortunatley 'part of the game' now and everyone seems to be doing it. for what its worth, i'd rather lose a game than win that way.