NON MFC: Rd 22 2021

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,297]

6 minutes ago, Wadda We Sing said:

is it possible we could play Cats 3 times?

 

2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

No it would only be twice

Preliminary Final swap sides

could be 3 out of 4!!!

Actually it is possible!
 

Next week, Qualifying Final, then GF

[monoccular 17,650]

Just now, FireInTheBennelly said:

Why was Charlie Cameron put on an angle there after marking in the goal square? Don't the umpires know the rules?

Don’t we all know that?

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

1 minute ago, Hell Bent said:

 

Actually it is possible!
 

Next week, Qualifying Final, then GF

Thats what i was thinking

...would be so over the Cats by then..

Edited August 14, 2021 by Wadda We Sing

[Demon17 5,227]

1 minute ago, Wadda We Sing said:

Thats what i was thinking

We need to finish 4th to meet cats in QF which is highly unlikely. 2nd or 3rd only. With cats on top. 

[Queanbeyan Demon 6,942]

13 minutes ago, Demon Jack said:

96 point loss for Marc Murphy in his final game.

Poor guy. He's been a warrior for the Blues in the same way Jones has been for us. 

Hey DJ . . . I love you  . . . . . but . . . . . .

Jones is in another football universe compared to Murphy. For a number one draft pick, Murphy has been 'good ordinary' at best.

[bobby1554 1,267]

24 minutes ago, Webber said:

So. Assuming we win tomorrow (I know, I know), if we lose next week and Port beat Doggies, we’re off to Adelaide. Fate in our hands and all that. Unless Dogs beat Port, which they will….maybe…..not….probably….aaaaah, who the [censored] knows. 🤯

Dogs need to be careful. If Brisbane win big tonight, there is a chance Dogs could end up 5th if they lose to Port

[FireInTheBennelly 4,101]

The 'Stand Rule' is the biggest [censored]-up in AFL laws history. Needs to be killed off after this season.

[Superunknown 4,241]

To win tomorrow and sew up top 3 would be mint. I’m guess dogs beat port week after so even if we lose to port we finish 2nd at worst to Geelong and I think play dogs week 1? Dogs are gettable now as are Geelong. Port looking dangerous over there but it was Carlton. Halcyon days ahead friends !

[Chook 15,023]

32 minutes ago, Demon Jack said:

96 point loss for Marc Murphy in his final game.

Poor guy. He's been a warrior for the Blues in the same way Jones has been for us. 

The Jones vs Murphy comparison is a reminder that no matter how bad you have it, someone has it worse.

As bad as it has been, no way Jones swaps his career for Murphy's.

[dazzledavey36 55,911]

 

[FireInTheBennelly 4,101]

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

 

What about the staging? Any word on Hawkins?

[monoccular 17,650]

2 minutes ago, FireInTheBennelly said:

What about the staging? Any word on Hawkins?

Both will get off under the “Innocent Cat veteran” rule. 

[Pates 9,680]

6 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

 

Lol Dangerfield could get reported for striking and the end result would be the other guy gets weeks for head-butting his fist.

As for the Cats and Carlton (the time of my last post), if something is too good to be true then usually it is. Carlton stopped dead.

[godees 892]

5 minutes ago, FireInTheBennelly said:

What about the staging? Any word on Hawkins?

Both arms pinned in the tackle and slams his head into the ground causing concussion. He was unable to protect himself as he fell and therefore Hawkins had duty of care not to cause head injury. Would be 2 weeks if named Neal-Bullen

[godees 892]

Anyone got the vision of Dangerfield incident?

[At Least I Saw a Flag 5,315]

Hawkins/Selwood/Dangerfield/Scott should be referred to MRO under the total ar@ehole rule.

[mrtwister 652]

Can someone with a better understanding of the rules explain to me how this play by Hawkins isn't a free kick for taking his eyes off the ball in a marking contest?

https://www.afl.com.au/video/664150/hawkins-helps-himself-to-a-crucial-major?videoId=664150&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1628930335001

This is a genuine question. 

Edited August 14, 2021 by mrtwister

[FireInTheBennelly 4,101]

1 minute ago, mrtwister said:

Can someone with a better understanding of the rules explain to me how this play by Hawkins isn't a free kick for taking his eyes off the ball in a marking contest?

https://www.afl.com.au/video/664150/hawkins-helps-himself-to-a-crucial-major?videoId=664150&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1628930335001

This is a genuine question. 

Thought the same at the time. Almost an old fashioned shirt front isn't it?

[FireInTheBennelly 4,101]

Does anyone know if they sell XXXX at the Gabba?

[sue 9,197]

Not going for the ball at all. How he gets away with it is beyond comprehension 

[mrtwister 652]

22 minutes ago, godees said:

Anyone got the vision of Dangerfield incident?

 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

5 minutes ago, mrtwister said:

Can someone with a better understanding of the rules explain to me how this play by Hawkins isn't a free kick for taking his eyes off the ball in a marking contest?

https://www.afl.com.au/video/664150/hawkins-helps-himself-to-a-crucial-major?videoId=664150&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1628930335001

This is a genuine question. 

Didn't Steven May give away a free kick doing exactly this?

 

18.5 MARKING CONTESTS
18.5.1 Spirit and Intention
The Player whose sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark shall be permitted to do so.
18.5.2 Free Kicks - Marking Contests
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick in a Marking contest against a Player where the Player:
(a) holds or blocks an opposition Player;
(b) unduly pushes or bumps an opposition Player;
(c) deliberately interferes with the arms of an opposition Player;
(d) makes contact to an opposition Player from front-on and whose sole objective is not to contest or spoil a Mark; or
(e) makes an unrealistic attempt to contest or spoil a Mark which interferes with an opposition Player.
18.5.3 Permitted Contact
Incidental contact in a Marking contest will be permitted if the Player’s sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark.

[Diamond_Jim 12,693]

mmmmm

could Brisbane unseat the Bulldogs (now that is doing a melbourne)

percentage is a difficult thing because it requires a calculation  of for and aginst but it strikes me that a win by more than 60 sets up a fascinating last round

[FireInTheBennelly 4,101]

1 minute ago, mrtwister said:

 

And what's his first reaction? Throw arms up, fall backwards to try and win a free himself. He's a deadset germ, how the players have voted for him as their rep is beyond me.

[mrtwister 652]

1 minute ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Didn't Steven May give away a free kick doing exactly this?

 

18.5 MARKING CONTESTS
18.5.1 Spirit and Intention
The Player whose sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark shall be permitted to do so.
18.5.2 Free Kicks - Marking Contests
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick in a Marking contest against a Player where the Player:
(a) holds or blocks an opposition Player;
(b) unduly pushes or bumps an opposition Player;
(c) deliberately interferes with the arms of an opposition Player;
(d) makes contact to an opposition Player from front-on and whose sole objective is not to contest or spoil a Mark; or
(e) makes an unrealistic attempt to contest or spoil a Mark which interferes with an opposition Player.
18.5.3 Permitted Contact
Incidental contact in a Marking contest will be permitted if the Player’s sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark.

I don't think they are the GMHBA rules Mazer.

Maybe the ump was blindsided while standing 3m away from the incident?