Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.
Demonland

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Throwing away the whistle on GF day.

bush demon
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

12 hours ago, BDA said:

Some people take issue with the JJ mark and goal but was it any different to BB's mark and goal in the 3rd when he had his hands in the back of the defender before marking. I think the 2 negate each other

The only obvious inconsistency i can remember was when Spargo was pinged for a high tackle on Hunter (that he scored from) however Kozzie didn't get a free in the exact same situation later in the game. I think is was Libba that tackled him

As long as umpires are consistent in game i've no issues

You are allowed to use your hands to hold your position - you can't push. BBs was textbook. The Dog player was backing into him.

JJ is allowed to have his hands in the back to take that mark. Had he not taken the mark it would have been a free,This rule interpretation has been in place for a long time and encourages 'high marking' - a hallmark of our great game.

Think last year when Weightman used his hands to climb Max like a stepladder - because he took the mark it was fine.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2
     
    1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

    You are allowed to use your hands to hold your position - you can't push. BBs was textbook. The Dog player was backing into him.

    JJ is allowed to have his hands in the back to take that mark. Had he not taken the mark it would have been a free,This rule interpretation has been in place for a long time and encourages 'high marking' - a hallmark of our great game.

    Think last year when Weightman used his hands to climb Max like a stepladder - because he took the mark it was fine.

    This interpretation by the AFL is really quite ridiculous though. It's like saying you're not allowed to rob a bank unless you do it spectacularly. If the mark is not taken, why not just call play on?

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    46 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    This interpretation by the AFL is really quite ridiculous though. It's like saying you're not allowed to rob a bank unless you do it spectacularly. If the mark is not taken, why not just call play on?

    Its like many things AFL

    They bend rules to suit...

     

  • Quote
    •  
    6 hours ago, jnrmac said:

    You are allowed to use your hands to hold your position - you can't push. BBs was textbook. The Dog player was backing into him.

    JJ is allowed to have his hands in the back to take that mark. Had he not taken the mark it would have been a free,This rule interpretation has been in place for a long time and encourages 'high marking' - a hallmark of our great game.

    Think last year when Weightman used his hands to climb Max like a stepladder - because he took the mark it was fine.

    Yep. Force decides whether it is a free or not 

    Bowey was stiff, but it was still a mark

    Edited by Sir Why You Little

  • Quote
    5 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    This interpretation by the AFL is really quite ridiculous though. It's like saying you're not allowed to rob a bank unless you do it spectacularly. If the mark is not taken, why not just call play on?

    Because if it was play on then we could end up with any number of unrealistic marking attempts ... the rule is a good one

    Risk reward and as jnrmac stated, it keeps the spectacular mark as a hallmark of the game

    Related  but I've often wondered why the yanks don't encourage the high-flyer for the hail-mary attempts in the NFL

    Juice Newton could have been an NFL player coming off the sidelines for the speccy!  A special team specialist

  • Quote

    20 hours ago, BDA said:

    Some people take issue with the JJ mark and goal but was it any different to BB's mark and goal in the 3rd when he had his hands in the back of the defender before marking. I think the 2 negate each other

    The only obvious inconsistency i can remember was when Spargo was pinged for a high tackle on Hunter (that he scored from) however Kozzie didn't get a free in the exact same situation later in the game. I think is was Libba that tackled him

    As long as umpires are consistent in game i've no issues

    I disagree. Totally different. All BB did was hold his position and put his hands out to stop his opponent moving back on him. You're allowed to do that (you're not allowed to push your opponent out of the position they're already in like Hawkins did against May in the Prelim which led to the hamstring injury). JJ put his hands on Bowey's shoulders and pushed him out of the contest before marking the ball. I do agree that the umpires are unlikely to pay such a free because in real time it's hard to see and the 'mark' was spectacular.

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1

    All we can ask for is that they are consisitent in their inconsistency.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    12 hours ago, jnrmac said:

    You are allowed to use your hands to hold your position - you can't push. BBs was textbook. The Dog player was backing into him.

    JJ is allowed to have his hands in the back to take that mark. Had he not taken the mark it would have been a free,This rule interpretation has been in place for a long time and encourages 'high marking' - a hallmark of our great game.

    Think last year when Weightman used his hands to climb Max like a stepladder - because he took the mark it was fine.

    Agree - a great mark

  • Quote
    •  
    12 hours ago, Biffen said:

    All we can ask for is that they are consisitent in their inconsistency.

    We get that - consistently inconsistent.  The only consistent thing they do.  

  • Quote
    15 hours ago, Biffen said:

    All we can ask for is that they are consisitent in their inconsistency.

    Hard to know which is better - for them to be consistent in their inconsistency or perhaps to be inconsistent with their consistency.

  • Quote
    • Haha 1

    20 hours ago, Sydney_Demon said:

    I disagree. Totally different. All BB did was hold his position and put his hands out to stop his opponent moving back on him. You're allowed to do that (you're not allowed to push your opponent out of the position they're already in like Hawkins did against May in the Prelim which led to the hamstring injury). JJ put his hands on Bowey's shoulders and pushed him out of the contest before marking the ball. I do agree that the umpires are unlikely to pay such a free because in real time it's hard to see and the 'mark' was spectacular.

    The Bulldog player didn't protest/complain when BBB took the mark. Usually a good indication that it wasn't a free.

    cf. JJ mark. Both Bowey and Gawn complained to the umpire.

  • Quote
    22 hours ago, Macca said:

    Because if it was play on then we could end up with any number of unrealistic marking attempts ... the rule is a good one

    Risk reward and as jnrmac stated, it keeps the spectacular mark as a hallmark of the game

    Related  but I've often wondered why the yanks don't encourage the high-flyer for the hail-mary attempts in the NFL

    Juice Newton could have been an NFL player coming off the sidelines for the speccy!  A special team specialist

    Why would unrealistic marking attempts be a problem for the game?

  • Quote
    Just now, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    Why would unrealistic marking attempts be a problem for the game?

     I could give you numerous examples but one would be if a player is caught out of position and then just blatantly pushes his opponent out of the contest even though he can't mark the ball himself

    So if that sort of incident isn't penalised then players would infringe all day, every day

    Or if a player places his hands into the back of an opponent when the ball is clearly going over both of their heads

    We actually do see that from time to time and it is penalised

     

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1

    They certainly did throw the whistle away on GF day.  In general, there does seem to be a lot less angst when the free kick count is quite low

    Players really needing to earn a free kick seems to appeal more to the spectators

    I noticed that we didn't receive a free kick in front of goal (or did we get 1? ... stand corrected on that)

    But if so, did we kick the highest score in a GF without receiving a free kick within scoring distance?

    Edited by Macca

  • Quote

    • Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • CASEY: Richmond

      The winds finally returned to Casey Fields for the Demons’ third home game of the VFL season, and its impact was immediate. After two opening rounds played in uncharacteristically fine conditions, the Anzac Day clash brought back the familiar gusty conditions that have been a feature of the region at this time of the year.
      Forced to kick into the breeze first, the slow-starting Demons faced a tricky opening against an enthusiastic young Tigers outfit. Casey responded by turning the contest into a scramble, pressuring Richmond into errors and missed targets. The tactic proved crucial, keeping the game tight for three and a half quarters before the Demons pulled away with the autumn wind at their backs.

      • 2 replies
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Richmond

      It seemed as if the whole purpose of the Anzac Eve clash at the MCG between the Demons and the Tigers was building toward that single, unforgettable moment when Kozzie Pickett soared above Campbell Gray and all but fittingly etched his name onto the face of the 2026 Frank ‘Checker’ Hughes Medal. 

      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: Richmond

      The Dees have gone 5-0 on their fortress at the MCG brushing aside Richmond by 54 points in a commanding performance on ANZAC Eve.

        • Love
        • Like
      • 269 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Richmond

      Andy is back and the Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday night at 8pm. Get your questions and comments in for the boys as they dissect a win on the big ANZAC Eve Stage over the Tigers at our Fortress at the G.

      • 19 replies
      Demonland

    • VOTES: Richmond

      Captain and reigning back to back Champion Max Gawn has healthy lead over Kozzy Pickett in the Demonland Player of the Year Award. Jack Steele, Harvey Langford & Tom Sparrow round out the Top 5. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

        • Like
      • 47 replies
      Demonland

    • GAMEDAY: Richmond

      It's Game Day on Friday night. ANZAC Eve. The big stage at the ‘G. The Demons return to the spotlight for one of our most significant nights on the football calendar, taking on the Tigers in a clash that always carries extra weight given the gravity of occasion of the commemoration of the ANZAC Spirit. Under the lights, in front of a packed house, this is where moments are made. Can the Dees rise to the occasion and deliver on the big stage, or will Richmond spoil the night? All the build-up, discussion, and in-game reactions here. Go Dees.

        • Like
      • 637 replies
      Demonland
    View All

    Account

    Navigation

    Search

    Search

    Configure browser push notifications
    Chrome (Android)
    1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
    2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
    3. Adjust your preference.
    Chrome (Desktop)
    1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
    2. Select Site settings.
    3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.