Jump to content

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

    • REPORT: Carlton

      I am now certain that the decline in fortunes of the Melbourne Football Club from a premiership power with the potential for more success to come in the future, started when the team ran out for their Round 9 match up against Carlton last year. After knocking over the Cats in a fierce contest the week before, the Demons looked uninterested at the start of play and gave the Blues a six goal start. They recovered to almost snatch victory but lost narrowly with a score of 11.10.76 to 12.5.77. Yesterday, they revisited the scene and provided their fans with a similar display of ineptitude early in the proceedings. Their attitude at the start was poor, given that the game was so winnable. Unsurprisingly, the resulting score was almost identical to that of last year and for the fourth time in succession, the club has lost a game against Carlton despite having more scoring opportunities. 

      • 3 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Carlton

      The Casey Demons smashed the Carlton Reserves off the park at Casey Fields on Sunday to retain a hold on an end of season wild card place. It was a comprehensive 108 point victory in which the home side was dominant and several of its players stood out but, in spite of the positivity of such a display, we need to place an asterisk over the outcome which saw a net 100 point advantage to the combined scores in the two contests between Demons and Blues over the weekend.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: St. Kilda

      The Demons come face to face with St. Kilda for the second time this season for their return clash at Marvel Stadium on Sunday. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • 115 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Carlton

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Tuesday, 22nd July @ 8:00pm. Join Binman & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to Carlton at the MCG.
      Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • 31 replies
      Demonland

    • VOTES: Carlton

      Captain Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year Award from Christian Petracca, Jake Bowey, Kozzy Pickett & Clayton Oliver. Your votes please; 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

        • Like
      • 22 replies
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: Carlton

      A near full strength Demons were outplayed all night against a Blues outfit that was under the pump and missing at least 9 or 10 of the best players. Time for some hard decisions to be made across the board.

        • Clap
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 330 replies
      Demonland
    View All