Jump 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

    • AFLW PREVIEW: Richmond

      Round four kicks off early Saturday afternoon at Casey Fields, as the mighty Narrm host the winless Richmond Tigers in the second week of Indigenous Round celebrations. With ideal footy conditions forecast—20 degrees, overcast skies, and a gentle breeze — expect a fast-paced contest. Narrm enters with momentum and a dangerous forward line, while Richmond is still searching for its first win. With key injuries on both sides and pride on the line, this clash promises plenty.

      • 2 replies
      Demonland

    • AFLW REPORT: Collingwood

      Expectations of a comfortable win for Narrm at Victoria Park quickly evaporated as the match turned into a tense nail-biter. After a confident start by the Demons, the Pies piled on pressure and forced red and blue supporters to hold their collective breath until after the final siren. In a frenetic, physical contest, it was Captain Kate’s clutch last quarter goal and a missed shot from Collingwood’s Grace Campbell after the siren which sealed a thrilling 4-point win. Finally, Narrm supporters could breathe easy.

      • 2 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Williamstown

      The Casey Demons issued a strong statement to the remaining teams in the VFL race with a thumping 76-point victory in their Elimination Final against Williamstown. This was the sixth consecutive win for the Demons, who stormed into the finals from a long way back with scalps including two of the teams still in flag contention. Senior Coach Taylor Whitford would have been delighted with the manner in which his team opened its finals campaign with high impact after securing the lead early in the game when Jai Culley delivered a precise pass to a lead from Noah Yze, who scored his first of seven straight goals for the day. Yze kicked his second on the quarter time siren, by which time the Demons were already in control. The youngster repeated the dose in the second term as the Seagulls were reduced to mere

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • AFLW PREVIEW: Collingwood

      Narrm time isn’t a standard concept—it’s the time within the traditional lands of Narrm, the Woiwurrung name for Melbourne. Indigenous Round runs for rounds 3 and 4 and is a powerful platform to recognise the contributions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in sport, community, and Australian culture. This week, suburban footy returns to the infamous Victoria Park as the mighty Narrm take on the Collingwood Magpies at 1:05pm Narrm time, Sunday 31 August. Come along if you can.

      • 9 replies
      Demonland

    • AFLW REPORT: St. Kilda

      The Dees demolished the Saints in a comprehensive 74-pointshellacking.  We filled our boots with percentage — now a whopping 520.7% — and sit atop the AFLW ladder. Melbourne’s game plan is on fire, and the competition is officially on notice.

      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Collingwood

      It was yet another disappointing outcome in a disappointing year, with Melbourne missing the finals for the second consecutive season. Indeed, it wasn’t even close, as the Demons' tally of seven wins was less than half the number required to rank among the top eight teams in the competition. When the dust of the game settled and supporters reflected on Melbourne's  six-point defeat at the hands of close game specialists Collingwood, Max Gawn's words about his team’s unfulfilled potential rang true … well, almost. 

      • 1 reply
      Demonland
    View All

    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.