NON-MFC: Round 11, 2022

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,846]

As much as I’d love Buddy to miss next week to increase our chances of winning, at the same time we’ll be playing all the big guns at finals time so we need to get accustomed to playing the best during the season.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

There is no way Lance can play. Cotchin is a deadset [censored], but he belted him in the jaw…

Only Corruption can see him run out next week

Edited May 27, 2022 by Sir Why You Little

[radar 1,865]

Cotchin got off for kicking few weeks ago

[monoccular 17,432]

2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

There is now way Lance can play. Cotchin is a deadset [censored], but he belted him in the jaw…

Only Corruption can see him run out next week

So he will be there then?  AFL specialty 

[deva5610 970]

17 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

No... and after the siren there is no time to be wasted.   Nothing to see here

But the rule doesn't say anything about "time wasting". It says "delays or impedes the play". Kicking the ball into the stands is delaying the play. Should've been a 50 IMO, but I can't say that it bothers me after seeing some of the faces.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

1 minute ago, deva5610 said:

But the rule doesn't say anything about "time wasting". It says "delays or impedes the play". Kicking the ball into the stands is delaying the play. Should've been a 50 IMO, but I can't say that it bothers me after seeing some of the faces.

Once the Siren has gone, time stops. So it cannot be delayed 

[deva5610 970]

2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

So it cannot be delayed

How so? The player has a free kick to take. The ball has been roosted into the stands. How is that not delaying the play?

It's not wasting any time, sure, because there isn't any time left. But it is delaying the play.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

10 minutes ago, deva5610 said:

How so? The player has a free kick to take. The ball has been roosted into the stands. How is that not delaying the play?

It's not wasting any time, sure, because there isn't any time left. But it is delaying the play.

You said it. 
“It’s not wasting any time, because there isn’t any time left”

During the game,  yes (Jake Lever)

But Tonight the Siren had gone

Edited May 27, 2022 by Sir Why You Little

[Chook 15,013]

13 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

You said it. 
“It’s not wasting any time, because there isn’t any time left”

During the game,  yes (Jake Lever)

But Tonight the Siren had gone

The play is still happening though. The quarter isn't over.

[deva5610 970]

16 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

“It’s not wasting any time, because there isn’t any time left”

But that's entirely my point. The rule mentions nothing about time, or time wasting. The wording is delaying the play.

If there is still a kick to go and you roost the ball out of the stadium you are delaying that piece of play. You're not wasting any time off the clock, but the rule mentions nothing of time being wasted so that argument is moot.

Purely and only based on the exact wording of the rule it should be a 50.

Edited May 27, 2022 by deva5610

[Jjrogan 1,420]

15 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

You said it. 
“It’s not wasting any time, because there isn’t any time left”

During the game,  yes (Jake Lever)

But Tonight the Siren had gone

The game is still alive. If for instance, the tigers player was 50 metres out post siren and he kicked a ball right to the goal square and a swans player coat hangered a tigers player who was trying to shepherd it through the umpire can still award a free kick down field. The game ends when the umpires say it ends. Not when the siren has gone.  Another example is when a free kick is awarded between quarters or after a goal is kicked and the clock has stopped. The clock not running is not relevant.  Tonight was a 50 metre penalty every day of the week and twice on sundays.   

The umpires didnt know the rules, they even said in their justification ' he didnt know the siren had gone' . if that was the case, kicking the ball into the stands is a free kick and in this case a 50 metre penalty as a free kick was already awarded.  

[radar 1,865]

AFL changed the result of Freo v StKilda game few years ago in contradiction of their own published rules

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

11 minutes ago, deva5610 said:

But that's entirely my point. The rule mentions nothing about time, or time wasting. The wording is delaying the play.

If there is still a kick to go and you roost the ball out of the stadium you are delaying that piece of play. You're not wasting any time off the clock, but the rule mentions nothing of time being wasted so that argument is moot.

Purely and only based on the exact wording of the rule it should be a 50.

The clock cannot click down below zero. A 50 metre penalty IS paid for time wasting.

The reason it was only a Free Kick and NOT 50 as well,  is because the Quarter was over. 
In the case of Jake Lever, the Clock was ticking down 

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

4 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

The game is still alive. If for instance, the tigers player was 50 metres out post siren and he kicked a ball right to the goal square and a swans player coat hangered a tigers player who was trying to shepherd it through the umpire can still award a free kick down field. The game ends when the umpires say it ends. Not when the siren has gone.  Another example is when a free kick is awarded between quarters or after a goal is kicked and the clock has stopped. The clock not running is not relevant.  Tonight was a 50 metre penalty every day of the week and twice on sundays.   

The umpires didnt know the rules, they even said in their justification ' he didnt know the siren had gone' . if that was the case, kicking the ball into the stands is a free kick and in this case a 50 metre penalty as a free kick was already awarded.  

Yes the game is still alive, but you cannot get done for time wasting when the clock is at zero. It was a Free Kick, not the extra 50

[Jjrogan 1,420]

12 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The clock cannot click down below zero. A 50 metre penalty IS paid for time wasting.

The reason it was only a Free Kick and NOT 50 as well,  is because the Quarter was over. 
In the case of Jake Lever, the Clock was ticking down 

Its still time wasting/impeding play Players can flood back. Yes in this particular circumstance, its unlikely it would have made a difference, but If he was 45 metres out and the goal square was empty it can still be a factor. Just an example of time wasting post the siren. 

Edited May 27, 2022 by Jjrogan

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,654]

1 hour ago, Dee Zephyr said:

Make up your own mind. Was kicking the ball into the stands classed as an unsportsmanlike manner?

 FIFTY METRE PENALTY
19.1 SPIRIT AND INTENTION
After a Mark or Free Kick has been awarded to a Player, a Fifty Metre Penalty will be awarded against the opposing Team which delays or impedes the play, or behaves in an unsportsmanlike manner

Definitely delays the play and let’s Swans stack the goal square.

 

50 IMO.

 

Suffer Dimma😂

[Kit Walker 225]

1 hour ago, sue said:

If the player on the mark steps forward over the mark a 50 would be paid even if the siren had gone before the kick.  No?

In my view yes - that would be impeding play by restricting where the player can properly and legally kick from. Maybe also unsportsmanlike conduct but that's probably irrelevant as definitely the first one.

[deva5610 970]

11 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The clock cannot click down below zero. A 50 metre penalty IS paid for time wasting.

The reason it was only a Free Kick and NOT 50 as well,  is because the Quarter was over. 
In the case of Jake Lever, the Clock was ticking down 

Read the laws of the game.

Quote

19. FIFTY METRE PENALTY

19.1 SPIRIT AND INTENTION
After a Mark or Free Kick has been awarded to a Player, a Fifty Metre Penalty will be awarded against the opposing Team which delays or impedes the play, or behaves in an unsportsmanlike manner.

19.2 WHEN IMPOSED
Where a field Umpire has awarded a Mark or Free Kick to a Player, or a Player is preparing to bring or bringing the football back into play after a Behind is scored, a Fifty Metre Penalty in favour of that Player will be awarded if the field Umpire is of the opinion that any Player or Official from the opposing Team:

(f) engages in any conduct which delays or impedes the play

The 50 metre penalties are not paid for time wasting. They are paid for delaying and impeding the play (amongst other reasons).

In fact the only mentions of time wasting in the laws are for payment of a free kick for time wasting (not 50m penalties) and reportable offences.

Once again. Player is awarded a free kick. That means there is still a passage of play to remain. Oppo player roosts ball out of the stadium. Oppo player is delaying that passage of play from occurring. As per the laws of the game, written in black and white, it is a 50m penalty.

Edited May 27, 2022 by deva5610

[Kit Walker 225]

11 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

Its still time wasting. Players can flood back. Yes in this particular circumstance, its unlikely it would have made a difference, but If he was 45 metres out and the goal square was empty it can still be a factor. Just an example of time wasting post the siren. 

That's a pretty reasonable argument.

I still tend to think the right call was made, but it's pretty borderline.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

15 minutes ago, deva5610 said:

Read the laws of the game.

The 50 metre penalties are not paid for time wasting. They are paid for delaying and impeding the play (amongst other reasons).

In fact the only mentions of time wasting in the laws are for payment of a free kick for time wasting (not 50m penalties) and reportable offences.

Once again. Player is awarded a free kick. That means there is still a passage of play to remain. Oppo player roosts ball out of the stadium. Oppo player is delaying that passage of play from occurring. As per the laws of the game, written in black and white, it is a 50m penalty.

But the Clock is at zero, that is what makes the difference. 
I am not saying I agree or disagree, but I understand why the decision was given 

[ding 5,126]

Imagine what i would have missed if i didnt visit this thread..........

[rumpole 515]

Once upon a time, a lesser known player would be condemned not only to guilt but given a lengthier suspension on the basis that his offence was a bad look for the game. At the time, many of us suspected that if the player was of a higher profile and played for a club that the AFL wanted to succeed then it would look away when such an incident occurred. Buddy is a high profile player, the Swans need him badly and what he did on the showcase of the game, on Friday night football, with lots of young children watching, was the worst look you can get for the game. He slapped (punched) once and for that alone, he should get a fine but the second strike was a punch with clenched fist to the face. In light of the fact that it was the second strike and it clearly affected the victim, it was a terrible act, a bad look for the game and a throwback to an earlier era when that sort of thuggery was countenanced. Before the competition said enough and almost stamped it out. This was not a jumper punch that warrants a fine and if the player committing the hit was named, say “Tom Bugg”, then he would get a multiple week suspension, but for likable Buddy who the AFL needs to keep the Sydney franchise buoyant and will help add bums to the seats, a $1,000 fine which is a small fraction of his weekly paycheque, will suffice.

This, I advise.

Ten Guineas.

Edited May 27, 2022 by rumpole

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

6 hours ago, Redleg said:

Well actually no.

The 50 is given for time wasting, running off the mark, dissent or a further infringement against the team with the free kick.

None of those existed.

There is no time wasting, as the siren went and he gets his kick no matter. If it happened in the game yes of course, but no time was wasted.

As the umpire said it was a commonsense decision.

Also, to get the look on Reiwoldt's face it was absolutely the correct decision.

 

Next time a player has a free kick or a mark after the siren the opposition should just run away with the ball.

In fact, they should refuse to give it back (and grab all the other balls while they are at it) preventing the player from taking the kick indefinitely because “time” doesn’t exist anymore.

[gOLLy 401]

9 hours ago, radar said:

See ya Buddy! 
 

oops

one of the “protected ones”

 

Grinter or Ox be looking at a month

Toby 5 weeks

[Deemania since 56 6,651]

9 hours ago, monoccular said:

Bolton caught red handed HTB - not paid .  Free against tackler for dissent, but not 50.  Is this a new interpretation?  Haven't seen this before.

It is the randomisation of fact at play through the umpires' intents.