Had the siren gone when Stynes ran across the mark?

8 hours 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.

This isn't new.

Poor umpiring indisputably cost us the Crows game last season. Move on tiges. The Dees did.

It happnes , but the laughable angle is listening to the umpires attempts at justification.

It was common sense last night, just don't try and get any at other times mid-games often, especially the insufficient attempt rule when the ball goes out of bounds.

I actually don’t reckon the Buddy hit was that bad. Clearly wasn’t a punch as he hand was open. Not sure if I am biased because he hit Cotchin but I’d say a week at most. Wouldn’t be surprised with a fine. No injury to the player. Free kick paid 

but I’m sure the conspiracy theorists will disagree 

Slowing the vision down it looked like Buddy's fist opened at the end of his follow through. 

He will still just get a fine:  Careless, Low Impact, HIgh Contact is a fine.  If they rate it as 'deliberate' then it is a suspension.  It won't be deliberate as the argument will be he was aiming for his chest but his hand slid high.  If it is rated as 'deliberate' it will be appealed to have it re-rated as 'careless' and every chance it he will get off.

It seems that being 'behind play' doesn't feature in the MRO's penalty calculation.

 

Anyway, I don't mind if he plays next week as May will take care of him.  It was pretty dumb of Hardwick to keep a new draftee (Gibcus) on Buddy until the damage was done.  He kicked 4 goals before putting Grimes on him with just 15 minutes to go.  Giving a kid experience is one thing but against the best forward of this generation, they deserved to lose the game on that miscalculation alone.

Edited May 27, 20222 yr by Lucifers Hero

12 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Buddy needs to retire.

should have kept watching

33 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Had the siren gone when Stynes ran across the mark?

Yes

Technically should 'probably' have been a 50 metre penalty but again, the rules are grey, the rules are not clear cut (so everyone understands what is going on) and because of that, the decisions are inconsistent

It's now got to farcical levels where most people are totally confused with the officiating

And soft free kicks aplenty.  High contact being one of those soft areas.  Just one example (1 of 10-15 similar) was the high contact free kick paid to the Swans player in the last 2 minutes of the game

There was nothing in it and the decision  should have been play on ... and if the players know that in advance then that particular 'play' could have been played out in an entirely different manner (without the soft free kick being an option)

There are far too many free kicks being awarded anyway ... they could halve the number and it would still be too many

 

Edited May 28, 20222 yr by Macca

9 hours ago, Kit Walker said:

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.

Exactly why I asked the question rhetorically.  If a player creeps  over the mark to interfere with a kick after the siren, then clearly that has to be penalised.  So 50's can be paid after the siren. And a delay in getting a ball allows a defending team to form a human pyramid on the goal line.  So strict accordance with the rules means there should have been a 50 paid.  But strict accordance with the rules is not always practised by the AFL and may have been appropriate for once.

I'm not sure if the umps even raised their arms to indicate they'd heard the siren? 

Some of the 'infringement'/undisciplined act frees of the last few weeks that look 'soft' appear to be when the players are over the boundary line rather than in play. 

Not sure if that is a rule of the fortnight...

Edited May 28, 20222 yr by Lucifers Hero

11 hours 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

As I said in my post above, under the rule it wasn’t a 50m, unless unsportsmanlike manner,  as didn’t impede or delay play.  The game ended and Prestia was entitled to his free kick, awarded a second before the siren. Clearly 10 seconds earlier and it’s a 50m penalty. He gets his kick and that’s it.

It was not unsportsmanlike as Warner didn’t hear the free and only did it because he thought the game was over.

Correct decision, but the hysteria will go on for a while.

Btw Swans had 2 shots 20 out taken off them for undisciplined acts and Tigers got a couple of soft free kick goals.

As Dimma said, they were 40 points up and it shouldn’t have got to that last second.

IMO the decision was correct, simply to see Reiwoldt going beserk. Might be a nice guy, but boy is he dislikeable on the field. 

Edited May 28, 20222 yr by Redleg

2 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Had the siren gone when Stynes ran across the mark?

Yes but the umpire didn’t hear it. That was the whole point. The siren blew for about a minute until the umpire put up his arms to acknowledge it. Go back and you will hear the commentators mentioning the siren but umpires oblivious.

If umpire had heard siren, game would have stopped and Stynes probably doesn’t even chase his man. I don’t believe Howlett would have paid a 50m if he had heard the siren.

i can't make up my mind on the 50m penalty. it would be very harsh but technically probably there

i'd be more concerned on the free kick. i don't see it. it would have to be extremely technical and if that really constitutes a fair free there would be an extra 50 frees given every game

imagine a gf where that sort of rubbish was penalised every time

11 hours ago, radar said:

Clock stops when umpire signals time on

And when out of bounds

11 hours 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.

But what play is it delaying the only play that can take place is the kick after the siren.

4 minutes ago, loges said:

But what play is it delaying the only play that can take place is the kick after the siren.

Exactly. 

8 minutes ago, loges said:

And when out of bounds

I believe the umpires are the arbiters of time. The time keepers start and stop the clock and blow the siren. The umpires signal the end of the game after they hear the siren. Probably a fifty as is did delay play. 

We were told to play to the umpires whistle not the siren or anything else.

 

Edited May 28, 20222 yr by ManDee
The delay could have allowed extra players on the goal line.

27 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Yes but the umpire didn’t hear it. That was the whole point. The siren blew for about a minute until the umpire put up his arms to acknowledge it. Go back and you will hear the commentators mentioning the siren but umpires oblivious.

If umpire had heard siren, game would have stopped and Stynes probably doesn’t even chase his man. I don’t believe Howlett would have paid a 50m if he had heard the siren.

Well described Redleg. I was in the pocket and heard the siren which made the whole experience surreal - as well as heartbreaking.

15 minutes ago, loges said:

But what play is it delaying the only play that can take place is the kick after the siren.

The play of the defending team having extra  time to get all their tall players on the goal line.  (OK, I'll drop the human pyramid idea.)  Plus their attempts to stop the ball going through.  All part of play I'd suppose.

Edited May 28, 20222 yr by sue

9 minutes ago, ManDee said:

I believe the umpires are the arbiters of time. The time keepers start and stop the clock and blow the siren. The umpires signal the end of the game after they hear the siren. Probably a fifty as is did delay play. 

We were told to play to the umpires whistle not the siren or anything else.

 

Correct. Which is why when before start of the match the umpires walk out the siren is blown and the umpire in charge signals by a hand up that he/she has heard it as a signal to the timekeeper.

23 minutes ago, sue said:

The play of the defending team having extra  time to get all their tall players on the goal line.  (OK, I'll drop the human pyramid idea.)  Plus their attempts to stop the ball going through.  All part of play I'd suppose.

Sorry Sue, but when the game is over and you have a free kick, the umpire comes over and warns of deviating off the mark and most  players go back to defend. That is not delay.

10 hours 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.

All of the above is premised on the player concerned being aware a free kick has been paid. 

We see countless examples every weekend where a free kick is paid, the ball is subsequently kicked away, yet a 50m penalty is not awarded because the umpire gives the player the benefit of the doubt in terms of the timing of when he reasonably ought to have been aware.   The vision clearly shows that not all players were aware that a free kick had been paid and this reasonably includes who Warner.   If you accept this reasonable test, it provides further context for his action of kicking the ball in to the crowd post siren.  Also of note, is that the umpires verbal advice of a free to Richmond also only came post siren.

Yes, the rules are the rules.   But many of AFL's rules require those officiating to determine who reasonably ought to have been aware of what when!

 

Interestingly the umpire told everyone to cool it while he listened to instructions on his ear piece. This in itself brings out the conspiracy alarmist in me. i.e. "Free kick Bulldogs" just after they have had 3 throws from packs. I dont believe there is a valid reason why umpires need to have an earpiece. At all. Who is on the other end? 

8 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Sorry Sue, but when the game is over and you have a free kick, the umpire comes over and warns of deviating off the mark and most  players go back to defend. That is not delay.

True, but if the ball is kicked into the stands there is the real possibility of delay before the kick can be taken. During that time the defending team can set up better to guard the goals than they might have otherwise had time to do.   Are we talking about the same thing? 

2 minutes ago, Damo said:

Interestingly the umpire told everyone to cool it while he listened to instructions on his ear piece. This in itself brings out the conspiracy alarmist in me. i.e. "Free kick Bulldogs" just after they have had 3 throws from packs. I dont believe there is a valid reason why umpires need to have an earpiece. At all. Who is on the other end? 

In the post game Jonathon Brown said it was Matt Stevic, one of the umpires last night. 

The umpire on the spot (Howorth) has umpired about 50 AFL games, Stevic about 430 games.  Stevic must have been in another part of the field.  When consulted he was quite clear and definitive about the free and the 50 m penalty not being applicable.

If they were to pay the 50m after the siren then they should reverse it for dissent, especially from Riewoldt also after the siren.

I just hope Melksham has kept the lid on his emotions. I fear he's already run through the banner in his mind. May not have enough left to play the match afterwards.