sue

I agree. Many times we get pinged for holding the ball at centre ball-ups because one hand of Oliver etc is being held before they take possession of the ball. Or it ensures we don't get away. But I fear the club will never complain because to quote Simon "It is what it is".

This is one more reason to dump the score reviews. Leave it to the umpires. Sure, they will get it wrong occasionally and even a GF may depend on such an error, but umpires make mistakes all the time which can effect the outcome of a game, including in the last 30 seconds. Why focus on this just because we have (sort of) the technology to do so if it introduces significant effects on the subsequent play. Should they put multiple cameras on almost every decision umpires make within 40 metres of goal and stop the play? As I posted elsewhere, what would have happened if a forward marked it like Lever, played on (like he did) and kicked a goal. Would they have made him kick it again after the review confirmed it was marked and not a point? Consistency would say he should have to kick it again, but I wouldn't bet on that happening. Or if he missed when he played on - would he get a second try? But they won't drop the cameras - gives idiot comemntators something else to talk about.

thanks - being an old fogie, I prefer to read quickly rather than watch slow videos, so I didn't see that.

It is frustrating to see our players stand where they were until the ball is given back. As soon as they get a free they should run backwards as fast as they can, giving themselves space as well as being able to play on quickly once they have received the ball - instead they then have to trot back giving the opponents time to set up. How hard is that? Don't they learn that in junior footy?

Seems to me that King wasn't pointing to the deliberate elbow to the head and the need for a penalty for that, just the general head is sacrosanct issue.

Someone said that commentator hates Melbourne. Seems like proof.

Seemed to me that he was pinged for bringing him down with a thud. Possibly a new rule or interpretation.

Dunno if this has been discussed. But the hit to Jetta's head. Seemed to me the Lions player was not going for the ball but chose to bump with his elbow raised. No comment from the commentators. Any comments anywhere?

That's what was paid. But there are many such tackles in a game ignored. In fact holding one arm as the player is brought down is considered a great tackle and an almost automatic free for holding the ball because the player cannot dispose of the ball legally- even the option of kicking is impossible because the player is brought to ground. I reckon only sling tackles should be pinged.

Spot on. It hurts me to say it, but the AFL also needs to get some lawyers to look at the rule book and clean it up to be consistent and as unambiguous as possible. And then get umps to follow the bloody rules, not the latest whim of the AFL heavies (and their advertisers).

Maybe true, but it doesn't answer the question I raised. What is the point of the umpire demanding X, if when you immediatley do X, you get pinged anyway. Either ping him instead of again shouting an instruction ( I presume he'd been asked earlier) or give him the chance to respond and then either ping or not depending on his response.

My 2 cents: Bad kicking for goal cost us the game. Lousy umpiring made it worse and without that we may Frisch 50m penalty. Maybe I need to see it again, but as I heard it, the umpire say give it back now and Frisch did immediately Now maybe he had ignored the umpire earlier, but what is the point of saying give it back now, if when the player does just that, you ping the player? Mark on the goal line. This is a knotty one and may have killed us (Does one at the match have an idea of how free we were on that flank?). The umps have to follow the rules and can't makes guesses like "a point or no point will not affect the result of the game, hence call it a mark and allow play on". On the other hand what if a full forward had taken that mark and turned around immediately and kicked a goal. If it was then reviewed and the mark paid, would he have to then kick at goal again? I bet , no and the goal would be allowed. If so, it is yet another inconsistency in the rules. If you are looking for arguments to do away with score reviews, this would add to the non-inconsiderable pile.

It’s more the interpretations by the umpires. If he walked it through they might have said he had 2 team mates he could have handballed to. There also seems to be a “prior opportunity “ factor not documented.

Far too sensible for the AFL LDvC

https://www.afl.com.au/news/474230/we-won-t-be-reckless-but-we-won-t-be-resting-dees-plan-hard-push and we still have to squeeze in the game against Essendon.

Private school culture - probably the same at most clubs these days Melbourne captain Max Gawn reveals how cigarettes and injuries nearly derailed his AFL career before it began

The AFL would argue with fewer matches to be played there was less opportunity to get fined and therefore the fines should be increased not decreased.

I don't see the need for a coach to show emotion in the box. Better to look calm in a crisis and not look like a whinger (you know which coach I mean). Goodwin has always shown emotion when we have had a good win, so to portray him as emotionless is bunkum. I haven't followed the 'battle' about who told whom what, but I doubt if anyone told him to "show more emotion, that will help the team because the players' eyes are peeled on the coaching box".

Yeah, and about 25000 different opinions.

Why the worry about giving the #1 pick to North. (We'd have more to worry about than that if we do). It's been said the 2020 draft was compromised before Covid. Now recruiters will have to a lot more guessing than usual. Pick quality will be more random than ever.

Interesting that the commentators didn’t say much negative about Essendon during that quarter. If it was us they’d put the boot in. I guess they don’t want to offend their large number of fans.

Normally we have a Non-MFC Round thread running while the match is in progress. What does the fact that this thread didn't appear until about 12 hours after the match finished last night say?

Rankine did touch it, but it's often a free if you hit your opponent on the head at the start of your 'realistic' attempt as Rankine did. Hands on shoulders however are often overlooked, but usually only if you do actually mark it. As you say, open to interpretation.

I wonder why the club thinks the words written on the whiteboard behind Goodwin's head around 2:15 are so top secret they need to be smeared in the video below. The pause button reveals all. If that is our top secret plan, then we are in trouble. https://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/743075/rd-6-game-film?videoId=743075&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1594711800001

Agree. But in D*9's defense, there are a few posters who seem to take more delight about things that go wrong with us and glee when they are proved right (and silent when wrong) than seems quite healthy.