binman

I posted this in another thread, but it is more relevant in this thread: Look, I've calmed down now. But that error cost us 4 points - in a game we won expected score (a stat the clubs put a lot of store in) by 2 points. it's simply not good enough. And i would say the same if it was us that benefited. If they use ARC they should invest in the technology. And then have a proper system. The VAR in the world cup works brilliantly, one because they have the tech. But as importanty it takes the pressure of the referee and linesman. If a difficult , and potentially controversial decision has to be made, it's made by an anonymous person shielded from baying fans. And the on field ref doesn’t cop it. We essentialy revert to the umpires call when in doubt ' and they have made the call in the moment, under huge pressure with no option to take their time and calmly review the evidence. If they don't want to invest in the tech to work and/or have a proper system then scrap the arc. And make it simple. If the umpire is 100% certain it is touched, it's a point. If not 100% certain its a goal. Takes out the grey. A huge amount of stress is avoided - not to mention resources that could be instead poured into improving the decision making skills of theumpireds. Think about it. The ARC was brought in after hawkins was awarded a goal in a gf when replays (and the naked eye) showed it hit the post to prevent similar 'howlers' Fifteen years later we are still having howlers. But worse. Because everyone watching sees it over and over. The law of unintended consequences. A law the AFL consistently, repeatedly fail to respect, let alone heed. They could have saved a fortune, and a huge amount of angst, if they simply changed the rule and made it like rugby (and soccer, and Hockey and gridiron and ice hockey and Gaelic football) - it hits the inside of the post and goes thru, its a goal If it hits the post and goes back into the field of play it's a point (or play on, which would be rare, but add an interesting variable). Instead we now have ridiculous scenarios of amateur "snicko' (i mean please - its not even accurate and nor all grounds has it), points getting paid when it hits oversized, flapping padding and minutes wasted trying to zoom in using sub standard tech on the point of impact - only to end up going with whatever the "soft call" was (which there is no fixed rule on what it should be ie they could simply make the rule if its not clear its a goal). To me it yet another example of the AFL making things ridiculously, and unnecessarily complicated and having grey areas they could take out of the game. It is hard not think it is a conscious decision by the AFL not to fix all this rubbish up. Why might they not take as much grey as they can out of the game? The AFL is addicted to controversy because controversy sucks up media air time. Creates clicks. Unlimited content. A good example is a free for insufficient intent to keep the ball in play. What a ridiculous concept. The umpires have to determine the players mindset it in for petes sake. Not to mention factor in things like proximity of teamated, bounce of the ball eyc eyc. Deliberate made more sense. But was still flawed. Take out the grey, make it easier for the umpires, and just have the last touch rule between the arcs they have in AFLW. Not a single footy fan would be unhappy with that. And critically it would reduce errors, take out a variable and most important of all give one less thing for fans to howl at the umpires for. There are dozens of of rule changes they could make if they were serious about making the job of the umpire easier, reducing the criticism they receive and removing as much grey from how the game is officiated as possible. Clearing up the holding the ball/insufficient attemp/not disposing schemozzle is just one. It was a joke on Saturday night. And that's on the AFL, not the umpires. I watched Casey yesterday. There is CLEARLY a directive not to pay htb. Just like Saturday night, a ridiculous number of clear frees not paid. And the new one is blocking or holding in marling contests. I watched 10 mins of the saints game and King got the softest free for a hold in the goal square. Bowey gets pinged when he scraps and marks. Yet other clear blocks, scraps and holds get completely ignored - even when there is a 4th umpire right there. And they wonder why people get so upset at umpires. That's on the AFL. The AFL talk a good game about the importance of not criticising the umpires. Which is fair enough. But they are the problem, and offer no solutions- not even when the solutions are in their control and simple to implement. Umpires deserves better. Players deserve better. Fans deserve better.

Agree. But we scored 35 points from turnover. Two almost identical game plans. Stats almost identical. Brilliant game of footy.

That is precisely right. Look, I've calmed down now. But that error caused us to not get 4 points - in a game we won expected score (a stat the clubs put a lot of store in) by 2 points. it's simply not good enough. And i would say the same if it was us that benefited. If they use ARC they should invest in the technology. And then have a proper system. The VAR in the world cup works brilliantly, one because they have the tech. But as importanty it takes the pressure of the referee and linesman. If a difficult , and potentially controversial decision has to be made, it's made by an anonymous person shielded from baying fans. And the on field ref doesn’t cop it. We essentialy revert to the umpires call when in doubt ' and they have made the call in the moment, under huge pressure with no option to take their time and calmly review the evidence. If they don't want to invest in the tech to work and/or have a proper system then scrap the arc. And make it simple. If the umpire is 100% certain it is touched, it's a point. If not 100% certain its a goal. Takes out the grey. A huge amount of stress is avoided - not to mention resources that could be instead poured into improving the decision making skills of theumpireds. Think about it. The ARC was brought in after hawkins was awarded a goal in a gf when replays (and the naked eye) showed it hit the post to prevent similar 'howlers' Fifteen years later we are still having howlers. But worse. Because everyone watching sees it over and over. The law of unintended consequences. A law the AFL consistently, repeatedly fail to respect, let alone heed. They could have saved a fortune, and a huge amount of angst, if they simply changed the rule and made it like rugby (and soccer, and Hockey and gridiron and ice hockey and Gaelic football) - it hits the inside of the post and goes thru, its a goal If it hits the post and goes back into the field of play it's a point (or play on, which would be rare, but add an interesting variable). Instead we now have ridiculous scenarios of amateur "snicko' (i mean please - its not even accurate and nor all grounds has it), points getting paid when it hits oversized, flapping padding and minutes wasted trying to zoom in using sub standard tech on the point of impact - only to end up going with whatever the "soft call" was (which there is no fixed rule on what it should be ie they could simply make the rule if its not clear its a goal). To me it yet another example of the AFL making things ridiculously, and unnecessarily complicated and having grey areas they could take out of the game. It is hard not think it is a conscious decision by the AFL not to fix all this rubbish up. Why might they not take as much grey as they can out of the game? The AFL is addicted to controversy because controversy sucks up media air time. Creates clicks. Unlimited content. A good example is a free for insufficient intent to keep the ball in play. What a ridiculous concept. The umpires have to determine the players mindset it in for petes sake. Not to mention factor in things like proximity of teamated, bounce of the ball eyc eyc. Deliberate made more sense. But was still flawed. Take out the grey, make it easier for the umpires, and just have the last touch rule between the arcs they have in AFLW. Not a single footy fan would be unhappy with that. And critically it would reduce errors, take out a variable and most important of all give one less thing for fans to howl at the umpires for. There are dozens of of rule changes they could make if they were serious about making the job of the umpire easier, reducing the criticism they receive and removing as much grey from how the game is officiated as possible. Clearing up the holding the ball/insufficient attemp/not disposing schemozzle is just one. It was a joke on Saturday night. And that's on the AFL, not the umpires. I watched Casey yesterday. There is CLEARLY a directive not to pay htb. Just like Saturday night, a ridiculous number of clear frees not paid. And the new one is blocking or holding in marling contests. I watched 10 mins of the saints game and King got the softest free for a hold in the goal square. Bowey gets pinged when he scraps and marks. Yet other clear blocks, scraps and holds get completely ignored - even when there is a 4th umpire right there. And they wonder why people get so upset at umpires. That's on the AFL. The AFL talk a good game about the importance of not criticising the umpires. Which is fair enough. But they are the problem, and offer no solutions- not even when the solutions are in their control and simple to implement. Umpires deserves better. Players deserve better. Fans deserve better.

Spargo will come in.

I agree. Frittata is far better hot than cold

Further to the above wcw, jvr was shooting for goal, not a penalty, but you get my drift (this is from an article about the maltidas- and the excerpt about cortnee vine's winning penalty) 'Penalty shootouts are fastidiously prepared long before they arrive. Every player picks their target, hammering in practice shots again and again until the precise movement is etched into their muscle fibres. But with her name 10th on the list of 11 Matildas penalty-takers, Cortnee Vine did not really think she would have to step up. Yet after 19 penalty kicks and the shootout score at 6-6, Australia’s eyes turned to the 25-year-old as she dutifully made her way to the spot. Brow furrowed in focus, Vine’s calm belied the fact this was her first World Cup and first penalty shot for the national team. She said afterwards she could not hear the 49,461-strong crowd, that she was able to block it out and focus on the task at hand.'

It wasn't a mistake wcw. jvr was not looking at anything in the crowd. They are trained to ignore all distractions, including targets and big maxy heads. If he WAS relying on the target then I feat he ain't gonna make it as AFL player.

I have heard everything now. A cheer squad member being blamed for an AFL player missing a goal! And here I thought we lost because a billion dollar industry can't spring for a go pro.

Now we are back to barracking for the lions!

How ironic would it be for finishing 4th being the best option?

Yep. The uncontested possession differential was massive after the first quarter - it's another stat that caught my attention at the game. It stayed about the same for the rest of the match, meaning we either stopped them chipping it around or they stopped using that strategy (which seems less likely)

They will be. And a big factor is we will struggle to come up from last nights game such was it's intensity. I'm glad the Hawks have travel, and one less day to recover. They will look to to to us exactly what they did to the Pies - run us of our feet

Agree on Smith's footy iq not being brilliant, but it mater less up forward. Put him up there and tell him to go wild. Run, jump, spoil - and worry about the oppo defender's footy iq Watching Tmac live today, he has no acceleration. Not surprising given he's coming back from yet another foot injury.

I'm coming around to this view too. His acceleration from a standing start is crucial. Snap - what young blood said (juts read it)

Wow. Just wow. Those pressure numbers are crazy Amazing it ended up 50 50 time in forward half given the first quarter was 24-76. The other interesting stat is scores from turnover - which is where we lost it (that and giving up those 2 quick goals early in the first - oh and a goal umpire seeing something that didn't happen). At the g they roll thru stats on the scoreboard. At one point in the third q they put up the blues score from turnover and it was 33 from 41 points. Nuts. A function of their incredible pressure - but also our poor foot skills. But they ended the game on 33 points from turnover, meaning we didn't concede any more points from turnover for the rest of the game. That's impressive. The numbers back up what the eyes showed in terms of pressure and intensity- but also that we were the slightly stronger team after the first quarter. By the by, that was the most tackles laid in a game this year. Expected score factors in umpiring error obviously.

Can't see Schahe playing for the dee again i'm afraid. And i cant see Tmac being fit enough to play again this season. Looked miles of AFL level fit.

Correction. Tmac did not look in great nick. Unless it is comparison to me. Only two players coming into the seniors any time soon from that game. Spargo, who was a cut above and worked his guts out. And ditto tomo. Spargo would have been involved in half our scoring chains i reckon

I'm at Princess Park. Not a breath of wind. Ground looks in perfect condition. The boys have just run onto the ground. Tmac looks in good nick. Tomo looks in great nick. My anger has subsided over the umpiring last night (venting on dl helpful) All is good with the world. Go dees.

I might watch it sans sound.

Fourth means a home final. Weird to hope for fourth.

Exactly. A total no brainer.

I have to say, the surface looked pretty distressed.

Exactly. There is a reason teams don't win the flag from outside the top 4 (yes tes, the dogs) Funny you should say that about the suns game. Thought the same thing. The suns to make their 9 point lineihas profit written all over it.

Agree with the fourth umpire creating confusion And it creates a cop out opportunity. The umpires are now regularly looking at other umpired to see if they ate going to call something. The perfect example was the rivers sling tackle. That was text book and a free every day of the week. Dees fans started howling when it looked like it wasn't going to get paid. And when it finally was, the blues fans around me went ballistic. Summed things up perfectly - a free, that was 100% obvious, was paid but BOTH sets of fans were aggrieved. I'm not even sure who ended up paying it. I'm going to watch the replay tonight, and I'll spew if the commentators don't call our the appalling umpiring the way they did foe the two over the boundary like call in the cats pies game.

The wet exacerbates our biggest weakness - too many poor kicks. Even our best players are average kicks. And our best kicks - Salem and bowey - both kicked very poorly last night. I got there at 4:30. Rained non stop until about 7. So the ground was super soggy. Then during the game there was a misty raini falling for almost the entire game. Made handling tricky, and there was no chance for the ground to drain. The blues def handled the conditions better.