Nope, not that one.
sigh Wasn’t even drinking…
Need a note pad like D Pyke.
Not a dig at you, more me liking the idea of someone using anecdotal reasoning in the age of people skewing data to fit what they think is happening in a multi-interpretational stat game like Aussie rules.
The long one is the plan B, as BJ said he had half an eye out for the short (plan A) option up the middle. When the shortnone doesn’t present, dump it long
Ha ha.
Good post.
I’m a little bit surprised people are questioning his decision making in playing on. Playing on, grabbing an extra 5m then kicking it 55m and chewing 7secs in the process was 100% the correct decision. He just didn’t execute. I’m more annoyed about the failure of structure that saw space open up in the last stoppage for Rampe to stroll through and Gleeson left one on one in the square.
If Gleeson was the forward up the other end, and Rohan the defender, and exactly the same thing happened between those two… would it have been a mark to Rohan, or a free to Gleeson?
I’d say a free kick against the defender every time… Except that it was in Sydney and it was “put the whistle away” dying moments of a game so it would’ve been play on. There’s no disputing that decision was a farce. We managed to completely and thoroughly throw up all over ourselves to even get to that position but once there, in that one terrible decision the umps ■■■■■■ us royally.
These pretzels…they’re making me thirsty!
It would have been a mark.
I don’t get why we’re discussing that so much. So many mistakes everywhere (and the missed free against Bellcho was a bigger)
If Gleeson outmaneuvered Rohan as easliy as Rohan did Gleeson, Gleeson would have also been paid the mark and received 3x Brownlow votes.
I find it strange that he didn’t know how long was left. Surely the runner should have been out there instructing the team on how long was left.
So… me. I have been called many things in my life and nothing is more offensive than being referred to as a “Mini David King”.
I’m about to go re-think my life.
At that stage of the game they shouldn’t have been bombing it unless they couldn’t get a direct pass to a player.
I may be wrong, as usual. But I was under the impression that putting your arms around a player and holding/grabbing/swinging without he having the ball - was a free kick. I don’t think the rule book specifies at which point in the game this applies, or on which part of the ground.
I’m not foolish enough to think that the particular incident cost us the game. Give me a little credit.
Marty was trying to push Rohan backwards legally over the goal line by backing into him, and you actually see Rohan lift Marty both feet off the ground and swing him behind him.
No one seems to be blaming Marty for being “out wrestled”, more saying he needed more support than being allowed to be caught one out, but no one seems to want to give credit to Marty for covering him legally only to be picked up and slung behind illegally.
Any player could probably pick up any other player from behind, to wrestle back you need to have a hold of the other player. And, as everyone says, if Marty did it to him there would at least be an outcry of cheating and a free kick if the umpire saw it.
See the Marty thread if you want to see this.
Have you never watched Tom Hawkins?
The secret rule book locked in Gill’s office drawer, alongside Jobe’s Brownlow, has specific exemptions.
Eg Lumbering full forwards, NSW & Queensland teams.
I’m not an umpire conspiracy theorist, I’m afraid.
I understand that game tempo, crowds, and even specific players and their histories may slightly effect how things are interpreted. But I don’t believe in a structured and methodical campaign against any team by umpires, or, indeed, any instructions from the AFL to umpires.