If we are a serious club we MUST protest Rampe post climb

Football Discussion Dustin Fletcher Hangar
743

Anyone got a match?

2 Likes
744

15.9 FREE KICKS – SHAKING GOAL POST OR BEHIND POST
15.9.1 Awarding Free Kick
Unless Law 15.9.3 applies, a Free Kick shall be awarded against a Player
or Official who intentionally shakes a goal or behind post (either before
or after a Player has disposed of the football):
15.9.2 Taking Free Kick
The following shall apply to a Free Kick awarded under Law 15.9.1:
(a) if a Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the
defending Team and a Goal is not scored, the Player from the
attacking Team who was about to or who has Kicked for Goal,
shall take the Free Kick at the centre of the Goal Line;
(b) if the Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the
attacking Team, the Player on the defending Team who was
nearest to the position from where the football will be or has
been Kicked, shall take the Free Kick from that position. For the
avoidance of doubt, any Goal or Behind which would have been
recorded in favour of the attacking Team but for the awarding
of the Free Kick to a Player of the defending Team, shall not
be recorded.
15.9.3 Goal Scored
If a Player or Official of the defending Team contravenes Law 15.9.1
but a Goal is still scored, the field Umpire shall not award a Free Kick.
In such cases, the field Umpire shall signal “All Clear” and a Goal shall
be recorded

745

What a load of horse ■■■■.

The only person happy with this ruling will be BSD.

4 Likes
746

Better still, boycott the rd 17(?) return game against the post climbing bin chickens. Would love to see empty seats everywhere.

Would make stuff-all difference, but at least it would be a satisfying way to give the middle finger to the AFL, as well as our club over it’s pathetic, obsequious response.

5 Likes
747

Hmmm, I would like to think that had the tables been turned with an Essendon player climbing the post that the same decision would have been made. Somehow I can’t see it happening!

Is there anything in the rules to prevent players from using a rugby union line out type lift to defend the goal line? Would be a very interesting tactic.

748

That would actually be the perfect game to boycott. Swans will have stuff-all fans there and if we don’t turn up it’s embarrassing for AFL especially as it’s a Saturday afternoon game at MCG.

2 Likes
749

The AFL were never going to suggest that the umpire was wrong and it was a free kick… as this means the umpire’s decision has cost EFC a win.

This ends up having huge ramifications (possibly legal ramifications) Especially when you take into consideration the gambling aspect.

Then you add the lack of trust in the umpiring department at the moment. Especially the way EFC has been umpired in recent weeks.

Then the AFL media and community response, especially EFC supporters… if it is ends up being the difference between making finals and not.

This is purely a political situation.

3 Likes
750

Not a surprise.

But they have thought about it for a few hours, how can we make this as absolutely ridiculously stupid as we can.

751

That being the case and noting rampe was fined for this Xavier should reply and ask why a free kick under 17.12 (g) for rampe engaging in misconduct was not awarded;

15 Likes
752

Garry Lyon"Were you happy with the way the AFL handled it?"
Xavier Campbell: “Not necessarily, no.”

3 Likes
753

AFL finally came around to just stating the facts,… as they should have done right from the start.

Anyone with eyes could see he didn’t intentionally shake the post, … so therefore there was no actual provision under the rules to pay a free kick, … silly as it is, but true.

Then state there will be a review, and acts like that will be covered going forward. So simple, … so therefore so UN AFL.

1 Like
754

Fixed.

755

What’s with all the quotes? Are you happy with his response?

756

Come off it, mate.

He intentionally climbed the post (an act that is not part of the game), and due to that intentional act the post was shaking. This whole thing is an absolute farce.

14 Likes
757

Door wide open for us to start climbing posts. I’m happy to provide a suspended donation to pay for the fine.

3 Likes
758

The Blitz expectation is Xavier goes soft on the AFL. This morning (maybe later than he should’ve, but still) Xavier straight out said he was not happy with the AFL.

The Blitz response is to play down X’s comments. It’s like we would rather X fits our negative stereotype than he do anything positive. Similar to the shock when Myers and Brown went out and Francis and Fantasia came in- no praise, just some residual anger that we have one less thing to whinge about.

2 Likes
759

This bloke need to toughen up! “No, not necessarily, no” means nothing. If he’s not happy, what is he going to do about it? Leave it at that? Let’s not upset ‘City Hall’ - just move on - no action required.

760

So, the organisation is being accused of being soft. If Essendon do not make a public declaration of disapproval this will be yet another sign of weakness, confirming the club is more concerned with not creating waves and being more inclined to be submissive/compliant… soft

1 Like
761

Not necessarily

1 Like
762

Michael Christian didn’t think it was intentional. Careless perhaps.

1 Like