If it helps NWM stay then it’s worth a heap more than a draft pick being one spot higher or lower.
2 Likes
Those are the kind of wins you see once in a lifetime. I’ve been watching the replay and I don’t even follow them - they’d be lapping it up as they should.
2 Likes
It might have helped them hold onto the NWM though.
Great win.
Watch the third quarter of the giants/swans clash if you haven’t seen it as well.
Some good footy on the weekend.
I missed q clash, but Gold Coast must have turned it on
The AFL exist to embarrass themselves:
“The clubs understand the rule and by and large this issue doesn’t arise, but this was a unique situation because there was only eight seconds left in the game.
“If this had occurred halfway through the last quarter, it would have proceeded as per a normal 6-6-6 breach and none of this would have eventuated.”
Not sure if horrendously communicated, or indeed saying rules are flexible depending on whether the result of a game is on the line.
11 Likes
Has anyone argued that finishing alone is enough? Good trades, good development, etc all matter. Those high picks can also be used in trade.
Also, the open best 22 spots gives you opportunities to entice young players or give second chances.
This is always a requirement.
3 Likes
Is he saying that the rules don’t apply in the last few seconds of a match? Actually Essendon fans already knew this - Rampe, goalpost.
6 Likes
True dat, but wasn’t it rampe
1 Like
Oops. Edited.
I have no idea why this is so difficult to understand
3 Likes
As the blitz afl rule book.
What happens one teams players just don’t return to their positions? Surely it’s a free kick. But why do they need to go back to their area and the same positions?
What happens if both teams are not in the 666, and also don’t return to their areas/positions?
1 Like
All I care is that it favoured an incredible finish and the death ride.
3 Likes
Both teams were in the 666.
The only bone of contention is Gawn returning to man the mark instead of drifting down to the edge of the square.
It was, as Gil described the Rampe goalpost climbing fiasco, “sensible umpiring”. The AFL acknowledges that the laws of the game are only there so the maggots can choose to enforce them or not.
4 Likes
McBurney also clarified that it was the responsibility of the offending team’s ruckman – in this case Gawn – to stand the mark when the free kick is taken or move outside 5m, with another player not permitted to come and stand the mark.
That seems like something they’ve just decided to add in while they have the chance. Would be interesting to check some of the 6-6-6 free kicks from this year and see who is on the mark.
1 Like
Yeah, it’s never been the norm that the offending person (which in this case is not the ruck!) MUST be on the mark after a free or mark.
1 Like
I think on the goal post saga the umpires in question actually didnt know the rules rather than them being sensible/biased to the home team.
But on more obvious free kicks paid or not paid late in games, they definitely always favour the home team or Collingwood.(whose army makes them feel like the home team in a lot of venues).
So yeah if the umps did actually know a 50 metre should be paid in the cold light of day without tens of thousands of home supporters giving ire then sure. But I doubt it. They just didn’t know that’s what they should do
1 Like
The maggots knew the rules well enough to report Fletcher when he shook a post once.
Jake Stringer even pointed out what was happenning to the maggots and told them it was an offence and we should have been awarded a 50m penalty.
Don’t make excuses for them. Ignorance is not an excuse. They were very fkg wrong and if they didn’t know they should have been disciplined. They weren’t. The AwFL was happy that they could deliver yet another win to Snydey at oiur expense.
6 Likes
Well yes. I was at the ground that day
I don’t think David Myers or our Captain knew the rules either.
Or they did, and knew that mere players are not allowed to determine the outcome of games.