I can't figure out what standout football characteristic Molan possessed for her to be taken so high up in the draft. From what I've seen she is a good kick but she only averages about 3-4 kicks per game. She's not fast, aggressive, an exceptional mark or a strong tackler. I would love to know what the recruiters saw.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
AFLW Richmond v Collingwood at Vic Park no less
- Thread starter DavidSSS
- Start date
Yuck. Second to the ball all game. A lot of dumb football. A class below unfortunately with the 4 outs we had no chance. Couldn't take a mark inside 50. I think we play good footy. Been a lot to like about the year. The twins. Have they got a secret triplet stashed away by any chance?
Next year new teams, god knows how we will go.
I don't now enough to call for heads to roll. I'm a bit scarred by the GR days. But list manager out maybe?
When is the draft?
Next year new teams, god knows how we will go.
I don't now enough to call for heads to roll. I'm a bit scarred by the GR days. But list manager out maybe?
When is the draft?
The Molan pick (and worryingly also Reid) have been discussed at length pretty much since Molan's debut about how nonsensical the selection was. I get picked up on twitter by the tiger diehards that refuse to accept we do anything poorly that the players taken around her weren't much good either.
But the good players are there. Yassir doesn't get much of it yet but looks miles above Reid who was a much earlier selection.
No-one can ever deny your consistency, David.
I'm way more consistent than the bloody umpires, mind you, setting a very very very low bar there.
Did you actually watch the game? My partner doesn't really follow footy but she was saying even the commentators on 3LO were commenting on how crap the umpiring was.
But, of course, we all know that you will defend them through thick and thin and they are totally consistent and always adjudicate consistently
DS
Last edited:
I like your evidence based assessment
But, yes, I only saw what I could see, at one point I kept seeing Collingwood free kicks and could not see Richmond free kicks. So, I decided to actually look for some evidence, and there it was, at that point it was 10 to 1.
DS
Not as bad as the marks inside 50, but it was pretty diabolical umpiring, very inconsistent.
DS
Hate to say it but there's a fair bit of that currently from the online AFLW crowd.
Posting anything remotely critical isn't met well I've also found. Especially if you're male.
The irony of that is that until it's held up to criticism & becomes mainstream, it will hold the sport back professionally.
Trying to get into it but there's a fair bit of gloss as it stands.
I was happy with our backline .
The umpiring is shocking. The girl from SAS Australia was caught after running 10 meters drops the ball. The Fkwit called play on. And then again going into Collingwoods forward line perfect tackle from behind. He plucked out a free kick to Collingwood.
It's hard enough for our girls but they make it near impossible.
The umpiring is shocking. The girl from SAS Australia was caught after running 10 meters drops the ball. The Fkwit called play on. And then again going into Collingwoods forward line perfect tackle from behind. He plucked out a free kick to Collingwood.
It's hard enough for our girls but they make it near impossible.
If we weren't shown the free kick tally, I'd've watched the game yesterday as a one sided flogging. Collingwood on top all over the ground. Richmond got caught with the ball repeatedly. Under pressure every minute of the game. A couple of in the backs by our defenders looked sloppy, tired. If Pies'd kicked straighter it'd have been a catastrophe. Anyhow a lot to consider with the list. No Brennan no FWD line, ball barely got there.
Anyhow I've enjoyed watching AFLW as a lead in to the AFL season.
Glad you agree the umpiring was diabolical, can I now say the umpiring was diabolical without watching the game in question?
DS
Difference is, I did see the game. You can accept mediocrity but I don't think it is good enough at this level.
DS
You could accept that those who saw the game noticed crap inconsistent umpiring and then looked at the stats which reinforced our observations.
Or you could just claim that the umpiring was all fine in a game you did not see.
Your choice, not my problem.
DS
TBR: It was poor. Very poor. The Pies were the better team. But the umpires had a bad day.
Face it, your defence of the umpires, which is implicit in your attack on anyone who dares criticise the infallible men in green, in this game is based on an assumption that they umpired well. This assumption seemingly trumps observations, and, yes, stats (which we all use in analysing football). You can choose to see assumptions as better evidence than observation, as I said, . . . not my problem.
You can also go ahead and analyse individual decisions, which will tell you precisely nothing about consistency as you need to look at the way they umpired the whole game.
Personally I expect better adjudication of our game. It isn't all the umpires' fault (as I have said many times) because the AFL have made the rules too vague and interpretations which contradict the rules and change on a weekly basis, but some of this is umpires not doing a good enough job.
DS
What stats? There is no stat that measures umpiring standards.
If you can't judge umpiring by the decisions they make then it's a pretty hard job to assess.
They also should be judged on the decisions they don't make.
What stats? There is no stat that measures umpiring standards.
If you can't judge umpiring by the decisions they make then it's a pretty hard job to assess.
Stats following observation, as I keep saying ad nauseum. Of course, your strategy of replying to half of what I say just shows the weakness of your argument, which is especially weak since you criticise all who observed the umpiring in the game on the weekend on the basis of your assumption that the umpires are unquestionably spectacularly good at their job. Assumption over-riding observation, your choice.
Now, you really should put your glasses on and read the whole sentence I wrote. Nowhere did I say that one should not judge umpires by the decisions they make, what I said was "You can also go ahead and analyse individual decisions, which will tell you precisely nothing about consistency as you need to look at the way they umpired the whole game." Nice deflection though.
DS
What stats? There is no stat that measures umpiring standards.
If you can't judge umpiring by the decisions they make then it's a pretty hard job to assess.
This sums it up for me, and most football fans think this way. A few decisions go against your team and it all adds up to a general vibe that the umps are crucifying your team. A lopsided free kick count then feeds the beast.
As TBR says, the only way to analyse umpiring decisions is to analyse each decision - duh. Was it right, wrong, in a grey area. I suppose you could also mount an argument that team A got paid a free kick right in front of goal when team B didn't.
Well, rather unsurprisingly, I disagree!
Free kick stats are not definitive, but they are an indicator. What you are effectively saying is that, up to that point in the game, Richmond were violating the rules of Australian Football at a rate of 10 to 1. Really? I find it very hard to believe that was really the case. Plus, I only looked at the free kick stats because of what I was observing, a hell of a lot of free kicks to Collingwood where very similar situations did not lead to a free kick to Richmond.
Analysing each decision, as I pointed to above, tells you nothing about consistency. You have to look at multiple decisions. Each decision in isolation can be justified, but when you compare decisions you may be looking at very inconsistent umpiring.
I read an article on the ABC app this morning about the new interpretation of the holding the ball rule, it actually sounds like a sensible interpretation. I do agree with prior opportunity but I find the interpretation very inconsistent. Now, while I do think the umpires could have done a better job of this, the AFL need to wear a fair bit of the blame here as they have been too vague on this rule. It is precisely the rule which causes the most controversy so it needs the clearest definitions they can come up with, and I would prefer they did not do this as an "interpretation", put it in writing in the rules - make it really clear and transparent.
But the really telling part of that article on the ABC app was this:
Herein lies the problem. Interpretations of rules need to be set for the whole season unless there is a damned good reason to change. Would help the umpires too as they would not be trying to change their interpretations week in and week out.
So if the free kick count at the end of a game is 42 to 4 you would say it indicates nothing about the umpiring?
DS
