Broad deliberate rushed behind

[OOOHAAAH boysfromtheg]

What a biased, corrupt decision that was.
The AFL will suffer if that sort of crap continues.
The AFL cant hand success to Gold Coast, GWS, Brisbane and Sydney.
A real conflict of interest here!
AFL’s job is to administer the fair running of Australia’s premier sport and not to favour certain clubs to ensure their success.

 

[Merveille]

What a biased, corrupt decision that was.
The AFL will suffer if that sort of crap continues.
The AFL cant hand success to Gold Coast, GWS, Brisbane and Sydney.
A real conflict of interest here!
AFL’s job is to administer the fair running of Australia’s premier sport and not to favour certain clubs to ensure their success.

The ARC was worse..!

 

[spook]

Have they ticked it off yet?

 

[eZyT]

Have they ticked it off yet?

Dillon probably wants to reform the organisation

and do the ticking off in secret

 

[MD Jazz]

Have they ticked it off yet?

Apparently kermit ticked it off on 360 so all good. He thought it was pretty straight forward.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Effwit would have been screaming blue murder if it was the Cats.

No way known that was paid against the Sun$.

Doesn't fit the narrative.

 

[BiddiscombeSkills]

As the rule is written, it's a pretty cut and dry free kick. Hard to argue that Broad didn't have time and space to dispose of the ball.

18.11.2 Free Kicks - Deliberate Rushed Behinds

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:
(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;
(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;
(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or
(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full.

 

[saigon tiger]

As the rule is written, it's a pretty cut and dry free kick. Hard to argue that Broad didn't have time and space to dispose of the ball.

18.11.2 Free Kicks - Deliberate Rushed Behinds

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:
(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;
(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;
(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or
(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full.

Yep dumb undisciplined football by Broad at a crucial stage of the game. Same as Grimes

 

[spook]

As the rule is written, it's a pretty cut and dry free kick. Hard to argue that Broad didn't have time and space to dispose of the ball.

18.11.2 Free Kicks - Deliberate Rushed Behinds

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:
(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;
(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;
(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or
(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full.

That reads as if all three of a) b) and c) need to be fulfilled (they weren't) OR it's option d) (it wasn't).

 

[TigerForce]

"Sorry losers, but I have to wipe my dirty noise, get back to your positions"

 

[TigerForce]

"I told you, shut the eff up. I'm the greatest and know better than you lot....sorry gotta go as I
have a team to help win"

 

[BluesBloke]

Fans wouldn't so much mind if the umpires were consistent in their interpretations of rules such as this one. Most of the angst is around the interpretation of it changing constantly. If there was less than a kick the difference with a couple of minutes to play, would the Broad incident have been ruled a free kick? You can bet your house it wouldn't have been.

 

[mrposhman]

Fans wouldn't so much mind if the umpires were consistent in their interpretations of rules such as this one. Most of the angst is around the interpretation of it changing constantly. If there was less than a kick the difference with a couple of minutes to play, would the Broad incident have been ruled a free kick? You can bet your house it wouldn't have been.

It probably would if it was against us.

But I think you are right. I'm ok with it however its not how the umpires have been adjudicating it over the last few years. When they change interpretations how about 1 - tell your end user and 2 - make sure you are consistent.

Just wait for 1 to not be paid this week thats very similar. It will happen.

 

[yo_eddy]

I thought the free kick was fair enough and a poor effort from Broad not to disguise it *at all*.

However, we're sure to see the same thing let go throughout the year and that inconsistency is what drives us all mad.

 

[OOOHAAAH boysfromtheg]

The ARC was worse..!

Definitely worse.

Potentially cost us another flag!

 

[OOOHAAAH boysfromtheg]

And how about Grimes?

Didn't the umpire see Grimes get pushed to the ground first?

What a joke!

 

[Harry]

As the rule is written, it's a pretty cut and dry free kick. Hard to argue that Broad didn't have time and space to dispose of the ball.

18.11.2 Free Kicks - Deliberate Rushed Behinds

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:
(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;
(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;
(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or
(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full.

Based on point (a), it's not a free kick.

 

[Merveille]

And how about Grimes?

Didn't the umpire see Grimes get pushed to the ground first?

What a joke!

Did you deliver the arvo papers Ooh Aaah

 

[BiddiscombeSkills]

Based on point (a), it's not a free kick.

Only if you read the rule to mean that points (a), (b) and (c) must ALL be satisfied at once for it to be a free kick.

If we're saying that (a) must apply in ALL rushed behind free kicks, it follows that a free kick can NEVER be paid if the defending player is within 9 meters of the goal/behind lines. I don't think that's the case.

I read the rule as presenting 4 distinct circumstances in which a free COULD be paid. The fact that there is no "and" between each of a, b, c or d indicates they don't need to occur simultaneously for a kick to be awarded.

But yeah, I'm no lawyer, it's just an opinion. The fact that there's enough ambiguity in the clauses to keep a discussion like this alive speaks volumes not just about this, but on the rules of the game as a whole. It really wouldn't be that difficult to tighten up the language and make it crystal clear.

Perhaps there's an element of maintaining some deliberate fuzziness to give umpires some protection - whether that's counterproductive or not is another matter entirely.

 

[OOOHAAAH boysfromtheg]

Anyway, we better take it out on the Blues this Thursday!