Ray Chamberlain is a c..............

[Tigaman]

Luv Razor as he is his own man. Calls it as he sees it. Undeterred by snipes such as the Scott Brothers etc etc. Great to have him in the GF.

 

[DavidSSS]

Absolutely. Cotch's was a free, Ellis' was also a free against.

I'll pay Cotch's free on one condition: every time Treloar does something similar next week, he gets pinged. Won't be holding my breath.

I thought Ellis's free was a bit stiff, didn't think he really had possession and/or prior opportunity. It was a long way away.

DS

 

[Mikee]

Agree, I think his name is Robert O'Gorman or something similar, we've had him a couple of times this year and crucified us every time. Tiger supporters must have picked on him as a kid, he ******* hates us

O'Gorman definitely has it in for us. He's the same umpire that tried to destroy us v the Hawks earlier in the year. Someone mentioned somewhere that it is fact he has a 'dislike' for us.

 

[ToraToraTora]

You people having a moan this week, wait til next week!

 

[Brodders17]

The Ellis one it hit the ground before he got his foot to it. Free kick.

Fair enough then, from my vantage point 100mtrs away it looked like a clean kick.

 

[JimJessTorp]

I still can't work out exactly what Ray Chamberlain is, according to the OP.

The clue is "c..............".

So a 15 letter word beginning with "c".

yougowords.com gives 75 words that are 15 letters long, starting with "c" and are nouns.

My favourite at the moment is "costochondritis" which is "an inflammation at the junction of a rib and its cartilage".

So, Ray, you are a costochondritis! (And a green flog).

 

[mrposhman]

The ball come out in the tackle.

Wow, that's an incredibly one eyed view of it. It didn't come out in the tackle at all, he was tackled, had one arm pinned and tried to drop it on the boot. He didn't, therefore that's about as clear a HTB decision as you are likely to get.

Agree with David on Treloar (and I'd throw Sidebum into that too) but to claim it wasn't HTB is naïve at best.

 

[Brodders17]

I still can't work out exactly what Ray Chamberlain is, according to the OP.

The clue is "c..............".

So a 15 letter word beginning with "c".

yougowords.com gives 75 words that are 15 letters long, starting with "c" and are nouns.

My favourite at the moment is "costochondritis" which is "an inflammation at the junction of a rib and its cartilage".

So, Ray, you are a costochondritis! (And a green flog).

Just dont call him a bald headed costochondritis.

 

[AngryAnt]

I'll pay Cotch's free on one condition: every time Treloar does something similar next week, he gets pinged. Won't be holding my breath.

I thought Ellis's free was a bit stiff, didn't think he really had possession and/or prior opportunity. It was a long way away.

DS

Unfortunately getting Treloar pinged for throws is above my pay grade too David. The issue of us getting pinged for this stuff while other sides don't is a whole other kettle of fish.

With Ellis, lack of prior doesn't really come into it - if you try to dispose of the ball, you have to do it correctly and he didn't.

 

[TigerMasochist]

if you are being tackled and drop the ball on the ground, that's incorrect disposal. I hate the Umps as much as anyone but let's try to keep the hysteria down to a dull roar.

Haargh, just proddin a little antsy one. While we're discussing the technicalities of correct and incorrect disposal. Player lying on the ground with the ball throws it at his foot n waggles said foot to make contact. Legal kick or throwing the ball?
Seen plenty of players drop the ball to ground n get a toe poke on it, play on he attempted to dispose or alternately it's a drop kick play on. Also seen plenty of players throw the ball at their foot ( Cotch is brilliant at it ) n it's counted as a legitimate disposal, yet throwing the ball used to always be incorrect disposal.
Maggots make up their own interpretations of the rules depending on the colour of their undies on match day n it's bloody ridiculous.

 

[AngryAnt]

Haargh, just proddin a little antsy one. While we're discussing the technicalities of correct and incorrect disposal. Player lying on the ground with the ball throws it at his foot n waggles said foot to make contact. Legal kick or throwing the ball?
Seen plenty of players drop the ball to ground n get a toe poke on it, play on he attempted to dispose or alternately it's a drop kick play on. Also seen plenty of players throw the ball at their foot ( Cotch is brilliant at it ) n it's counted as a legitimate disposal, yet throwing the ball used to always be incorrect disposal.
Maggots make up their own interpretations of the rules depending on the colour of their undies on match day n it's bloody ridiculous.

No prob TM, I'm a big fan of your work.

Throwing the ball onto the foot while lying on the ground is totally legit IMO. Remember Cotch doing this for a great goal at Sydney in 2015 I think.

 

[Bill James]

if you are being tackled and drop the ball on the ground, that's incorrect disposal. I hate the Umps as much as anyone but let's try to keep the hysteria down to a dull roar.

That's not correct and Paul Roos alluded to this in commentary on the weekend.

17.6.3 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Incorrect Disposal
Where a Player in Possession of the football has not had Prior Opportunity, a Free Kick shall be awarded if that player elects to Incorrectly Dispose of the football when:

(a) the Player genuinely attempts to Correctly Dispose of the football;
(b) the Legal Tackle causes the football to be dislodged from the Player's possession.

Basically it has to be a deliberate attempt to dispose of the ball incorrectly for it to be a free.

So if the player was attempting to correctly dispose of the football and it falls on the ground it should be play on.

Because we want to move the ball forward, our players will often try to dispose of the ball when tackled and all to often are incorrectly penalised when they are making a genuine attempt. On the other hand, teams that want stoppages simply hug the ball in and get themselves wrapped up in a tackle deliberately without making an attempt and then they have a stoppage.

This is one of the major reasons why we have have been at the bottom of the free kick differential since we introduced the surge strategy in 2017. If you go back to 2015, Richmond was second for free kick differential.

 

[AngryAnt]

That's not correct and Paul Roos alluded to this in commentary on the weekend.

17.6.3 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Incorrect Disposal
Where a Player in Possession of the football has not had Prior Opportunity, a Free Kick shall be awarded if that player elects to Incorrectly Dispose of the football when:

(a) the Player genuinely attempts to Correctly Dispose of the football;
(b) the Legal Tackle causes the football to be dislodged from the Player's possession.

Basically it has to be a deliberate attempt to dispose of the ball incorrectly for it to be a free.

So if the player was attempting to correctly dispose of the football and it falls on the ground it should be play on.

Because we want to move the ball forward, our players will often try to dispose of the ball when tackled and all to often are incorrectly penalised when they are making a genuine attempt. On the other hand, teams that want stoppages simply hug the ball in and get themselves wrapped up in a tackle deliberately without making an attempt and then they have a stoppage.

This is one of the major reasons why we have have been at the bottom of the kick differential since we introduced the surge strategy in 2017. If you go back to 2015, Richmond was second for free kick differential.

Thanks for the clarification BJ. "Genuine attempt" is one of those really subjective judgement calls which partially explains why the umps are so inconsistent with it.

 

[Bill James]

You people having a moan this week, wait til next week!

Yes I have a Collingwood friend (is that an oxymoron or just a moron') who is bemoaning the umpiring against GWS. Collingwood won the free kick count 24-14.

 

[Bill James]

Thanks for the clarification BJ. "Genuine attempt" is one of those really subjective judgement calls which partially explains why the umps are so inconsistent with it.

When was the last time you heard genuine attempt over the umpires mic? I know I am old but when we played the umpire was always yelling out 'he made an attempt' . Maybe they are not allowed to say it now because its not inclusive.

 

[TigerMasochist]

When was the last time you heard genuine attempt over the umpires mic? I know I am old but when we played the umpire was always yelling out 'he made an attempt'

Last time I heard that call, the femme ump Ellie whatsername, called it when we appealed for deliberate out of bounds against an oppo defender who was trying to scrub a point through under pressure and missed.
If you try to force a point n miss by going out of bounds instead it's deliberate every single day of the week. Free kick. Not he was deliberately trying to force a point n missed, I'll give him another chance. Stupid bruddy iriot umpire.

 

[zippadeee]

Just get rid of fisher

 

[jb03]

Where a Player in Possession of the football has not had Prior Opportunity, a Free Kick shall be awarded if that player elects to Incorrectly Dispose of the football when:

(a) the Player genuinely attempts to Correctly Dispose of the football;
(b) the Legal Tackle causes the football to be dislodged from the Player's possession.

Not sure this makes sense. If a player elects to incorrectly dispose of the ball, then it would be free kick regardless of anything else

 

[DavidSSS]

That's not correct and Paul Roos alluded to this in commentary on the weekend.

17.6.3 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Incorrect Disposal
Where a Player in Possession of the football has not had Prior Opportunity, a Free Kick shall be awarded if that player elects to Incorrectly Dispose of the football when:

(a) the Player genuinely attempts to Correctly Dispose of the football;
(b) the Legal Tackle causes the football to be dislodged from the Player's possession.

Basically it has to be a deliberate attempt to dispose of the ball incorrectly for it to be a free.

So if the player was attempting to correctly dispose of the football and it falls on the ground it should be play on.

Because we want to move the ball forward, our players will often try to dispose of the ball when tackled and all to often are incorrectly penalised when they are making a genuine attempt. On the other hand, teams that want stoppages simply hug the ball in and get themselves wrapped up in a tackle deliberately without making an attempt and then they have a stoppage.

This is one of the major reasons why we have have been at the bottom of the free kick differential since we introduced the surge strategy in 2017. If you go back to 2015, Richmond was second for free kick differential.

That makes absolutely no sense: how can you elect to incorrectly dispose of the ball while genuinely attempting to correctly dispose of the ball? If you are genuinely attempting to correctly dispose of the ball then by definition you are not electing to incorrectly dispose of the ball. That rule is a mess.

Either that or it's too late at night and I've had too many sherbies.

Oh, and Chamberlain is not worth this much attention.

DS

 

[Tigermad2005]

Unfortunately getting Treloar pinged for throws is above my pay grade too David. The issue of us getting pinged for this stuff while other sides don't is a whole other kettle of fish.

With Ellis, lack of prior doesn't really come into it - if you try to dispose of the ball, you have to do it correctly and he didn't.

No it’s knocked out in the tackle