you have said forceful high contact cannot be incidental, but now you are saying it can be?How else can you take a high mark if your legs touching the player underneath high isn't considered incidental?
Otherwise this is a free kick for high contact.
-
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.
Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!
- Thread starter iLoVeNeWmAn
- Start date
It isn't a brush to Dustin Martin's shoulder, Robinson literally jumped up and then tackled Martin while falling back to the ground. He tackled from above. Now he didn't do a bad job of it all things considered, but high contact was the result.
I know you are never wrong TBR, but clairvoyance now too? You know what the players and umpires were thinking at the time, stunning, you should be an umpire with all the rules involving interpretation of intent, that clairvoyance of yours would be very useful.
All I see is a rule which says high contact, specifically mentioning the shoulder, means a free kick, and pictures which show high contact and the result was a free kick the other way. I don't know how you interpret high contact, it isn't a matter of opinion, it is a matter of physical contact. Now, if you want to take a clear cut rule and bring in interpretations, that's your opinion, but it is the variable interpretation of rules like this which has led to the messy game we see today.
DS
I know you are never wrong TBR, but clairvoyance now too? You know what the players and umpires were thinking at the time, stunning, you should be an umpire with all the rules involving interpretation of intent, that clairvoyance of yours would be very useful.
All I see is a rule which says high contact, specifically mentioning the shoulder, means a free kick, and pictures which show high contact and the result was a free kick the other way. I don't know how you interpret high contact, it isn't a matter of opinion, it is a matter of physical contact. Now, if you want to take a clear cut rule and bring in interpretations, that's your opinion, but it is the variable interpretation of rules like this which has led to the messy game we see today.
DS
I went mental at that one up close and live Jazz. JR stood on the mark laughing and shaking his head. he was absolutely monstered.
He's used to not getting the free, but to have one paid against really tweaked him (and me) out
* I think Robinsons tackle on dusty was holding the ball against dusty
How good was the umpiring today.
Why can't it be like that more often.
I was blown away when in the first 3 plays we had 3 frees for, for guess what. High tackles.
Guess what happened next! They stopped making high tackles.
Really good work Umps.
Why can't it be like that more often.
I was blown away when in the first 3 plays we had 3 frees for, for guess what. High tackles.
Guess what happened next! They stopped making high tackles.
Really good work Umps.
The square up from last week was always coming; nothing surer. Next week will be back to normal transmission.
Gill must have directed SHocking to instruct the umpires to tone it down. It was getting too ridiculous to defend any longer.
Umps did a fairly reasonable job today, Missed some, paid a couple a soft ones one way but not the other.
But overall fairly consistent. For umpires.
Umps did a fairly reasonable job today, Missed some, paid a couple a soft ones one way but not the other.
But overall fairly consistent. For umpires.
Not sure whether we sung the song at the end of the game for kicking more points than them or for winning the free kick count??
You know you're most likely wrong when JB agrees with you.....You're just saying that to be a contrarian.
Agree, you cant compare a bit of high contact when spoiling the ball, which happens pretty much every time someone spoils from behind, to a knee to the head by someone who didnt even get near the ball.
Anyway as others have said they did a decent job today so this thread can have a rest for a week.
Geez you have a healthy ego.So now that we have all agreed the farce is a furphy, it might be useful to have a look at what changed today.
Firstly, as @The Big Richo has pointed out previously, a few players are responsible for a high percentage of our frees against tally.
With Pickett and Lynch out and Riewoldt playing a different role that didn't require him to engage with bigger opponents close to goal as much, and Nankervis with more support in the ruck, that dynamic changed significantly.
The other member of that infamous quintet, Aarts summed up the other big difference today, which was a clear effort to improve our technical approach to the physical contest. Without having done the full analysis, the number of high contacts in tackled we conceded was well down, as were any free kicks out of play. There's no doubt we reflected on the Brisbane game and tidied up our approach in this regard.
Countering that was the fact that Adelaide was very sloppy in their tackling approach, especially early in the game and gave us a lot of cheap free kicks. The show was on the other foot for a change.
I won't do the full analysis this week (because I have a feeling it might show a fair bit missed to Adelaide and spoil the vibe
<
Changes for R9 v Dogs
|
MRP
>
