They must understand you can win the free kick differential and still indeed be hard done by, because the number itself is meaningless without context.
Smart fans, Collingwood supporters.
-
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
They must understand you can win the free kick differential and still indeed be hard done by, because the number itself is meaningless without context.
Smart fans, Collingwood supporters.
Yeh, in isolation its meanningless.They must understand you can win the free kick differential and still indeed be hard done by, because the number itself is meaningless without context.
Smart fans, Collingwood supporters.
I love Pies supporters. Basically tigers fans in different colours. With less teef.
It’s meaningless in the context of one game. It’s meaningful as a trend because trends usually mean something.They must understand you can win the free kick differential and still indeed be hard done by, because the number itself is meaningless without context.
Smart fans, Collingwood supporters.
There must be a reason ( or reasons) why Richmond are consistently worst or near worst for free kick differential whereas Collingwood is consistently at the other end of the scale.
I’m not one for conspiracy theories but I would like to know why. Maybe the club has some theories or knowledge on it, you would suggest they are aware of it
I may be remembering incorrectly, but last year I think Dimma was asked about not getting free kicks during a post game and he said something like "Maybe we need to start coaching our players how to draw free kicks."
I watched rebels v pioneers NAB saturday
A couple of raw boned farm boys went at it,
One smacked the other - closed fist straight to the face
I heard it. 2 umps saw it up close
1 ump heard saying to 2 ump
'Do we have a send off rule'?
'I dunno' says no 2 'if we do, i dont have a red card, do you?'
'Nuh' says no 1
So nothing happened.
This is the feeder comp to a $1b game.
Im not making this up
Protect the head? Id settle for a half measure of professionalism
A couple of raw boned farm boys went at it,
One smacked the other - closed fist straight to the face
I heard it. 2 umps saw it up close
1 ump heard saying to 2 ump
'Do we have a send off rule'?
'I dunno' says no 2 'if we do, i dont have a red card, do you?'
'Nuh' says no 1
So nothing happened.
This is the feeder comp to a $1b game.
Im not making this up
Protect the head? Id settle for a half measure of professionalism
I think you've made the argument well as to why it should be a free kick (without actually meaning to). Could weitering have competed in the marking contest with Lynch - yes he could. Did he - no he didn't. Why not? Because he was protecting space for Mcgovern which you aren't allowed to do - Thats why its called a block. The real giveaway was that he wasn't even looking at the ball at the end. He ended up facing away from the direction that the ball came in and towards McGovern. It was a very clear block.
Taranto's was a bit different. He was facing the ball as it came in, and knew that Weitering was going to come in from behind to try and spoil so he held his ground. Protecting the space in front of him so he can compete - which he allowed to do.
Weitering and Taranto blocked in very different ways, 1 was illegal, 1 was not. Thats the difference.
Most people can give reasons why our frees against is higher than other teams, and I can accept those reasons. We do play things a bit close to the line, but its the frees for thats hard to understand.
Umps are very trigger happy when paying frees against Nank but they are resistant to give him any. There were a number of times when O'Brien had his arm clearly over Nanks shoulder (using him as leverage) to jump at the centre bounce and no free but Nank does it the other way it would be a free.
The thing I just can never get my head around is why we are so poor at drawing frees, the argument stands up for frees against but I've yet to hear a plausible one as to why we don't receive frees.
Well explained. It's very similar to what happens in basketball to me.
In basketball a screen is legal.
You get there before the defender and stand your ground / stand still - if the defender runs into you and your offensive teammate is then clear that is fine. You can also set your screen and then roll away from the defender (typically towards the basket to give your teammate a passing option). This is what Taranto did - got there first then ran a little bit towarads the ball - but was never going to try to mark. He doesn't have to give up his space that he already claimed.
A moving screen is illegal. You basically run into the defender (or even just use your arms while you are stationary to block them) as they are moving to guard the person with ball. This is what Weitering did - took out the incoming player without allowing them to go for the ball.
Maybe the main difference would be if the defender genuinely goes for the ball and takes out an offensive player then that is fine too.
Kind of says get front position and then hold your ground and make an effort to mark or if you are going to block then do it in the act of going for the mark / punch.
If you go back to page 699 @Ricemagic makes an excellent analysis of why Ben Brown's free kick count looks very different to other forwards, because of the lack of involvement he has with things like tackles.
If you dig through the team stats there are similar things. For example Collingwood have the most positive free kick differential in the competition. They also have the lowest number of defensive 1 v 1 contests in the competition, less than half the average. I don't know what percentage of free kicks are given away at defensive 1 on 1 contests but I'd imagine it's quite a few so if they are not having those contests then they are naturally going to save on free kicks.
That's why I said the free kick could be argued both ways.
There's the case you make, and the Carlton argument would be Weitering was protecting the space around the ball so he could push off Lynch and move back to mark or spoil.
McGovern arrived so he left the ball for him instead, which he is perfectly entitled to do.
It's one of those ones where you could make either decision and be correct.
These are potentially reasons for those things that relate to Brown and Collingwood but I assume there could be similar analysis around relating to Richmond.
As I said I am not a conspiracy theorist but equally I am certain that a team cannot gave such a negative for and against free kick record since 2017 without their being a reason or reasons.
If the club knows then presumably they have decided there is nothing they can do about it or alternatively are unwilling to do anything because we want to play a certain way.
Actually it isn't, well, according to the rules they publish and enforce when they feel like it:
This is the definition from the 2023 rules.
How many times do they ignore shepherds which are more than 5 metres from the ball? All the time . . . except when they don't.
The issue is not the rule, which is actually very clear, it is the inconsistent adjudication.
But, then they also add rules in regards to marking contests:
So you can't block a player in a marking contest, but you can shepherd if the ball is within 5 metres. Contradictory? Yep, just the way the AFL likes it, means they can claim any decision is correct.
For such a big competition this should be a lot better but the morons running the show just don't.
Of course those who believe the sun shines out of the rear end of everyone in the AFL will see this as fine.
DS
I've run a lot of theories around this over the years and never quite nailed it, mainly because I think there's a lot of factors at play.
There's definitely some game style factors, but when you really drill into ours our differential is often only because of a handful of players.
Nankervis is unquestionably elite at free kicks against. He goes at -.8 on career free kick differential. That doesn't sound like much but it's huge. Buddy Franklin who I believe is the all time leader in frees against goes at -.6. Tom Lynch is -.1 Dustin Martin -.5.
-.8 is the highest negative differential over a reasonable length careerI have ever seen and the second highest is -.7. The owner of that? M. Pickett.
Loved the Tylar Young tackle on Tex Walker. Grabs his arm and refuses to let go. Walker struggles and tries to free his arm but Young just hangs on. Walker ends up swinging around like a pendulum but Young still won’t let go.
Then both players look at the ump who is still thinking about whether anyone will notice if he let’s this go and just calls play on. But they can’t play on. Walker keeps struggling, Young keeps holding. After a while the ump figures out that the tackle has been going for 15 minutes and Walker has made no attempt to dispose of the ball at any stage, in fact, he has forgotten that he still has it, he is just intent on freeing his arm. But Young won’t let go. And he is stronger.
Finally, it dawns on him that no-one can go home until he makes a decision so he pays it to Richmond. Reluctantly.
I don’t care what Neil Balme once said about umpires, it just shouldn’t be this hard to get an obvious free kick.
Then both players look at the ump who is still thinking about whether anyone will notice if he let’s this go and just calls play on. But they can’t play on. Walker keeps struggling, Young keeps holding. After a while the ump figures out that the tackle has been going for 15 minutes and Walker has made no attempt to dispose of the ball at any stage, in fact, he has forgotten that he still has it, he is just intent on freeing his arm. But Young won’t let go. And he is stronger.
Finally, it dawns on him that no-one can go home until he makes a decision so he pays it to Richmond. Reluctantly.
I don’t care what Neil Balme once said about umpires, it just shouldn’t be this hard to get an obvious free kick.
Last edited:
The flog was gonna call a meeting to discuss if that tackle should be a HTB......
I reckon it was such an unusual tackle no-one really knew what to do, even the players.
The lad did really well to take care in that situation as well, could have been a really nasty injury.
