Paul Bevan - 100 games

[connolly]

Another typical piece of decision making by Bevan in the 4th Q deserves attention as well. Something that most would have missed.

Just a couple of minutes after his previous Williams shocker, when the ball came into Hawthorn's 50, a pack situation developed and we were 3 on 3 with the flight of the ball.

Bevan and Williams were the ground players under the ball, but Bevan decided to leave Williams, back in and try to spoil.

Very courageous. Very stupid.

He was never going to be able to touch he ball with taller players running with the flight of the ball and easily getting higher. His job is to mind the small crummer (Williams) when the ball hits the ground.

Inevitably, the ball hit the ground - Teddy and Bolton did their job.

It left Williams as the only ground level player. Luckily the ball did not bounce kindly for Williams and Bevan's team mates saved him and us yet again, cleaning up on the ground and doing Bevan's job as well.

Unfortunately as I have pointed out many times, Bevan cannot do what good defenders do - watch the ball and cover his opponent at the same time.

It was so nearly 2 goals in 2 minutes to Bevan. But luck and his team mates saved him.

So you are suggesting that defenders never leave their opponent to be third man up or fill the corridor? Bevo is multi-tasked. He is instructed to fill the corridor in front of leading forwards (most defenders do this) and he is expected to be third or second man man up if he can spoil. (apart from Crouch who just cannot mark overhead as evidence by the plum pudding he spilt after Bevo put it out in front of him on Sunday) Bevo has saved games for us by leaving his man and either spoiling or taking the match saving mark into the pack. No doubt he will continue to do the team thing and save games for us.

[ScottH]

It was over the shoulder. Bevo had his eyes on the ball and Williams leant into him and started to fall. It was momentary and in the context of the umpiring technical. Grabbing around the neck it was not. But i have to dip my hat to those that have managed to focus on one free kick in a match that was otherwise dominated by Big Beamish and the umpires, high drama and a slashing game by Goodesy. Craig Bolton had an absolute shocker against a great player (was there one occasion when Bolts beat Buddy?) but i guess its not what you do but who who you are in the scapegoat business.

Whether it happens to us or not. It has nothing to do with the fact it was a free against Bevan. Argue all you like about positioning/holding ground, yada yada yada. It was a free against.

I thought Williams out positioned and beat Bevan at that contest. I think that happens, otherwise there would be a lot less goals. Bevo had a standard Bevo day, nothing more or less. An effective spoil at that time may have made a difference to the overall result, maybe not.

Bit hard to spoil when you are on the wrong side of the fall of the ball. Maybe it should of been a technocal free to Bevo, for not being allowed to spoil effectively.

Never said it wasnt a free but it was a technical one, especially in the context of the otherwise let it go (especially on our forward line) interpretations.

Aren't most frees technical??
Sorry mate, but your man love for bevo is getting tedious.

[connolly]

Whether it happens to us or not. It has nothing to do with the fact it was a free against Bevan. Argue all you like about positioning/holding ground, yada yada yada. It was a free against.

Bit hard to spoil when you are on the wrong side of the fall of the ball. Maybe it should of been a technocal free to Bevo, for not being allowed to spoil effectively.



Aren't most frees technical??
Sorry mate, but your man love for bevo is getting tedious.

Fair go one of those comments is from ROK! I know we are as one on most things but he can answer for himself. Bevo was on the goalside of Williams which is wher he should have been, the heavy ball dropped and drifted to the left side of Williams. It happens. Umpiring decisions are interpretations. Some interpretations are very technical applications of the rule and some not. Clarkson has said that he wants his defenders in particular to push the boundaries of the rules and if they give away frees he accepts that. Obviously not a criteria that everyone uses. If Bevo was wearing yellow and brown and his opponent was Big Beamish it probably would not have been a free.

[ScottH]

I realise one of those was from ROK, I was responding to him.

The problem with Bevo is he does good things, and some bad/dumb things (kicking straight to a hawk on the wing in the 2nd Q), but your blind adoration seems to tarnish your views.
It was a blatant over the shoulder/holding by Bevan. End of Story.

Hall copped some bad decisions, He probably got away with some too. It happens.

The problem with the umps is they are on the ground watching from the inside lookng out, we are on the outside looking in, and a lot of what we see, the umps can't because they caen't see through the players.

[Lohengrin]

Bevo was on the goalside of Williams which is wher he should have been, the heavy ball dropped and drifted to the left side of Williams.

The problem was that Bevan positioned himself behind and to the side of Williams and prepared himself for the huge leap and punch over the top. Franklin's long bomb could be read (as Williams did better) and Bevan should have been up against Williams bodying him out of position, with a fist out in front. Watch a good defensive player against a shorter and smaller player, and that's what they will do. No need to try to leap over the top.

[ROK Lobster]

Bit hard to spoil when you are on the wrong side of the fall of the ball. Maybe it should of been a technocal free to Bevo, for not being allowed to spoil effectively.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Siriusly.

[stellation]

Fair go one of those comments is from ROK! I know we are as one on most things but he can answer for himself. Bevo was on the goalside of Williams which is wher he should have been, the heavy ball dropped and drifted to the left side of Williams. It happens. Umpiring decisions are interpretations. Some interpretations are very technical applications of the rule and some not. Clarkson has said that he wants his defenders in particular to push the boundaries of the rules and if they give away frees he accepts that. Obviously not a criteria that everyone uses. If Bevo was wearing yellow and brown and his opponent was Big Beamish it probably would not have been a free.

From memory it was a pretty clear free kick, I honestly don't think it was just a line ball decision. Williams is a very good player, no shame in being outsmarted by him in a contest- frustrating for it to happen straight in front of goals, but no real shame in it.

[connolly]

The problem was that Bevan positioned himself behind and to the side of Williams and prepared himself for the huge leap and punch over the top. .

He was goalside where he should have been. The kick died and faded on him. Which is what should now happen to this thread.

[stellation]

He was goalside where he should have been. The kick died and faded on him. Which is what should now happen to this thread.

Should a defender always be goal side in a one on one marking contest?

[goswannie14]

He was goalside where he should have been. The kick died and faded on him. Which is what should now happen to this thread.

But you're the one doing most of the posting.

[connolly]

Should a defender always be goal side in a one on one marking contest?

A defender minding a small forward should be. i'm not sure the bomb was aimed at Williams, who probably was taking a crumbing position. In which case Bevo was on the right side of him. As i said before the heavy ball dropped and faded. Bevo along with a couple of others was expecting the kick to be straighter and a bit longer. Given that it was kicked by Buddy it could and did go anywhere.

[Melbournehammer]

actually i think that is wrong. i just reckon williams read it better in the air. if you watch it bevan was separated by about three-four metres when the ball was kicked and by the time he went to body williams he was running into a brick wall.

it does raise a question in my mind which i raised earlier. at the beginning of the game teddy was playying on williams - where was teddy and who was he playing on ?

[Lohengrin]

He was goalside where he should have been. The kick died and faded on him. Which is what should now happen to this thread.

The problem was he was too far away and hence the attempted run and jump which was the mistake, rather than creating body contact.

[Triple B]

A defender minding a small forward should be. i'm not sure the bomb was aimed at Williams, who probably was taking a crumbing position.

Trouble with that theory is they were 1 out with each other in the goalsquare and not another player within 20 metres.

Unless he was just going to let Bevan spill an uncontested mark and crumb that......

Uh oh, now I'm sounding like the rest of the inmates here

[goswannie14]

Trouble with that theory is they were 1 out with each other in the goalsquare and not another player within 20 metres.

Unless he was just going to let Bevan spill an uncontested mark and crumb that......

Uh oh, now I'm sounding like the rest of the inmates here

See what the facts will do to you!!