Tweet
I don't agree with that at all. He didn't duck, he put his head down to pick up the ball (he wasn't trying to dodge or evade in order to ensure that a legitimate tackle hit him high - which is how I believe the AFL and subsequently the umpires use the term when they call "play on he ducked his head"). How else can a player pick a ball up off the ground without having their head pointing down - of which Mattner had every right to do?
-
-
Matty, i think what the others are arguing and FWIW I agree with them, is in the Mattner incident, he ran into the Norf player (almost sure it was Swallow) who was as good as stationary. It's not the first time we've seen it and I agree it is unfair when a defender can be just standing there and get penalised because a player burrows into them, head first.Driver of the Dan Hannebery bandwagon....all aboard. 4th April 09Comment
-
I understand what you are saying... I just see the incident differently - Mattner didn't burrow through he was simply picking up the ball.Comment
-
Most jobs don't tolerate 10% error rate. Glad Gieschen is not the head of surgeons. These prancing fools need to understand how the gane is played and increase the level of consistency. The inconsistent umpiring is my main gripe. This is particularly evident in ruck contests and holding the ball. Give everybody a fair go.SYDNEY SWANS.....THE GREATEST FOOTBALL CLUB IN LIVING MEMORY.Comment
-
That free to Hale was ridiculous. Almost as bad was the free against Goodes at the end of the quarter which, in all likelihood, cost us a goal.
On the whole though I'm happy to see our free kick ledger has gone to deeply in the red to about level this year. I think we've even finished to the good in all games except Saturday's, when there was a pretty clear bias towards North in the 1st half.
I suspect the retirement and trading of certain players like Jolly, Hall and Leo (bless him) plus recruiting Bradshaw (a free kick magnet -- bless him too) has tipped the scales sharply in our favour.
That's my theory anyway. Whatever it is, I hope it continues. Touch wood x3To all those people who waited 72 years to see a South Melbourne/Sydney Swans premiership HERE IT IS!!Comment
-
It certainly feels like we're getting a much better run from the umps than we have in recent years - is this another sign that we're no longer playing "ugly football"? Of course, the big test will be playing a "big" Melbourne team in Melbourne - or when St. Nick returns.Comment
-
Quite a few times, actually....for example he made at least two contrite apologies about the treatment of one B. Hall....didn't make any difference, though"I'll acknowledge there are more talented teams in the competition but I won't acknowledge that there is a better team in the competition" Paul Roos March 2005Comment
-
As Dr J is my witness this was the free kick that was the most obvious of the ones they got goals from. You can't block a ruckman's run at the footy. If you had a top ruckman it's the easiest way to neutralise him and should not be allowed. It was at the softer end but should be a free kick
I had/ have no problem with itYou don't ban those who supported your opponent, you make them wallow in their loserdom by covering your victory! You sit them in the front row. You give them a hat! Toby ZieglerComment
-
Seems Gieschen will actually admit to mistakes
"Clearly in this situation, the umpire has made a mistake and didn't see it clearly and missed an obvious marking interference to Travis Johnstone."
We got Porplyzia decision right: League - AFL.com.auComment
-
Adn that seems right to me - the Porpoise mark was legit but the Petterd mark was clearly interference.Comment
Comment