Official Round 1 Melbourne Game day thread

[JC 14]

I saw it! Effectively cost us a goal. Commentators on radio later said that the Melbourne bloke "would face scrutiny for his trip on McVeigh". Surely worth a free? Our group went ape droppings in the stand behind the goals!

Just went on the AFL website:
Match Review Panel: full report - AFL.com.au

It was Joel McDonald and i cant believe he hasnt been done, the contact was not 'below that required to constitute a reportable offence', the MRP frustrate me....

[liz]

Umpires need to be the judge.

As they were last year. And the year before that. And the year before that. It seemed to work well - it was pretty rare that the umpires got it wrong, and when they did it was usually calling the ball back when the team in possession were actually advantaged by playing on.

Yet another example of "if it ain't broke, lets meddle with it anyway".

[liz]

Just went on the AFL website:
Match Review Panel: full report - AFL.com.au

It was Joel McDonald and i cant believe he hasnt been done, the contact was not 'below that required to constitute a reportable offence', the MRP frustrate me....

I thought the MRP and the introduction of more transparent guidelines would make the tribunal process better. And I still think it is a marginal improvement on what went on before. But when they start talking about how forceful contact is for a tripping incident (I am sure Dustin Fletcher raised an eyebrow at that one), or determine that a fairly deliberate kick between the legs by Waite was below the necessary force (Barry Hall and Stephen Baker - condemned "attempted strikers" - would have been amused, or not) then you have to wonder.

[JC 14]

I agree, i think the strict interpretation of necessary force is too one-dimensional, i know the strict guidelines in which the MRP run by now due to costs, and effciency of clubs not wanting to have attend hearings via in person or video link etc. But the problem is that both of the incidents u highlighted liz were stupid.

I think the MRP should have a special authorities outside there normal guidelines for these 'Brainmelts', because bottom line is the trip was deliberate, it could have caused serious injury, and it was reckless.

[Primmy]

I had the same thoughts liz, that BB would be shaking his head in wonder, because I am. I hope the jock gets fined by his club at the very least. It was a low act.

[Nico]

The McVeigh incident appeared to be a free kick and I hadn't considered it reportable. Everyone in the ground saw the incident I know all and sundry around us were quite amused or abusive that McVeigh wasn't paid a free kick. I am still bemused by the one where a Melbourne player took possession on about their offensive centre square line going to the Punt Road end, was tackled once after he had prior opportunity, lost then regained possession, then again had prior opportunity, was then tackled and dispossessed and it was called play on, and I think a goal resulted. On both occasions it appeared that he had not legitimately disposed of the ball.

[mcs]

The McVeigh incident appeared to be a free kick and I hadn't considered it reportable. Everyone in the ground saw the incident I know all and sundry around us were quite amused or abusive that McVeigh wasn't paid a free kick. I am still bemused by the one where a Melbourne player took possession on about their offensive centre square line going to the Punt Road end, was tackled once after he had prior opportunity, lost then regained possession, then again had prior opportunity, was then tackled and dispossessed and it was called play on, and I think a goal resulted. On both occasions it appeared that he had not legitimately disposed of the ball.

Yep thats how i saw that passage of play as well.... I believe there was in fact a 3rd illegal disposal in the same movement as well if I remember correctly. The HTB rule seems to be far more lenient in Rd 1 then previous years, but then the umpires randomly will pull one up (There was a shocker paid against us on Sunday where the player was gang tackled as soon as he got the ball with absolutely no chance to dispose of it and got pinged.

[liz]

Yep thats how i saw that passage of play as well.... I believe there was in fact a 3rd illegal disposal in the same movement as well if I remember correctly. The HTB rule seems to be far more lenient in Rd 1 then previous years, but then the umpires randomly will pull one up (There was a shocker paid against us on Sunday where the player was gang tackled as soon as he got the ball with absolutely no chance to dispose of it and got pinged.

If I am thinking of the same one, it was against McGlynn deep into the final quarter, and as a direct result of that, they got the ball to Jurrah and he kicked a goal to pull the Dees back to within a few points.

Overall I don't think we got a rough ride from the umpires, mind. There were soft ones paid and apparently clear ones missed to both teams and other than picking apart isolated incidents, I don't think the umpiring had a significant impact on the balance of the game. The play-on from advantage rule, for example, almost certainly cost the Dees a goal.

[Triple B]

I also don't think the umpiring cost us, but McBurney sure does give us no favours...ever.

[giant]

If I am thinking of the same one, it was against McGlynn deep into the final quarter, and as a direct result of that, they got the ball to Jurrah and he kicked a goal to pull the Dees back to within a few points.

Overall I don't think we got a rough ride from the umpires, mind. There were soft ones paid and apparently clear ones missed to both teams and other than picking apart isolated incidents, I don't think the umpiring had a significant impact on the balance of the game. The play-on from advantage rule, for example, almost certainly cost the Dees a goal.

McGlynn had got possession of the footy by diving on it. He then got up and was tackled (or possibly was tackled as he got up) - either way, technically it was probably the right call. Just don't dive on the footy is the answer.

[giant]

I am starting to think that of all the stupid rules that the AFL have brought in, this is one of the stupider ones. The players are playing on instinct and don't have time to stop and wonder whether it is to the team's advantage to play on. Especially in a HTB situation where half the time the umpies just call "play on" when the ball comes free in a tackle, at which point it is a free for all, and whoever reacts the quickest is most likely to get possession.

I thought this "player decides" rule had been left to the confines of the NAB Cup. I hadn't realised until yesterday that it was in for the season proper.

You've been too easy on him. The rule is designed to support the player that can make a quick call on whether there is advantage or not, and hence it serves well for those who are quick decision makers. That doesn't describe our Bevo.

Under the old rule umps copped it if they called the players back and the crowd thought there was an advantage, and copped it if they called advantage and the player got run down ("where was the advantage there, ya mug?"). Now, there's nowhere to lay the blame but yourself - or in our case Bevo.

[The Big Cat]

There was a clear holding the ball decision which led to the Jamar's shot at goal. I went crazy at the ground, but on seeing the replay it WAS called as HTB but Bevo took the "advantage" when he was in the middle of about 4 Melbourne blokes and he lost possession. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he hadn't become used to the new player calling the advantage situation. Then on the other hand, Jack had a clear advantage but seemed confused and didn't take it and the umps brought it back to the original free.

[Nich]

Not sure of this has been brought up after this game on this thread but I'm getting tired of them calling Jets, Leroy. Bruce did it again and there was even an online Herald Sun article that called him Leroy. It's quite ridiculous. Just on that did anyone notice when Goodesy lined up in the pocket and Cometti commented 'really tough angle for left footers here'. C'mon Cometti, he is one of the champs of the game and you can't remember that he kicks with his right?!?

[magic.merkin]

After watching the replay I was super impressed by Everitt, just needs to get the ball in his hands a little more. Will definately be a key to our backline this year, Smith also impressed me.

Smith is a gem! Tackles stick, great disposal, and is a blanket!

[Hartijon]

Smith is a gem! Tackles stick, great disposal, and is a blanket!

Agree 100%. He also doesn't leak the ball out once he gets possession. Its a real skill to be frantically trying to dispose of the ball so you don't get pinged HTB while making sure the ball stays exactly where it is.Those who don't do this cost us dearly. The ball spills out to the opposition or they get pinged HTB.I see Dempster got a HTB decision that cost the game in the last minute.Glad he doesn't play for us and maybe we should have sent another player who costs us goals every game with him to St.Kilda.Smith however is a gem and Everitt was great,Sumner nervous and needs another game,Rohan a star but out of the game too much,Jetstar a star,Mattner mercuric,Reg bad first game,Jude amazing.Lets face it,we should have won by 4-5 goals coz we let them out of jail by kicking 3goals 9 points in the third. I rest my case about needing TDL to slot majors!