Interchange fiasco

[Hartijon]

Nobody is mentioning the free 6 points that Carlton got through the interchange balls up.
IMO it changed the momentum of the game and Carlton never looked back from there on.What happened and why were we penalised for having 17 men on the field???

[goswannie14]

I agree, it was the turning point in the game. Since when has it been an interchange infringement to have 5 men on the bench?

[mcs]

It was a very poor decision and while it didn't cost us the game, it didn't help at all either as it was definitely a period in the game where we were struggling, and it gave Carlton some extra unjustified momentum. I have no problem with the rule except for the 50m part of it. If a player comes on and gets directly involved in the play, then fine a 50 metre penalty is very much warranted, but had last nights 'infringement' actually been an infringement, there is no way that was worthy of a 50 m penalty. A free kick to Carlton would have more than sufficed- it never was close to affecting play (waiting for a bounce I believe?) and had no influence on the game. Very pissed off about it- its not like the attendant has a tough job, all he had to do is count how many people are on the bench, but obviously he couldn't even manage that correctly.

[Damien]

Shocking decision by the looks, but we failed to put them away when we dominated and had no answers when they came at us. I still think we would have lost without that decision.

[Primmy]

It was the turning point of "what on earth do we have to do" and "we are getting money for nothing! so lets go blues". So is the attendant a blues fan? I sometimes wonder where aliegences lie amongst that mob. Or whether they just can't stand sydney. am I bitter and twisted this morning. yes. they could have fought back, but ...

[robamiee]

i believe it did cost us the game as it gave the blues that extra momentum and deflated the swans and especially more so in conditions like last nigght...that being said we should have been further ahead in the 2nd qtr....

[veramex]

I think I heard Jesse white was down in the rooms getting some work done at the time which is why it may have looked like we had too few on the bench.

Such a bad decision and definitely didn't help us. Lucky the loss was more than 6 otherwise there would be even more up roar

[ScottH]

According to this mornings paper, the confusion came as White was out of sight getting treatment, and the steward failed to notice this.
Champion Data who monitor the rotations supports the swans story.

Will be interesting to see what comes of this.
Ironic that White is involved again.

[ScottH]

Here is the story.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-probe-over-interchange-infringement-that-cost-sydney-a-goal/story-e6frf9jf-1226047295455

[dimelb]

The rule as it stands is stupid. The penalty is out of all proportion to the "offence", and would only be legitimate if there were deliberate intent to stack the field, which is most unlikely. A free kick is quite enough for what is almost guaranteed to be an inadvertent error.
We will hear a lot more about this, and so we should.

[GongSwan]

They just don't like Sydney, the AFL included, anyone remeber Andrew's comments from 2005? They even blame Sydney for the weather, like we caused it to rain on purpose. We're definitely up against it

[Triple B]

Here is the story.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/af...-1226047295455

Did you have to link that!!

I just read all the comments and I'm now crankier then I was when I woke up cranky...

[Big Al]

Well I must apologise to the Swans because when it happened I have gave them an almighty spray for screwing up but it's obvious now they didn't.

The Interchange steward should lose his job. What a joke!!

[laughingnome]

I can appreciate that a free kick is warranted as a penalty when there is an infringement on the bench, and if that side already has clean possession (from a mark or free kick, for example) then a 50m penalty awarded, but to award a Free + 50 when the ball is in dispute (like a stoppage) is a HUGE exaggeration of what the crime is. I've never liked the knee-jerk reaction the rules committee had in regards to this, and I've never seen it justified in any way by anyone from the AFL.

As to last night, the steward has to be sacked. End of story. His job is to keep track of who is off the field and who is on (just for one team, mind you), and he ballsed it up royally. No excuse.

[ugg]

Here is the story.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/af...-1226047295455

Longmire said the Swans actually had five players off the field, with Jesse White out of view receiving treatment.

Poor Jesse can't stay away from interchange imbroglios can he? He's not exactly a small guy either, how could you miss him!