Match Day Thread Rnd 4 V Fremantle

[chalbilto]

He is contracted to end of 2017.

[Hotpotato]

The 50 against McVeigh for in the back after the mark annoyed me.
Whilst it was by all accounts a legitimate 50, I saw worse on Friday night and it wasn't paid.

There was also the 50 we should have got when Freo kicked the ball after the free was given.

It was a flea push by McVeigh, but why do it, you know for certain now the whistle is going to go and ping your team 50, so just don't even think about it .
I know to change a set habit takes at least 21 days of continuous practice ... They will get there...

[annew]

He is contracted to end of 2017.

Woohoo - I am glad

- - - Updated - - -

It was a flea push by McVeigh, but why do it, you know for certain now the whistle is going to go and ping your team 50, so just don't even think about it .
I know to change a set habit takes at least 21 days of continuous practice ... They will get there...

Well that all depended on what colour you were wearing on Sat night because I saw many things that Freo did not get pinged for in the first half that were a lot worse. I remember there was a free swans got that should have had a 50 metre penalty but didnt so sometimes you have to take your chance.

[WauchopeAnalyst]

Unfortunately I hate bagging umpires, because we need them for every game but Jeff Dalgleish Umpire No. 7, is a former WAFL Umpire and WA person, and clearly was unable to make good decisions and most if not all went to Freo. One out 3 umpires can turn the game. The AFL only allows the numbers of free kicks from each umpire occasionally. Then the boundary has x-ray vision and can see touches through point and goal posts. THE AFL will not pay for non-home umpires to travel for every game. Fox Footy gave them a fair bake and when you can see an umpire being favourable for a team it just starts more problems for umpires. Freo beat us early and some negative stuff once we get close. Fair effort but you can't get flogged for a whole half and claim a good effort.

[liz]

I think your usual fair-mindedness has got the better of you here and you are, like both decisions, absolutely wrong. With both decisions, you could clearly see the Freo tackler pull the ball in and hold it against the Swan. This was something the AFL said it would be watching out for at the start of the year. But we all know that an AFL promise means about as much as a guarantee from an aluminium cladding salesman.

The umpires are given the "right" to pay a HTB decision in those circumstances because the Swans player had gone to ground and had their body over ball, regardless of the fact they couldn't get it out because it was being held in by a Freo player. In the Rampe case, the umpire failed to take account of the fact that Rampe didn't choose to go to ground. He slipped in the contest. From memory his opponent slipped shortly afterwards, which is how they both came to be on the ground.

I can't recall the Shaw example quite as clearly, but I don't think he really took possession of the ball. He was on the ground in the vicinity of the ball and the Freo player pulled it into him.

Neither example is what I think the HTB rule is (or should) be there for but I can see enough excuse for an umpire who wants to pay a free kick to pay those two.

The 50m against McVeigh was tough, I thought. I think McVeigh's contact was close enough to being "?n the contest" to give Macca the benefit of the doubt. We did get paid a fifty for a similar kind of incident later in the game I think.

The non-paid 50m to Buddy was pretty blatant. It's the kind of clear example they put on the DVD at the start of a season to demonstrate what frees and fifties will be paid for.

[Auntie.Gerald]

ok now that i am a little more relaxed :

all coaches have to find the balance between playing the style of football that wins GFs in each and every round vs bending a little when an opposition has too much momentum. I totally get that you need to demand of your players to play the brutal style each week so they are ready for this style that gets results in most finals game BUT we didnt execute and when that happens a PLAN B needs to be engaged before it is too late

15mins into the first qtr should have been a warning sign

What I observed was John Longmire challenging the 22 Swans mentally, emotionally and physically to play one on one football in the first qtr and win the clearances. John knows that this trench warfare style wins GFs.........reason being is that if you get on top in the clearances you send the ball in quick to the one on one advantage of a tall forward and with the likes of a Buddy that works wonders in most games. But not always against one of the best defensive teams in the comp headed by arguably one of the best CHB / FB in the comp.

First qtr......John asked the Bloods to play on or play fast after receiving a pass / kick.........but we DID NOT win enough clearances in the first qtr and when we did we kicked to a pack of purple

In this same first qtr Ross Lyons also said to his chargers win the clearances kick a goal fast...........well they scored about a 9 out of 10 on their report card because they did this in spades

The difference with Ross's set up was his plan B ie when the Swans kick into the Freeo defensive 50m arc well freeo had it covered and then the transition of Freeo was first class to get back up the other end

Freeo ensured that back in their defensive 50m arc that there was purple people every where. They dropped off their players and stacked the defence.......but then Freeo engage the swans again by stretching the swans forwards very very wide on a very very wide field before flooding forward in numbers thru the corridor. plain and simple we got sucked in. Lyons wanted our talls to chase wide the Freeo transition lets face it tippo if he runs 60m across the forward pocket to chase a freeo player then this aint working because he will be 20m behind after 60m !

I personally think this was a grave mistake by Longmire and Co. our forward press should have retreated and defended an area of teh field that we truly could defend

Yes take on a team head to head and ask your players to execute their agreed Game Plan to start the game.............but I also think you need to be adaptable and personally i think we should have also stacked our defence and transitioned exactly the same way Freeo did when the forward entries by Freeo were unsuccessful

I think we can test our GF style football strategy in most games of the season but we needed to have a PLAN B mid way thru the 1st qtr against Freeo

Sandilands and Fyfe were too hot and executed in the clearances early on and we needed to cop this on the chin and retreat in numbers then counter attack until we could wrestle the momentum back on the score board

[lorakf]

Unfortunately I hate bagging umpires, because we need them for every game but Jeff Dalgleish Umpire No. 7, is a former WAFL Umpire and WA person, and clearly was unable to make good decisions and most if not all went to Freo. One out 3 umpires can turn the game. The AFL only allows the numbers of free kicks from each umpire occasionally. Then the boundary has x-ray vision and can see touches through point and goal posts. THE AFL will not pay for non-home umpires to travel for every game. Fox Footy gave them a fair bake and when you can see an umpire being favourable for a team it just starts more problems for umpires. Freo beat us early and some negative stuff once we get close. Fair effort but you can't get flogged for a whole half and claim a good effort.

I too was thinking of this. At first glance, all but one of the nine umpires from the Freo game, plus the two reserves, are from Perth. Is this not a problem? Shouldn't the AFL ensure no umpire officiates in their home state or at the very lease for the team they support (in the case of Victorian umpires). Would it not be fair to assume that as umpires they have an interest in the game and therefor a team they support? And therefor the WA umpires would logically support one of the two WA teams, and most likely dislike the other? Would this not have an impact even subconsciously? I am not saying they deliberately cheat but would it not have at least some sort of impact? In an era where so much money is being invested in the game, the need for professional full time umpires, who are flown to games, not just kept for local games in their state, should be a must.

[Meg]

The contentious goal review from the Freo match involving the boundary umpire is discussed at the 5.25 mins point of Whistleblowers this week. Apparently there was additional vision available to the reviewer but not shown on TV which showed it was touched.
Pie's great goal grilled - AFL.com.au

[ScottH]

The contentious goal review from the Freo match involving the boundary umpire is discussed at the 5.25 mins point of Whistleblowers this week. Apparently there was additional vision available to the reviewer but not shown on TV which showed it was touched.
Pie's great goal grilled - AFL.com.au

How the hell can the boundary umpire see "clearly" form behind to posts?????

I would have liked to see them talk about the Reid/Tippett non goal as well. Clearly didn't hit the post.

[chalbilto]

So if there was this so called extra vision through "hawkeye" why didn't they show it in this review? I think that the excuses they gave were very lame!

[liz]

I thought the review umpire's
call was that the vision was unclear and thus it reverted to the goal umpire's call. That's not consistent with there being additional footage that showed it was touched.

[Nico]

that's hold Erica!!! Cleary the umps haven't been to OPSM lately. Mr X-ray vision boundary ump must have gone to spec savers for the super duper multifocals like I wear.

Looking at the photo the boundary umpire is looking to the left of the goal post, so his line of vision wasn't even to where the Freo player was. I think the AFL should exclude boundary umpires from goal line decisions.

[Triple B]

I'm long past blaming umpires for losses, but if I was to ever make a comeback to that particular pastime, this would have been the game.

In the mid noughties the Weagles had a charmed run from the umps at Subi, getting every 50/50 and the visitors get donuts. Now it seems that with Freo being the dominant WA side, they now get the outrageously one sided home town decisions which seem particularly prevalent at Subi and have been for well over a decade...

[Nico]

Some observations from the game.

Reid is around the ground ruckman and should only be used in defence in that role. He gave us an enormous amount in the second half. Very Teasdale like.
Lloyd is now our number one midfield distributor. The disposal of Parker and Kennedy are way below his level.
Lloyd's gut running is outstanding.
Cunningham should be banished to the 2's and traded.
Tippett should always play FF.
Rohan should always start and play up forward. Is very dangerous at the fall of the ball. Tippett plays FF, Franklin CHF with Rohan at their feet. Gives very dangerous structure. Messing around with Tippett creates too much instability in the structure. Rohan and McGlynn provide the quick forward pressure.
Not getting a lot of effective ball use from Kennedy.
Need another quality back man.
Jack needs to play 4 quarters.

[Conor_Dillon]

It should be said that Reid wasn't playing ruck at any stage...he was playing midfield and using his leap to jump third man up. This was a great move by Horse as it really nullified Sandilands and in turn the Fremantle midfield.