Match Day Rnd 14 Sydney V Essendon. SCG 19.50 pm.

[liz]

Errr, since when has it been a punishable offence to know where your opponent is? I don't think that it's written anywhere in the rulebook, that hearing them coming is okay, but using your eyes to get a better idea of where they are is verboten. I suspect that sort of misinterpretation of the rules, has been popularised by commentators of the quality of of Brian Taylor, Luke Darcy, etc.

I don't much like that interpretation but it is consistently paid as a shepherding free.

[dejavoodoo44]

I don't much like that interpretation but it is consistently paid as a shepherding free.

Yes, but Naismith was going for the mark himself. Can you actually shepherd for yourself?

[barry]

The third picture is the proof, look at where Towers is in relation to Hurley.

He is clearly in the protected area. He isn't following a player nor is he moving away as per the rules.

Decision seems correct to me, a lack of awareness proves costly in this case.

You seem a bit too eager to crucify towers

- - - Updated - - -

Absolutely disgraceful decision again!! becoming tired of this.

It can't be against towers but did Rohan creep up on the mark or something?

[Industrial Fan]

Yes, but Naismith was going for the mark himself. Can you actually shepherd for yourself?

His other choice was to keep running under the ball. If he stopped his opponent getting to the contest then fine, but he didn't block him. If anything he was pushed away from the drop.

Happy with a play on call, but it wasn't a shepard.

[Scottee]

The third picture is the proof, look at where Towers is in relation to Hurley.

He is clearly in the protected area. He isn't following a player nor is he moving away as per the rules.

Decision seems correct to me, a lack of awareness proves costly in this case.

I caught up with the video. At all times Towers was moving out of the protected area . He did slow down to look around, but kept moving out of the area the whole time.That was an umpire created 50m penalty! Becoming far too regular an accurrence for my liking.

Sent from my SM-T805Y using Tapatalk

[Beerman]

I caught up with the video. At all times Towers was moving out of the protected area . He did slow down to look around, but kept moving out of the area the whole time.That was an umpire created 50m penalty! Becoming far too regular an accurrence for my liking.

Sent from my SM-T805Y using Tapatalk

That 50m call was very puzzling. I thought it must be an off-the-ball incident (or perhaps abuse). Commentators didn't seem any the wiser either.

[Meg]

That 50m call was very puzzling. I thought it must be an off-the-ball incident (or perhaps abuse). Commentators didn't seem any the wiser either.

I too thought that Rohan must have unwisely chosen his words in telling the umpire what he thought about an umpiring decision.

[707]

Errr, since when has it been a punishable offence to know where your opponent is? I don't think that it's written anywhere in the rulebook, that hearing them coming is okay, but using your eyes to get a better idea of where they are is verboten. I suspect that sort of misinterpretation of the rules, has been popularised by commentators of the quality of Brian Taylor, Luke Darcy, etc.

Never ever put quality and the names Brian Taylor and Luke Darcy in the same sentence! Two complete muppets and Derwayne Russell makes a trio of muppets!

[dejavoodoo44]

I too thought that Rohan must have unwisely chosen his words in telling the umpire what he thought about an umpiring decision.

No, he was just standing the mark and he didn't seem to be saying anything. Certainly nothing came over the audio. Nor was there any direction from the umpire to get back a metre or so. That and the fact that he wasn't moving forward at all, really does make me think that the 50 was paid against Towers. Totally unjustly in my opinion, as he just made the merest feint towards Hurley, while generally moving away from Hurley.

[giant]

No, he was just standing the mark and he didn't seem to be saying anything. Certainly nothing came over the audio. Nor was there any direction from the umpire to get back a metre or so. That and the fact that he wasn't moving forward at all, really does make me think that the 50 was paid against Towers. Totally unjustly in my opinion, as he just made the merest feint towards Hurley, while generally moving away from Hurley.

Yep, like the Reg Grundy "palm caress" that became a push in the back to McKernan this was a rule interpretation that was 18 months too late - haven't seen anything like this paid all year.

[AnnieH]

Well.
Wasn't that a bit exciting?
I really feel sorry for the THREE ROWS of people in front of us who left with five minutes to go.

That behind call on Buddy's goal was the worst decision in umpiring history.
The umpires clearly don't like us. They think we don't know the rules.

[ugg]

Officially Towers was recorded as the culprit that gave away the 50m.

[Boddo]

Officially Towers was recorded as the culprit that gave away the 50m.

Not surprised. I was a big defender of him for a long time but I'm done with him. Has excellent pace but doesn't use it enough n has the most rediculous brain fades. Good depth player n that's it

[barry]

Not surprised. I was a big defender of him for a long time but I'm done with him. Has excellent pace but doesn't use it enough n has the most rediculous brain fades. Good depth player n that's it

You cant blame towers when we all agree it was an umpire mistake. Sheesh!

[Boddo]

You cant blame towers when we all agree it was an umpire mistake. Sheesh!

I meant that it wouldn't surprise me one bit for him to give a 50 away. I never said I agree that it was 50. Sheesh