Match Thread. Swans v Geelong.

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • stevoswan
    Veterans List
    • Sep 2014
    • 8534

    Originally posted by aardvark
    At 14.41 in the first qtr Gryan Meyers kicks a goal for the Cats from a kick that Richo reckons didn't go 15 meters. Does that even it up?
    Well, that makes at least 3 goals I count now that Geelong should not have got. Yeah, I reckon that easily evens it up.

    Comment

    • MattW
      Veterans List
      • May 2011
      • 4180

      Ok, this makes it pretty clear.

      Comment

      • aardvark
        Veterans List
        • Mar 2010
        • 5685

        Originally posted by stevoswan
        Well, that makes at least 3 goals I count now that Geelong should not have got. Yeah, I reckon that easily evens it up.
        Yep and the free against Lloyd for an arm chop with 7 to go in the third which resulted in a goal to Close was another. The replay clearly showed Lloyd doesn't make contact.

        Comment

        • Meg
          Go Swannies!
          Site Admin
          • Aug 2011
          • 4828

          Originally posted by MattW
          Originally posted by MattW
          Thanks for posting this Matt. It is very clear and puts to rest the alternative being put forward that the ump called ‘touched’ rather than ‘not 15’.

          The umps would be damned one way or the other. Whateley criticises the ump for making the call early: he wants them to wait until the player catches the ball and then decide if it was 15. Sounds sensible but in a situation where it is indeed not 15 it would disadvantage the player with the ball.

          Cameron fell to the ground as he marked (which very often occurs when a player has flown for the ball). Had the ump then called ‘not 15’ Cameron would have had no chance of playing on before being jumped on by several Swans players.

          This is what happened to Hayward when he hadn’t heard a ‘touched’ call. And then he was penalised for HTB.

          So the solution is not as straightforward as Whateley suggests.

          Comment

          • Industrial Fan
            Goodesgoodesgoodesgoodes!
            • Aug 2006
            • 3317

            I maintain there was no touched call for Hayward. The umpire called his fumble when he stood up as trying to play on. It was only play on from that point - and the field mic picks up the umpire saying you elected to play on.
            He ate more cheese, than time allowed

            Comment

            • Meg
              Go Swannies!
              Site Admin
              • Aug 2011
              • 4828

              Originally posted by Industrial Fan
              I maintain there was no touched call for Hayward. The umpire called his fumble when he stood up as trying to play on. It was only play on from that point - and the field mic picks up the umpire saying you elected to play on.
              Ok. My point still applies: whatever the reason for the Hayward incident it is illustrative of what can happen when a play-on call is made only at the point at which the player has the ball - as Whateley wants to happen with ‘not 15’ decisions.

              Comment

              • barry
                Veterans List
                • Jan 2003
                • 8499

                Originally posted by MattW
                Does anyone have audio of the "touched" call. ?

                Comment

                • KSAS
                  Senior Player
                  • Mar 2018
                  • 1750

                  Originally posted by barry
                  Does anyone have audio of the "touched" call. ?
                  I must have biaised ears as I was one of those who were certain they could make out touched/play on call watching the replay. Last night's AFL360 evidence makes it clear there was only the Play On call.

                  However I'm annoyed at the media inference that Cameron would've certainly goaled, considering he would've most likely taken the shot post siren on acute angle where he wouldn't be allowed to run around off the mark.

                  Which is why I was peed off when Whateley suggested it would be fair if the Swans lose a game against Brisbane as a result of late umpring error to even things up, but was disappointed that we're not fixtured to play them again.

                  Comment

                  • Sandridge
                    Outer wing, Lake Oval
                    • Apr 2010
                    • 2037

                    All of this "the Swans were lucky" stuff is based on the ridiculous assumption by media personalities that the Cameron decision was the only umpiring mistake made in the game. From what media pundits are saying, you'd think that up until the last 10 seconds, every free kick the umpires paid was correct and that every time they didn't make a call, they got that right too! Geelong's first goal came from a mark paid from a kick that was nowhere near 15 metres. The free kick paid against Lloyd that led to a goal was a shocking decision as well! No mention of any of these instances in the media!

                    To change the subject, I've watched highlights of the game numerous times and the crowd was just magnificent! The reactions to the Papley goal and the final siren were reminiscent of the Nick Davis final! Fantastic stuff!

                    Go Bloods!

                    Comment

                    • Rod_
                      Senior Player
                      • Jan 2003
                      • 1179

                      Final siren has sounded. To many what if's to be counted up if you want to change the result.

                      What if the Swans played better in the first quarter? What if a free here or there was not paid or should have been paid.

                      If the Cats get to change one thing, presume the swans can change something also... We will go second!

                      Comment

                      • Mountain Man
                        Regular in the Side
                        • Feb 2008
                        • 906

                        In looking at the 360 video clip, the tackler around Cameron was
                        .....
                        Papley

                        Comment

                        • baskin
                          Long Term Injury List
                          • Jan 2008
                          • 286

                          Originally posted by Rod_
                          Final siren has sounded. To many what if's to be counted up if you want to change the result.

                          What if the Swans played better in the first quarter? What if a free here or there was not paid or should have been paid.

                          If the Cats get to change one thing, presume the swans can change something also... We will go second!
                          +1

                          Comment

                          • dejavoodoo44
                            Veterans List
                            • Apr 2015
                            • 8449

                            Originally posted by Sandridge
                            All of this "the Swans were lucky" stuff is based on the ridiculous assumption by media personalities that the Cameron decision was the only umpiring mistake made in the game. From what media pundits are saying, you'd think that up until the last 10 seconds, every free kick the umpires paid was correct and that every time they didn't make a call, they got that right too! Geelong's first goal came from a mark paid from a kick that was nowhere near 15 metres. The free kick paid against Lloyd that led to a goal was a shocking decision as well! No mention of any of these instances in the media!

                            To change the subject, I've watched highlights of the game numerous times and the crowd was just magnificent! The reactions to the Papley goal and the final siren were reminiscent of the Nick Davis final! Fantastic stuff!

                            Go Bloods!
                            Nick Davis was doing the ABC radio commentary and I got the impression that he was being flooded by happy memories of playing Geelong.

                            Comment

                            • stevoswan
                              Veterans List
                              • Sep 2014
                              • 8534

                              Originally posted by MattW
                              It certainly does....and I was wrong. In the match replay video, it is hard to make out exactly what he is saying besides 'play on' but I could have sworn I heard the word 'touched'. Like KSAS, I may have been guilty of hearing what I wanted to hear.....hell, we've all been there!

                              Anyway, I couldn't give a rats if the call was wrong, Cameron was no guarantee of kicking a goal and the Cats got at least 3 earlier goals from flatly wrong decisions. Karma can be a bitch.....but we got some good karma on Saturday night.....and we deserved it!

                              Comment

                              • stevoswan
                                Veterans List
                                • Sep 2014
                                • 8534

                                Originally posted by KSAS
                                Which is why I was peed off when Whateley suggested it would be fair if the Swans lose a game against Brisbane as a result of late umpring error to even things up, but was disappointed that we're not fixtured to play them again.
                                That is seriously pathetic from Whatley, a sports journo I have respected a lot over the years. He's certainly become more of one of the Vic boys club since he left the ABC.....very disappointing and immature response.

                                Comment

                                Working...