Sydney vs Collingwood Match Thread

[Ludwig]

I think the free kick against Paddy McCartin for walking over the goal line was correct. The rule is set out in TMP article posted earlier in this thread though the writer came to (what I think is) the wrong conclusion.

18.11 DELIBERATE RUSHED BEHINDS
18.11.1 Spirit and Intention
Players shall be encouraged to keep the football in play.

18.11.2 Free Kicks - Deliberate Rushed Behinds
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:

(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;
(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;
(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or
(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full.

Paddy marked the ball. Thereby by the rules relating to marks (and the allowed actions of other players) he had time and space to dispose of the football (his prior opportunity). By playing on Paddy allowed the defender to close in and pressure him, which is when Paddy stepped over the line.

The umpire penalised Paddy under part (c) above, which seems correct to me. A tough but good lesson for Paddy. Fortunately it wasn’t decisive in the match outcome.

Also someone above queried whether it should have been a ball-up, but the umpire was correct:

18.11.3 Taking Free Kick
A Free Kick awarded under Law 18.10.2 shall be taken from the middle of the Goal Line if the football crossed the Goal Line or hit the goal post, or at the point where the football crossed the Behind Line.

(18.10.2 includes a free kick where a player “Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Boundary Line and does not demonstrate sufficient intent to keep the football in play”.

It's not clear to me if all or only 1 or the conditions in a, b and c have to be in place. In most of the instances of conceding a point that I've seen the defensive player has had time and space to dispose of the ball, but is under sufficient pressure to concede the point. Even if it was a mark and called play on, it would seem that if a player is within the 9 metres and putting pressure on the player with the ball, then the player should be able to concede the point. The relevant time when this rule should become operative should be when the umpire calls 'play on'. I don't think it's relevant that there was a mark preceding a play on call, because the other conditions were still operative at the time. The way I see it, all 3 of a, b and c would have to be in effect for it to be a penalty.

[MattW]

Ps to my post above re the free kick against Paddy: on reflection, I think Paddy did understand the part of the rule set out (so my comment re lesson learned is not relevant).

What Paddy said to the umpire was that he (Paddy) hadn’t heard the mark called (presumably because of the crowd noise). That would explain both why Paddy went to play on and then why he stepped over the goal line.

Even if he did hear the mark call, did he play on? Seemed to only go backwards; not sure play on was called?

[Meg]

It's not clear to me if all or only 1 or the conditions in a, b and c have to be in place.

Just one of the listed conditions need to be in place for a free kick to be awarded.

This would be clearer if each condition had been separated by an ‘or’ (as is the last one).

[MattW]

It's not clear to me if all or only 1 or the conditions in a, b and c have to be in place. In most of the instances of conceding a point that I've seen the defensive player has had time and space to dispose of the ball, but is under sufficient pressure to concede the point. Even if it was a mark and called play on, it would seem that if a player is within the 9 metres and putting pressure on the player with the ball, then the player should be able to concede the point. The relevant time when this rule should become operative should be when the umpire calls 'play on'. I don't think it's relevant that there was a mark preceding a play on call, because the other conditions were still operative at the time. The way I see it, all 3 of a, b and c would have to be in effect for it to be a penalty.

I think you can infer from the 'or' between c and d that they're all alternatives.

[Meg]

Sydney vs Collingwood Match Thread

Even if he did hear the mark call, did he play on? Seemed to only go backwards; not sure play on was called?

Yes, ump very clearly called play on, twice, just before Paddy walked over the goal line.

I now think that Paddy didn’t realise he had been awarded the mark (didn’t hear ump’s whistle which is quite audible on video). So in Paddy’s mind he wasn’t playing on from a mark, he had just taken possession of the ball.

[MattW]

Yes, ump very clearly called play on, twice, just before Paddy walked over the goal line.

If that's the case, did you see whether the defender moved prior to that call? It was the defender's movement that seemed to lead Paddy to crab backwards.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

[MattW]

I don't think we can take Clarke into the finals. His ball usage is too much of a liability.

I had the same thought. But who would you select to replace him?

All options have flaws.

I actually think Sheldrick might be the best bet; just a shame there isn't time to give him a runway of games into the finals.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

[Meg]

If that's the case, did you see whether the defender moved prior to that call? It was the defender's movement that seemed to lead Paddy to crab backwards.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Each action was immediately successive: Paddy marked, ump blew whistle for mark (which Paddy didn’t realise), Paddy played on., and ump called play on (twice). The ump hadn’t had time to set the mark or call ‘stand’ so I don’t think it matters where the defender was.

[Ludwig]

Just one of the listed conditions need to be in place for a free kick to be awarded.

This would be clearer if each condition had been separated by an ‘or’ (as is the last one).

Then it was a free kick, because he did have time and space to dispose of the ball. But so often players are holding the ball near the goal line and waiting to be taken over the line or getting a bit of pressure, they have plenty of time and space, but no free kick gets called.

[MattW]

Each action was immediately successive: Paddy marked, ump blew whistle for mark (which Paddy didn’t realise), Paddy played on., and ump called play on (twice). The ump hadn’t had time to set the mark or call ‘stand’ so I don’t think it matters where the defender was.

I just watched it. The defender never 'stands'. He runs over the mark before the play-on is called. I think it should have been 50.

EDIT: I just re-read your post I hadn't realised the umpire needs to call 'stand' in order for that rule to apply. The defender ran the over the mark before play-on was called - is it your understanding that's OK if 'stand' hasnt been called? I had thought the 'stand' call was a reminder/ warning - I didn't realise it actually triggered the operation of the rule.

[Meg]

The period of play from when Rampe prevented a certain goal to the Heeney tap and one hand drop to his left boot for a goal by Buddy is the best of the year I reckon and the crowd acknowledged it bigtime. It was maniacal defence and a opportunistic magical goal.

[emoji3581][emoji3581][emoji3581] magical play from one end to the other.

Rampe’s amazing run and lunge. Heeney’s extraordinary gut running and his footy intelligence. And Buddy’s genius!

[Maltopia]

Just watched the replay, woohoo!!!

Great game by Fox. Reid was playing like a man possessed in the first half with his attack on the ball and opponent. Hayward was great in the first half in particular with his strong marking.

Franklin's three goals! Two snaps from the pocket, and that last goal - the scoop of the ball onto the boot, wow!

Only one who looked out of place was Clarke with his fumbly disposals and turnovers. In the first half, there was about a two minute passage where he had five bad disposals in a row.

Now for next week where we can secure 2nd place through superior percentage!

[KTigers]

Fantastic analysis of the game in TMP.....with stuff on our impenetrable defence, the deliberate rushed behind (the ump was WRONG), Rowbottom (it's as if he writing it to TB) and more.

Sydney v Collingwood - Mongrel Talking Points - The Mongrel Punt

Yep, this guy really gets it. Our defense in the early part of the last quarter was extraordinary. Collingwood are a really good team and will not
roll over. They threw everything they had at our defense and normally it works for them. It's part of the reason they have won so many tight
games this year. They just keep coming, you have to give them credit for it. But our defenders were just awesome. A lot of that play was on
the Brewongle side of the ground where we sit. It was quite something to watch unfold.

[KTigers]

Gotta feel for those thousands of Collingwood supporters who are currently making their way back to Melbourne.

Really? What about the ones with their COLA reference banner. I'd make them walk back to Vic carrying their stupid banner.
We don't want it here fouling up our landfill. They could use it as a tarp to sleep under on the side of the road each night.

[stellation]

Then it was a free kick, because he did have time and space to dispose of the ball. But so often players are holding the ball near the goal line and waiting to be taken over the line or getting a bit of pressure, they have plenty of time and space, but no free kick gets called.

I thought it was likely technically a free kick to the letter of the law, but as you said they very rarely call much more obvious instances of players having time to dispose of the ball and just waiting for pressure to come. My main frustration was that Paddy did not take his time and then get called to play on by the umpire, where you could argue he had time to dispose of it; he stepped off his line almost immediately, didn't take the option and the umpire was quick on the whistle to call him to play on.