Rd 13 vs St Kilda @ SCG - Match Thread

[rojo]

Good to know Blakey has not got concussion. He is the bright light in our back half at the moment. His enforced absence would be ..... depressing!

[giant]

Not sure if anybody saw the clip from Kane Cornes this week where he pointed out numerous examples of the “breach” Sheldrick committed in our game that weren’t paid.

It wasn’t the point of his piece (he was talking about there being no replacement for Brad Scott in the AFL so there is no rudder with football decisions) but I think it makes it more egregious that the 50 was paid just after Gulden and also just after the marking infringement against Hickey wasn’t paid a 50.

I saw two in a minute in the Pies game.

And this is the issue as I see it for AFL fans and the umpiring at the moment - we see highly technical 50m paid at critical times, but someone crashes into a back of player very late and there's nothing paid. We see flavour of the month frees paid like the Butler dangerous tackle, but see blatant breaches of the most fundamental skills of the game go unpunished. We see obvious and flagrant holding and other interference of some players go unwhistled but other players who get the benefit of free kicks for the most trivial of contact. Sure, thus it's always been to some extent, but it seems very bad indeed at the moment, and that umpiring performance last week was among the very worst I've ever seen - there must have been upwards of a dozen clangers every quarter.

Frankly, we deserve better.

- - - Updated - - -

If 2023 has taught us anything, it is how quickly things can change in football. Absolutely ludicrous to write off 2024 as 'blooding new players'. We haven't suddenly gone from grand finalists to fallen off a cliff. It is a deeply disappointing season this year sure - but we can easily rebound next year and be right back up there again next year.

Well said!

[MattW]

Wow - Lance has not kicked a fourth quarter goal in 2023.

https://twitter.com/sirswampthing/status/1668540846927654912?t=dTV2kj0SN2RuSZT2HgSXWA&s=19

[Industrial Fan]

Hey Industrial Fan, I haven't seen the clip from Kane Cornes so can you tell us what is the "breach" he was referring to.

The 50m was seemingly against Sheldrick coming into to man the mark through the protected zone.

This was the clip I was referring to

https://www.facebook.com/109246229094084/posts/pfbid0RTUmAWixDZYVGfx1thaPrMD9cPVqu2A2kVjamVVkqYpSmLubPwrdQ4ytEVoS9iPNl/?app=fbl

- - - Updated - - -

Hey Industrial Fan, I haven't seen the clip from Kane Cornes so can you tell us what is the "breach" he was referring to.

The 50m was seemingly against Sheldrick coming into to man the mark through the protected zone.

This was the clip I was referring to

https://www.facebook.com/109246229094084/posts/pfbid0RTUmAWixDZYVGfx1thaPrMD9cPVqu2A2kVjamVVkqYpSmLubPwrdQ4ytEVoS9iPNl/?app=fbl

[Meg]

Rd 13 vs St Kilda @ SCG - Match Thread

Re the two very costly 50 metre penalties last week (which have been referenced various times in this thread).

I too thought the match had some horrible umpiring, both for and against us.

But (as I said earlier) the 50 metre penalty against Sheldrick was correct. Sheldrick ran in from the side cutting off the St K player’s option of swinging out and playing on. It is irrelevant whether the St K player wanted, or had any intent, to do that. It is a clear breach of the stand and protected area rules - whether we like those rules or not.

In the Gulden case, I have now watched the replay multiple times and am no longer as aggrieved as I was originally by this decision.

If you watch and listen to the replay (below) it was Lloyd who (unsuccessfully) contested the mark with Owens. Gulden was standing facing the contest, presumably hoping to crumb the ball if it came to ground. As a result it was Lloyd who landed on The Mark and who seemingly at first intended to stand it (he raised his arms). So it was Lloyd, not Gulden, whom the ump told to ‘stand’.

Lloyd then ran off to defend closer to the goal square and Gulden turned around to take over. The problem was that Gulden was well in front of the mark - which he should have known as he had been looking straight at the marking contest.

I still think/agree it was harsh not to give Gulden more time to adjust. But Gulden at the best made a mistake. Or at the worst was deliberately trying to hold up play to allow Swans players time to organise their defence.

I expect St K supporters might suggest the latter. And that might have been what the ump thought.

There are learnings for Swans players from both 50 metre penalties. I hope they don’t repeat these errors in future matches.

https://twitter.com/foxfooty/status/1666767931760607232?s=21

[crackedactor 01]

Re the two very costly 50 metre penalties last week (which have been referenced various times in this thread).

I too thought the match had some horrible umpiring, both for and against us.

But (as I said earlier) the 50 metre penalty against Sheldrick was correct. Sheldrick ran in from the side cutting off the St K player’s option of swinging out and playing on. It is irrelevant whether the St K player wanted, or had any intent, to do that. It is a clear breach of the stand and protected area rules - whether we like those rules or not.

In the Gulden case, I have now watched the replay multiple times and am no longer as aggrieved as I was originally by this decision.

If you watch and listen to the replay (below) it was Lloyd who (unsuccessfully) contested the mark with Owens. Gulden was standing facing the contest, presumably hoping to crumb the ball if it came to ground. As a result it was Lloyd who landed on The Mark and who seemingly at first intended to stand it (he raised his arms). So it was Lloyd, not Gulden, whom the ump told to ‘stand’.

Lloyd then ran off to defend closer to the goal square and Gulden turned around to take over. The problem was that Gulden was well in front of the mark - which he should have known as he had been looking straight at the marking contest.

I still think/agree it was harsh not to give Gulden more time to adjust. But Gulden at the best made a mistake. Or at the worst was deliberately trying to hold up play to allow Swans players time to organise their defence.

I expect St K supporters might suggest the latter. And that might have been what the ump thought.

There are learnings for Swans players from both 50 metre penalties. I hope they don’t repeat these errors in future matches.

https://twitter.com/foxfooty/status/...760607232?s=21

The problem I have with that is I constantly hear from the umpires back one meter or back 2 meters etc. The umpire did not even give Gulden a warning!!

[Blood Fever]

Re the two very costly 50 metre penalties last week (which have been referenced various times in this thread).

I too thought the match had some horrible umpiring, both for and against us.

But (as I said earlier) the 50 metre penalty against Sheldrick was correct. Sheldrick ran in from the side cutting off the St K player’s option of swinging out and playing on. It is irrelevant whether the St K player wanted, or had any intent, to do that. It is a clear breach of the stand and protected area rules - whether we like those rules or not.

In the Gulden case, I have now watched the replay multiple times and am no longer as aggrieved as I was originally by this decision.

If you watch and listen to the replay (below) it was Lloyd who (unsuccessfully) contested the mark with Owens. Gulden was standing facing the contest, presumably hoping to crumb the ball if it came to ground. As a result it was Lloyd who landed on The Mark and who seemingly at first intended to stand it (he raised his arms). So it was Lloyd, not Gulden, whom the ump told to ‘stand’.

Lloyd then ran off to defend closer to the goal square and Gulden turned around to take over. The problem was that Gulden was well in front of the mark - which he should have known as he had been looking straight at the marking contest.

I still think/agree it was harsh not to give Gulden more time to adjust. But Gulden at the best made a mistake. Or at the worst was deliberately trying to hold up play to allow Swans players time to organise their defence.

I expect St K supporters might suggest the latter. And that might have been what the ump thought.

There are learnings for Swans players from both 50 metre penalties. I hope they don’t repeat these errors in future matches.

https://twitter.com/foxfooty/status/...760607232?s=21

Stop being rational Meg!

[Meg]

The problem I have with that is I constantly hear from the umpires back one meter or back 2 meters etc. The umpire did not even give Gulden a warning!!

If you watch/listen to the video, the ump did give Gulden instruction: he blew his whistle twice, called out ‘Errol, come back here’ and ran across to indicate where The Mark was to be set. It was at that point that Gulden turned around to move back. (Actually it was more a shuffle back.)

The ump then made a lightning-fast decision that Gulden wasn’t adjusting his stand quickly enough and called the 50-metre penalty. That is the bit that is arguably harsh - we really have no grounds for complaint about the umpiring of any of the rest of this incident.

As I said earlier, I suspect taking the chain of events as a whole, at that point the ump decided Gulden was deliberately trying to slow down play. That may have been quite unfair. However Gulden does need to be more attentive to correct positioning when standing The Mark in future. And to move quickly if told to come back.

[stellation]

The problem I have with that is I constantly hear from the umpires back one meter or back 2 meters etc. The umpire did not even give Gulden a warning!!

That is something I find quite frustrating, as well. I appreciate umpires are human and some might miss things others might see, or may bring their personality out in different ways out on the ground- but I don't think it would be that hard to get some consistency in this scenario.

Every umpire: "Player x, back 2 metres" (count to 2) "Player x, back 2 metres" (count to 1, blow whistle if not moving), or
Every umpire: "Player x, back 2 metres" (count to 2, blow whistle if not moving)

Whatever they come up with, harsh or lenient- as long as it's consistent.

[liz]

If you watch/listen to the video, the ump did give Gulden instruction: he blew his whistle twice, called out ‘Errol, come back here’ and ran across to indicate where The Mark was to be set. It was at that point that Gulden turned around to move back. (Actually it was more a shuffle back.)

The ump then made a lightning-fast decision that Gulden wasn’t adjusting his stand quickly enough and called the 50-metre penalty. That is the bit that is arguably harsh - we really have no grounds for complaint about the umpiring of any of the rest of this incident.

As I said earlier, I suspect taking the chain of events as a whole, at that point the ump decided Gulden was deliberately trying to slow down play. That may have been quite unfair. However Gulden does need to be more attentive to correct positioning when standing The Mark in future. And to move quickly if told to come back.

But he'd already told him "to stand". And if you move once told to stand, it's a 50m penalty against.

The umpire needs to be comfortable with where the player is before calling "stand". Or once he's called "stand", he has to ignore any misgivings he has about where the player is standing.

[Meg]

Rd 13 vs St Kilda @ SCG - Match Thread

But he'd already told him "to stand". And if you move once told to stand, it's a 50m penalty against.

The umpire needs to be comfortable with where the player is before calling "stand". Or once he's called "stand", he has to ignore any misgivings he has about where the player is standing.

Liz, if you watch/listen to the video the umpire’s call to ‘stand’ was to Lloyd, who was originally on The Mark and who shaped to stand it. Gulden then botched his attempt to take over the stand from Lloyd. That was his error not the umpire’s.

In my view lots for the players to think about in this incident.

Ps: in fact there was possibly/probably grounds for a 50-metre penalty the moment Lloyd ran off after being called to stand. Gulden was standing in the protected zone that had already been delineated by the umpire’s call to Lloyd, and he made no attempt to move out of it.

Pps: And “if you move once told to stand, it's a 50m penalty against” then the umpire should have called a 50-metre penalty as soon as Lloyd ran off. The umpire gave us some latitude there which we didn’t capitalise on because Gulden didn’t stand in the right place.

[Scottee]

If you watch/listen to the video, the ump did give Gulden instruction: he blew his whistle twice, called out ‘Errol, come back here’ and ran across to indicate where The Mark was to be set. It was at that point that Gulden turned around to move back. (Actually it was more a shuffle back.)

The ump then made a lightning-fast decision that Gulden wasn’t adjusting his stand quickly enough and called the 50-metre penalty. That is the bit that is arguably harsh - we really have no grounds for complaint about the umpiring of any of the rest of this incident.

As I said earlier, I suspect taking the chain of events as a whole, at that point the ump decided Gulden was deliberately trying to slow down play. That may have been quite unfair. However Gulden does need to be more attentive to correct positioning when standing The Mark in future. And to move quickly if told to come back.

The decision that made me feel that the umpires were not acting in our best interests was the one where Gulden marked at chf, and it was only after he had stopped and was preparing to turn around and take his kick that the umpired called not 15. Umpires have been consistently calling not 15 before the ball is marked for years now.Sus!

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Markwebbos]

Rowbottom’s game against the Saints was his best performance ever according to Champion Data including PBs of 17 contested possessions, 9 clearances.

[Roadrunner]

Rowbottom’s game against the Saints was his best performance ever according to Champion Data including PBs of 17 contested possessions, 9 clearances.

I miss TheBloods-is he ever coming back?
Thought Rowy was very good……….????

[Markwebbos]

I miss TheBloods-is he ever coming back?
Thought Rowy was very good……….????

I had him in mind when posted!