Tweet
Bombers were pretty woeful, but Port were something to behold last night. Connor Rozee was phenomenal and JHF bursting out of packs was impressive too.
-
-
I only saw the second half, but Essendon were very poor against port. No effort. Missing tackles. Just standing around.
It's not the coach, they've had 3 or 4 coaches for the same result.. it's the list.Comment
-
Fremantle ahead by 2 kicks with a few minutes to go. Carlton manage to get ahead with 40 seconds to go with a mark in front of goal which they contested.
They got pinged for umpire abuse and give up a free kick right in front instead of a centre bounce chance to get the lead back!Comment
-
Adelaide Oval rockin' with The Presets.....fantastic. Saw them live in Melbourne about 13 years ago....gee that went bloody quick!Comment
-
It shouldn't have been paid a mark because the ball hit the arm of the Fremantle player. You can see it deviate. Freo were unlucky, but you can't abuse the umpire. They had 40 seconds to try and regain the lead, instead the game was over after giving them another shot at goal.
By the way, what were Fremantle wearing?Comment
-
Possibly the correct decision, would have been to have overturned the first goal on review, while Kennedy was lining up for his shot, but still letting him take the shot because the dissent ruling stood? I can't work out if that would have been more or less controversial?
Either way, I am starting to get a bit sick of crucial decisions seeming to consistently go Carlton's way.Comment
-
The standard for paying a mark if another player might have touched the ball in flight and the standard for a possible touched shot at goal are different. We regularly see marks paid where several pairs of hands probably touch the ball in a pack but the player who gains control is paid the mark. There is no mechanism in the game to review anything other than scores (or potential scores). If there were, we'd be reviewing hundreds of decisions and non-decisions every game.
Once the umpire paid a mark, it was a mark. End of story. The umpire wasn't going to change his mind. Just as an umpire doesn't change his mind once he's awarded a 50m penalty, even if the offending player stares at him in disbelief with his arms stretched out. (Looking at you, Harley Reid.) I don't know what was said by the Freo players. But they were carrying on like pork chops after one decision that probably wasn't in the top 50 grey area/ debatable decisions paid in that game alone (as a typical game, not because I was sitting there counting them).
I know the umpires went over the top with the "umpire dissent" frees and 50m penalties when the crackdown initially came in. But now they've wound it so far back that players can get away with almost anything if they don't like a decision. I don't think the game is better for it.Comment
-
They paid the mark. The Carlton guy put it through and they hit the lead. The chances of Freo kicking another goal in the
remaining 45 secs of the game are very slim even if there was no 50M and free kick against them for dissent with the umpires.
Both teams are pretty good and we'll have to be going at 100% to beat them I reckon.Comment
-
Agreed. After the mark and goal, Carlton had it won. Both teams had their moments to win and it was pretty close for the whole game. The lesson for us is that we can’t beat either if we don’t play four solid quarters, which we find very hard to do. We usually drop at least one quarter and against strong sides this may not work as the gap can be too much to bridge. That said, it must be very hard to play with top intensity for a whole game- but they are AFL full time professionals aren’t they?Comment
-
The Tigers have started very brightly against the Saints. Makes last week’s effort look not so bad, but I wonder if they can maintain it given their outs.
Gesendet von iPhone mit TapatalkComment
-
Watched the Gold coast v Giants game and I am wondering how is possible we could beat either side based on yesterday's performance.?Comment
Comment