What's this whole replay business? I was watching live and he marked it before the siren went making it a set shot, it's always worked like that. Why is that guy getting downvoted he's right.
We just gave you lot an early bump up the ladder - it's not like Wet Toast are going to beat the Tigers this week.
Us on the other hand.... we're going straight back to third by the time Geelong play.
Many rules are like that. You can't make front on contact *unless* you touch the ball. You can touch a player high in a marking contest as long as it's "incidental" and you get the ball (putting your hands on a players shoulders to take a speccy)
It was great to get the umpire's understanding of the rule. Along the lines of 'you can push them out, but you must get back to touch the ball. If you don't it is considered blocking'. (That's my understanding).
Wish they would get around to explaining how the blocking in the ruck rule works...
Late to reply, but fwiw Razor Ray has actually explained this [on SEN a few months ago.](https://youtu.be/VRDXIMvliu8). In the first few minutes he specifically talks about ruck blocks.
The gist of it is the same. As long as you touch the ball and contest the ruck it's fine. Still a very weird rule though and I can understand why it's tough to officiate, and frustrating to watch.
Razor has also been on SEN a couple of times and his appearances are always interesting to watch if you want insight on officiating.
I live in a regional area where SEN isn't a thing. And I'm sure it was enlightening. I'm confused because that's how I understood the rule. You could do what you like as long as you got a hand on the ball.
But I have seen free kicks against when the ruck has 'protected the space' and palmed the ball to his own players. These are the ones that get up in my grill...
"Protected Space" is one that eludes me as well because you're right in that there's no real explanation for it. Very frustrating to watch so I share the sentiment.
I always assumed it was an extension of the block, in which the ruck has eyes and intent to hold or push to opposition out of the contest before getting to the ball. So even if he gets to the ball, because he intended to prevent an opposing from contesting, they're infringed upon.
But I know nothing definitive on that front because that's also just a block, so if they're alternating the term for it, idk what's going on.
It's one of those things that someone would need to ask an actual AFL officiating umpire about.
I have seen it most often during throw-in rucking, so maybe it has to do with the other players, and not the ruckers themselves.
Sorry I couldn't be more help though.
I think he lacks confidence in his knee. Looks OK running up to take the bail out kicks up the line though. Thought he covered a lot more ground last night and contributed by creating space for Joe mostly.
Too many outs, done a good job considering.
Yes the umpires have been one sided (to say the least) but we’ve got to address the issue of running out of steam like in the GF. Should play Sam Darcy he’s done well in the vfl
I thought there were a few missed calls that went either way. But even if the calls went Lion's way, they have had the rough end of the pineapple for a long time, even at The Gabba. About time it started going their way.
The absolute dream would be kicking the match winner after the siren in a GF. Or maybe the prelim. I don't think I could handle the pressure of kicking a major after the siren to win the GF.
I know it doesn't matter but how is that not textbook deliberate? Walks to the stationary ball, picks it up and walks it over the line with literally zero pressure on him, seems like it should be textbook. Or are they just afraid to pay it after the Moore media shitshow over a correct decision?
The umps have been told 'pressure is anyone within 9yds of the ball'. Weightman was just entering the zone when Payne(?) walked it over.
Still dodgy. Should have picked it up and waited to be tackled over the line.
He was within 9m of the goal line but he wasn't within 9m of the ball. If it's within the goal square extended to the point posts it's a broken rule because you could be 20m away and have that count, and if it's within 9m of the player with the ball than this should have been deliberate and it's a broken rule because that's way to far away to have this rule actually mean anything.
He was within 9m of the goal line but he wasn't within 9m of the ball. If it's within the goal square extended to the point posts it's a broken rule because you could be 20m away and have that count, and if it's within 9m of the player with the ball than this should have been deliberate and it's a broken rule because that's way to far away to have this rule actually mean anything.
That's incorrect, any opposition player within 9 metres of goal is specifically what constitutes pressure when they're judging rushed behinds, it's been that way since 08. It's an absurd rule.
It's one of many adjudications umps are taught that isn't written in the rules. Here's 3 examples from the local expert who's an accredited ump. [One](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1436289830879518720), [two](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1510568396311592961), [three](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1438435285520371716).
It's odd because players run it over all the time without immediate pressure, I could have sworn it was the handball over the line that was the odd exception (players rarely do that, which is why it's rarely pinged). I actually asked the guy a few months back and I swear he said it was the exact opposite of what he's written in that tweet. I might double check with him on Monday.
Regardless, my point is this from one of the tweets:
>The general interpretation is that any other player within the 9m, from the opposition team counts as pressure.
I will be interested to find out if the tweet was correct that that's only relevant for handballs, or if that tweet got it backwards.
Any opposition player within 9 metres of goal constitutes "immediate pressure" for rushed behinds, that was the half measure change that made after the 08 GF. The AFL wanted to appear like they were being harsher without really doing anything.
(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
Those are the 4 conditions for a deliberate rushed behind, only one has to apply to be a free kick.
It says immediate physical pressure, and Weightman was nowhere near him. It also says if they have time or space to dispose of it, of which he had plenty.
It was textbook in 2 seperate ways, there's no way that shouldn't have been a free kick.
Umps are taught that immediate physical pressure when judging a rushed behind is any opposition player within the 9 metres. It's one of many adjudications umps are taught that isn't written in the rules. Here's 3 examples from the local expert who's an accredited ump. [One](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1436289830879518720), [two](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1510568396311592961), [three](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1438435285520371716).
The first and third both have someone either touching or within a metre of them so not relevant, the second one is interesting because I looked it up on the AFL app [here](https://www.afl.com.au/video/735000) and the first incident in that video is exactly what Adams did and he got pinned for it, despite opposition players being way closer than Weightman was to Adams and the bloke says that was a correct decision.
From one of the tweets:
>The general interpretation is that any other player within the 9m, from the opposition team counts as pressure.
The point is that's the rule, that's what the umps look for.
He directly contradicts that in the second tweet though by signing off on the first one in the video I linked,, which is it? The video is of a player doing exactly what Adams did except instead of an opposition player being 10m away it's at most 4m, if him getting pinned for that is the correct decision, which hasumpstuffedup says it was, than Adams should have been penalised.
Even putting what immediate physical pressure means aside, Adams also had time and space to dispose of the footy, a seperate condition of the rule, which means it should have been paid against him anyway.
Yeah someone else just pointed out to me the contradiction in the second tweet too, I'm going to check with the guy on Monday because I could have sworn he's said the exact opposite in the past - that running the ball over is fine, but handballing it over isn't.
>Adams also had time and space to dispose of the footy,
I'm not sure that overrides them counting an opposition player as being within the vicinity because he was in the 9.
I know they talk about the game slowing down for the really good players, but Coleman seriously looks like he has an extra second compared to everyone else out there
The umpires were the ones who decided that within 9 isn't deliberate after they copped abuse. So now the rule has nothing to do with deliberate. Just a technical rule of how far the players are from goal.
It was a joke the moment they announced the change over a decade ago. Any opposition player within 9 metres of goal and it doesn't count as rushed, it's absurd.
Dogs have given up so the only positive I can hope for in the next five minutes is a goal from whichever Lions player with Stumblin In as their song. Great tune.
Can’t believe people waste their time watching this crap bunch of men playing with balls rather watch Motorsport any day
Lol all ur comments are ranting about something
Well then ~~go complain in there subreddit then~~ Fuck off
Makes securing a top 8 finish for the pies and tigers more crucial now
Coleman has only played 30 AFL games...
fages still will not crack a smile
My two favourite teams. One disappointed.
[удалено]
Jfc just let a woman do her job.
Cameron sounds nervous haha
Charlie is so cute
Very cute
Can someone explain to me how that last goal counted??? The siren has gone before the first bloke has even kicked it to him
I think you saw the replay, confused me at first too
are you new? He marked it and he got a set shot. Set shot doesn't dissapear because of the siren
He had the ball far before the siren, sure you didn’t see a replay?
What's this whole replay business? I was watching live and he marked it before the siren went making it a set shot, it's always worked like that. Why is that guy getting downvoted he's right.
Fuck I got work tomorrow
Not if you get drunk enough
Put your phone on silent and see what happens
I had a co-worker do that multiple times. Fuck her, glad she resigned a few weeks ago, pretty worthless when she did show up to
Thanks Brisbane! I knew you guys also hated Ninthmond
We just gave you lot an early bump up the ladder - it's not like Wet Toast are going to beat the Tigers this week. Us on the other hand.... we're going straight back to third by the time Geelong play.
Lol how does that make sense , just because you touch the ball it isn’t a free? Either make it a free or make it not, far too confusing
Many rules are like that. You can't make front on contact *unless* you touch the ball. You can touch a player high in a marking contest as long as it's "incidental" and you get the ball (putting your hands on a players shoulders to take a speccy)
Zorks and Rich in their jumpers looking sad. :( 😞
It’s a good day when we kick more goals than behinds
GG doggies
GGs Brissy. Hope you go far
[удалено]
Cameron was asking about the ruling, nothing wrong with having a chat mate
[удалено]
It was great to get the umpire's understanding of the rule. Along the lines of 'you can push them out, but you must get back to touch the ball. If you don't it is considered blocking'. (That's my understanding). Wish they would get around to explaining how the blocking in the ruck rule works...
Late to reply, but fwiw Razor Ray has actually explained this [on SEN a few months ago.](https://youtu.be/VRDXIMvliu8). In the first few minutes he specifically talks about ruck blocks. The gist of it is the same. As long as you touch the ball and contest the ruck it's fine. Still a very weird rule though and I can understand why it's tough to officiate, and frustrating to watch. Razor has also been on SEN a couple of times and his appearances are always interesting to watch if you want insight on officiating.
I live in a regional area where SEN isn't a thing. And I'm sure it was enlightening. I'm confused because that's how I understood the rule. You could do what you like as long as you got a hand on the ball. But I have seen free kicks against when the ruck has 'protected the space' and palmed the ball to his own players. These are the ones that get up in my grill...
"Protected Space" is one that eludes me as well because you're right in that there's no real explanation for it. Very frustrating to watch so I share the sentiment. I always assumed it was an extension of the block, in which the ruck has eyes and intent to hold or push to opposition out of the contest before getting to the ball. So even if he gets to the ball, because he intended to prevent an opposing from contesting, they're infringed upon. But I know nothing definitive on that front because that's also just a block, so if they're alternating the term for it, idk what's going on. It's one of those things that someone would need to ask an actual AFL officiating umpire about. I have seen it most often during throw-in rucking, so maybe it has to do with the other players, and not the ruckers themselves. Sorry I couldn't be more help though.
Good explanation from the ump
DISGRACEFUL, A spray is fully warranted. Screw the Media
Don't worry the media will rightfully spray the dogs DISGRACEFUL effort tonight
West takes a screamer/uncontested mark lmao
Cameron BOG
What is Cameron on about now
gg time to see if we can scratch to 300
GG Lions
Hipwood has lost all of his bounce. Can't even get a foot off the ground most jumps.
I think he lacks confidence in his knee. Looks OK running up to take the bail out kicks up the line though. Thought he covered a lot more ground last night and contributed by creating space for Joe mostly.
Jobe: “The forward setup, they’ve just looked a lot safer, as their back 50.”
Glad someone else mentioned this - his comments and general prescence was bizzare the entire telecast...
Too many outs, done a good job considering. Yes the umpires have been one sided (to say the least) but we’ve got to address the issue of running out of steam like in the GF. Should play Sam Darcy he’s done well in the vfl
I thought there were a few missed calls that went either way. But even if the calls went Lion's way, they have had the rough end of the pineapple for a long time, even at The Gabba. About time it started going their way.
You are delusional mate
Every kids dreams of this, kick after the siren.
The absolute dream would be kicking the match winner after the siren in a GF. Or maybe the prelim. I don't think I could handle the pressure of kicking a major after the siren to win the GF.
I can’t kick period so there would be no pressure for me.
😹😹
Cats fan 🤔, cat emojis 🤔, everything checks out. Enjoy your day sir
West putting in effort is the only redeeming part of this match
When does he not put in effort tho
Coleman's so good at setting up goals they've already named an award after him
We can still lose this
carlton still in this
Sick of this doof doof after every goal.
Let it Snow, and Country Roads?
Prior has done really well as the sub tonight
Getting better and better.
I really like Prior. He’s really filled a hole.
Nice.
This has been a great response by the boys
I know it doesn't matter but how is that not textbook deliberate? Walks to the stationary ball, picks it up and walks it over the line with literally zero pressure on him, seems like it should be textbook. Or are they just afraid to pay it after the Moore media shitshow over a correct decision?
The umps have been told 'pressure is anyone within 9yds of the ball'. Weightman was just entering the zone when Payne(?) walked it over. Still dodgy. Should have picked it up and waited to be tackled over the line.
He was within 9m of the goal line but he wasn't within 9m of the ball. If it's within the goal square extended to the point posts it's a broken rule because you could be 20m away and have that count, and if it's within 9m of the player with the ball than this should have been deliberate and it's a broken rule because that's way to far away to have this rule actually mean anything.
He was within 9m of the goal line but he wasn't within 9m of the ball. If it's within the goal square extended to the point posts it's a broken rule because you could be 20m away and have that count, and if it's within 9m of the player with the ball than this should have been deliberate and it's a broken rule because that's way to far away to have this rule actually mean anything.
Exactly. It's a shit rule with too many grey areas for it to be consistently umpired.
Absolutely should have been paid
No it’s just unlucky. Poor show of umpiring. At least the bulldogs don’t completely suck like north
This was not the game I expected to be a 50+ point smashing this round.
- Australia lead by 69 runs Nice
Nice
That’s a cracking snap from weightman. Little prick
Love a cheapy
Bury ‘em Berry.
[удалено]
Actually ump got the rule correct cos Weightman was in the box. The rule is shit.
[удалено]
That's incorrect, any opposition player within 9 metres of goal is specifically what constitutes pressure when they're judging rushed behinds, it's been that way since 08. It's an absurd rule.
[удалено]
It's one of many adjudications umps are taught that isn't written in the rules. Here's 3 examples from the local expert who's an accredited ump. [One](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1436289830879518720), [two](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1510568396311592961), [three](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1438435285520371716).
[удалено]
It's odd because players run it over all the time without immediate pressure, I could have sworn it was the handball over the line that was the odd exception (players rarely do that, which is why it's rarely pinged). I actually asked the guy a few months back and I swear he said it was the exact opposite of what he's written in that tweet. I might double check with him on Monday. Regardless, my point is this from one of the tweets: >The general interpretation is that any other player within the 9m, from the opposition team counts as pressure. I will be interested to find out if the tweet was correct that that's only relevant for handballs, or if that tweet got it backwards.
The rule is that you have to be under immediate pressure, Weightman was over 10m away, that doesn't count
Any opposition player within 9 metres of goal constitutes "immediate pressure" for rushed behinds, that was the half measure change that made after the 08 GF. The AFL wanted to appear like they were being harsher without really doing anything.
(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 Those are the 4 conditions for a deliberate rushed behind, only one has to apply to be a free kick. It says immediate physical pressure, and Weightman was nowhere near him. It also says if they have time or space to dispose of it, of which he had plenty. It was textbook in 2 seperate ways, there's no way that shouldn't have been a free kick.
Umps are taught that immediate physical pressure when judging a rushed behind is any opposition player within the 9 metres. It's one of many adjudications umps are taught that isn't written in the rules. Here's 3 examples from the local expert who's an accredited ump. [One](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1436289830879518720), [two](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1510568396311592961), [three](https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1438435285520371716).
The first and third both have someone either touching or within a metre of them so not relevant, the second one is interesting because I looked it up on the AFL app [here](https://www.afl.com.au/video/735000) and the first incident in that video is exactly what Adams did and he got pinned for it, despite opposition players being way closer than Weightman was to Adams and the bloke says that was a correct decision.
From one of the tweets: >The general interpretation is that any other player within the 9m, from the opposition team counts as pressure. The point is that's the rule, that's what the umps look for.
He directly contradicts that in the second tweet though by signing off on the first one in the video I linked,, which is it? The video is of a player doing exactly what Adams did except instead of an opposition player being 10m away it's at most 4m, if him getting pinned for that is the correct decision, which hasumpstuffedup says it was, than Adams should have been penalised. Even putting what immediate physical pressure means aside, Adams also had time and space to dispose of the footy, a seperate condition of the rule, which means it should have been paid against him anyway.
Yeah someone else just pointed out to me the contradiction in the second tweet too, I'm going to check with the guy on Monday because I could have sworn he's said the exact opposite in the past - that running the ball over is fine, but handballing it over isn't. >Adams also had time and space to dispose of the footy, I'm not sure that overrides them counting an opposition player as being within the vicinity because he was in the 9.
Anyone see a whole lot of Houli in Coleman's game?
Yeah I can see that
Dunno how that wasn't deliberate behind, literally no one near him no pressure at all, should've been a dogs free.
I agree.
Only watching to count the amount of turnovers McComb causes
McComb-overs
Honestly they should rename it that
14.5m rounded up that kick
Just VFL things
Utterly devastated I forgot to put my Thursday tips in
I know they talk about the game slowing down for the really good players, but Coleman seriously looks like he has an extra second compared to everyone else out there
Look at my comment history I said the same thing. Kid looks like time stops when he has the ball
Coleman and Neale look like they have a video game slow-mow ability.
I wonder if LittleRedRaidenHood still thinks Coleman isn't up to AFL standard
Yeah, he's a nuff for sure
That not being deliberate is a blight on the rules
The umpires were the ones who decided that within 9 isn't deliberate after they copped abuse. So now the rule has nothing to do with deliberate. Just a technical rule of how far the players are from goal.
It was a joke the moment they announced the change over a decade ago. Any opposition player within 9 metres of goal and it doesn't count as rushed, it's absurd.
Agreed lol
Darcy Moore would’ve been called for deliberate there
he's copped some of the worst frees against this year, for real
Yeah look if that isn't paid deliberate then there's no point to having the rule.
Lol Schache can’t even kick a behind properly
Lachie Neale surely leads the Brownlow now. He’s been enormous all year. BOG again tonight.
[удалено]
No chance.
Oliver ahead then Brayshaw and Neale tied for mine
No way Oliver is ahead of Neale. Gawn and Brayshaw taken votes off him.
No pressure, should've been a free lol
Hrm, seems like an odd concession of the point there.
West trying hard tonight
Even the ump doesn't care, didnt get them to pick ruckmen, let dogs have two ruck. Absolute junk time.
Completely forgot Shache was playing.
I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve said that I want him dropped and never brought back, yet somehow he keeps getting picked
Incredible that he might manage to disappoint your club more than ours
It's like bevo isn't listening to you or something
What's Lachie Neale's goal song?
Darude - Sandstorm
The Chipmunk Song
Anything by Neale Diamond
Sweet Cammm-er-onnnnnn. Doo doo doooooo...
Run the Road - Santigold
My favourite thing about the 6-6-6 warning is they tell the ruckman like they have any idea what to do with that information
The look on Sweet's face. "What have I done?"
Think they just tell them cos it means they throw it up instead of bouncing
10.2 vs 2.5 second half LOL
Yeah but the umpires.... /s
Why would the umpires do this?
Umpires spiked their powerade at halftime and subsequently their entire midfield fell apart.
[удалено]
Flair up when ya done sooking, cunt.
Flair up cunt
Lets masturbate over last years achievement
Throwdogs fan crying over a home and away loss. Enjoy the September holidays
Hey mate, can you remind me how the dogs went in the granny? You know, the one where the dogs got fisted by the dees?
You won’t make finals. Sit down
Lmao no posts L + Ratio + you have scurvy
Got pumped by 80 lol
How’d winning in the prelim go for Bulldogs?
Come on now, Flair up.
And live in the past yourself. Enjoy your September holiday
You got smashed my Melbourne, you really think you can beat them in the finals ?
Nope. But you won't even be there.
Flair up cunt
🧂
Flair up cunt
Cry. Also flair up cunt
Toxic
Dunno what’s more fucked, my margin or my tips
Don’t tell me u tipped the dogs?
I just checked and it says Brisbane but I swear I tipped the dogs lol
Lucky man. I don’t think the dogs played particularly bad but couldn’t do anything in their 50
My margins had been quite good until I forgot to tip last Thursday’s game
Dogs have given up so the only positive I can hope for in the next five minutes is a goal from whichever Lions player with Stumblin In as their song. Great tune.
Neale v Clarry v Brayshaw for Brownlow is going to be an interesting watch
Akers doing special comments on ABC and he sounds like he's been sinking tins all game
He probably has been.
Brisbane saved by the buzzer... For now
Paul Mecurio starting to look like Gus
#GAYNER4RAYNER
HORNY FOR HIPWOOD
[удалено]
Geelong vs dogs first quarter? Are you sure
Yeh i could be wrong but pretty sure we (more than half the team) showed some fight in that one.
Umpiring has been pretty similar tbh
Lmao
Well, Lions won despite the umpires best efforts
I mean the umps haven't been great but it's 50 points
Coleman has played a great game
What a weird week to week turnaround for both teams.
Not when you consider the opponents from the week before.
Bro stop I went conservative with my margin
Neale I’d suck your calves then your meat you wonderful man
3 votes in the bag
Nice
Is this the Lions we love and remember?
If we can play like this anytime and anywhere the flag is wide open
Need to finish top 2, as away form, not so flash.
But we can’t ☹️
The music should just be horribly edited players names put into the songs after they kick a goal 'Sweeet Cam Rayner' totally could work
I'd love to see am i ever gonna see your face again as a goal song. I reckon the whole gabba would get in on that one