|
Who has the Joe Daniher moutheye picture?
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 10:36 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:08
|
|
|
realbez posted:Sydney cheated Sorry mate, haven't you heard the news? Only Hawthorn cheats thanks to the umpires, every other team is pure as snow.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
You Am I posted:Sorry mate, haven't you heard the news? Only Hawthorn cheats thanks to the umpires, every other team is pure as snow. Oh
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:22
|
|
|
 Now docking at Glenferrie
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:24
|
|
|
 Oh... Ok
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:27
|
|
|
Sydney cheated today, though
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:29
|
|
|
They did win by three points. Checks out imo
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:34
|
|
|
This was gamesmanship http://m.afl.com.au/news/2016-05-01/filthy-leppitsch-questions-stretcher-rule-after-loss
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:45
|
|
|
TG-Chrono posted:
That's very funny. Well done @Bolta10
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:45
|
|
|
Collingwood drew their last breath and just let go in the fourth quarter. <3 Lecca
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 10:12
|
|
|
Exactly double their score, neat. EDIT: Hmmm I'm tipping Melbourne next week, this feels weird. Chairchucker fucked around with this message at 10:20 on May 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
"Nic Naitanui has eclipsed his previous record of 12 hitouts-to-advantage against Collingwood set in Round 22, 2012 with 19 in this match. This also equals his career-best mark in this category, set previously against Essendon in Round 11, 2015." I think he's fully over his injury now guys
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 10:20
|
|
|
Late in the Eagles Pies game Kennedy snapped the ball which rebounded off LeCras' boot and went through for a goal, umpire called it touched on review 
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 10:48
|
|
|
If we keep going up the ladder after a loss we are a lock for top 4
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 10:54
|
|
|
snaeksikn posted:Late in the Eagles Pies game Kennedy snapped the ball which rebounded off LeCras' boot and went through for a goal, umpire called it touched on review The review came back umpire's call - initial call was touched.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
glasnost toyboy posted:The review came back umpire's call - initial call was touched. Surely they could allow the system enough flexibility to stop retarded poo poo like that from happening. Or are umpires to stupid to be granted any kind more autonomy than is absolutely necessary
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 11:29
|
|
|
Very proud that this year Melbourne get to be The One, In One and Twenty-One.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 11:38
|
|
|
I don't know, the review system seems fine to me. If it's that obvious that it came off his foot then they wouldn't say "umpire's call", they'd just call it a goal. If they're not sure then it seems silly to overturn the decision. Disclaimer: I haven't actually seen the footage. On the other hand, I see why Brisbane are filthy about the stretcher thing. I honestly think someone's done it as a tactic. Whether it's the runner, or if he got instruction from a coach, who knows, but it just seems really convenient to me and it legitimately alters the likelihood of Brisbane reclaiming the lead right towards the end of the match.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 11:43
|
|
|
Yeah, the Sydney thing is really hosed. I'm not sure how to stop it though. Not super comfortable with changing it so stretchers only come on at the next stop of play rather than stopping play when they are needed.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 11:46
|
|
|
That's just a crazy conspiracy theory, I suppose now you're going to try and tell me one of the 19 Swans players on the ground managed to collude and make it happen too
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 11:49
|
|
|
cmndstab posted:I don't know, the review system seems fine to me. If it's that obvious that it came off his foot then they wouldn't say "umpire's call", they'd just call it a goal. If they're not sure then it seems silly to overturn the decision. LeCras was running in front of Kennedy when he kicked the ball, LeCras ducked as it was kicked but there was a clear deflection, so the goal umpire requested a review as he thought Kennedy's kick was touched by a teammate. They did the review and the ball clearly hit LeCras' heel but it also had clearly missed touching his back on the way through, so it should have been called a goal to LeCras. The review ump instead went back with Umpires call, which was originally touched so it counted as as a behind. It's a bit of a waste of having a score review system when they can review a rare instance like this and still come up with the incorrect result because of the process they have in place. e: the clip is up at http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-05-01/five-talking-points-west-coast-v-collingwood near the bottom of the article. snaeksikn fucked around with this message at 11:59 on May 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 11:53
|
|
|
I swear there was a rule about once a stretcher comes on you have to use it and the player can't come back on for a certain amount of time, not that that matters right at the end. Assign the AFL integrity unit to investigate lol
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 11:53
|
|
|
Love all the pissing and moaning about North being on top. I'm not sure who they have to beat before people will admit they are a decent team. It was meant to be the dogs but it's looking like the dogs have been severely overrated because they are media darlings. It's funny how no one has really mentioned we were down a player for 3 quarters and Sam Wright also injured for most of the game.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 11:59
|
|
|
All over the place like a madman's poo poo this week! 
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:00
|
|
|
Seriously, axe the AFL writers and give me their loving job. They're hopeless.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
The Deadly Hume posted:All over the place like a madman's poo poo this week! How the gently caress did Freo gain ground? Or did they just become even more Lyony?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:05
|
|
|
Diet Crack posted:How the gently caress did Freo gain ground? Or did they just become even more Lyony?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:07
|
|
|
Ah that makes more sense then.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
Applecross WC. posted:Love all the pissing and moaning about North being on top. smacking the hawks around should do it. i feel the roos are a bit like west coast last year, beating everyone in front of them and its the oppositions fault they keep losing
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:10
|
|
|
snaeksikn posted:LeCras was running in front of Kennedy when he kicked the ball, LeCras ducked as it was kicked but there was a clear deflection, so the goal umpire requested a review as he thought Kennedy's kick was touched by a teammate. That's not a problem with the system or the process, though. The process is clear - check to see if there is evidence of a clear goal or a clear behind. If not, go with the umpire's call. If it's clearly missed his back, then the third umpire should call it a goal. That's what the process says. If he's not sure that it's missed his back, then he can't overturn the umpire's decision, that would be stupid. The footage in that link cuts off midway through the review but it's not 100% obvious to me that the ball hasn't slid up and clipped his back on the way through. Might have been clearer if the clip went longer though. If it is clear, like you say, then the third umpire hosed up. Nothing to do with the process.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:15
|
|
|
Applecross WC. posted:Love all the pissing and moaning about North being on top. I assume you mean somewhere else and not here, because they haven't been mentioned once in several pages here.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:17
|
|
|
It didn't touch his back (you can still see the shadow of the ball and it never alters it's spin), but may have come off of his boot - which should be a goal anyway. No issue with the process though. It's a weird one to judge irrespective of what actually happened. Lecca's dribble goal was way cooler anyway. Diet Crack fucked around with this message at 12:27 on May 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:25
|
|
|
Diet Crack posted:It didn't touch his back (you can still see the shadow of the ball and it never alters it's spin), but may have come off of his boot - which should be a goal anyway. No issue with the process though. It's a weird one to judge irrespective of what actually happened. It's probably a goal, but personally I like the fact that the thrid umpire decided it wasn't conclusive enough and said so instead of rolling the same footage back and forwards for three minutes expecting a different result before guessing. If you can't definitively tell from a run through of each available angle then don't get involved.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:37
|
|
|
Diet Crack posted:Lecca's dribble goal was way cooler anyway. I dunno, kicking a goal from that far out by having it deflect off your boot would actually be pretty cool IMO.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:42
|
|
|
So do you think Hodgey actually eats Lite n Easy
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
I'd want to hit people if I had to survive on Lite n Easy.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:48
|
|
|
I thought his endorsements had dried up after he stopped being the face of SALT ROOM
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 12:48
|
|
|
I tried a Lite and Easy meal once reduced in price, and it was essentially like eating wet cardboard. I doubt it could've been remotely healthy for you.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 10:36 |
|
|
Diet Crack posted:It didn't touch his back (you can still see the shadow of the ball and it never alters it's spin), but may have come off of his boot - which should be a goal anyway. No issue with the process though. It's a weird one to judge irrespective of what actually happened. I disagree, I don't think it's definite enough to overrule. From that footage it could possibly have touched his back. You do know that you can cast a shadow on a thing you're touching, right?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 22:17
|
|