The St Kilda runner strikes again

[meher baba]

FFS!!!!

[Stillwaiting]

This is truly amazing that this crap happened again

[stinger]

those that read the general forum would be aware that i'm in favour of the reintroduction of capital punishment for certain offences.......i'd start with the runner......ffs......talk about a lack of common sense...let alone a lack footy smarts....what a f***-wit......turned the game around....if they are not allowed to hang him...at least give him the sack.....

[sasaint]

This runner should be replaced immediatly. He is a repeat offender and possibly cost us the game as he changed the momentum early in the game. He also runs around like a headless chook and even after giving away a free and a certain goal nearly got involved in the game 15 mins later.

[mr six o'clock]

cannot understand why we have such dud runners , obviously they must be volunteers

[True Blue Sainter]

I know the rules, but I think it's a bloody harsh penalty. It's OUR kick. Schneider was lining up for goal FFS. OUR runner running across the mark doesn't influence the play at all. Reversing the kick seems far too harsh the penalty. I think it should just be play on, but if they want a punishment, it should just be a ball up.

[Sainternist]

The runner offended when Shneids took that set shot?

I wondered what that was all about.

I thought they took it off hime for time wasting.

[FortiusQuoFidelius]

This runner should be replaced immediatly. He is a repeat offender and possibly cost us the game as he changed the momentum early in the game. He also runs around like a headless chook and even after giving away a free and a certain goal nearly got involved in the game 15 mins later.

Was a different runner tonight than the usual offender....

[stinger]

The runner offended when Shneids took that set shot?

I wondered what that was all about.

I thought they took it off hime for time wasting.

yep...ran straight between sneids and the man on the mark...just as he started his run in....

[SainterK]

Is that even a free to the opposition though?

Hate to to be captain obvious, but how is that even interference when it's our shot on goal?

Did he impede the Geelong players arm waving while manning the mark?

[perfectionist]

Is that even a free to the opposition though?..

Yes. Posted this in first thread on subject:

The fact that Adam Schneider took a 60 metre run up didn't help. Razor Ray let it go (a mistake). The other ump picked it up, one of the few things he got right on the night. Our runners spent more time on the ground than most players. Mostly it was to tell them when to come off. Strangely, the Geelong players were able to work that out for themselves, and they were a midfield player down. Our other runner, who appears both older and slower than me, almost intruded into play a few times. Recently retired ex-players who can run might have a better idea of where the ball is.

[Beno88]

Before you all get stuck into our runner, the decision was incorrect. If the OPPOSITION runner enters the protected zone then it is 50 mtrs however your own runner is allowed to run through he just can't stay in the area. The controlling umpire (Chamberlin) correctly told the runner to clear the area, however the umpire 50 mtrs away incorrectly paid a free.
The only person at fault was the umpire.

[Bernard Shakey]

Is that even a free to the opposition though?

Hate to to be captain obvious, but how is that even interference when it's our shot on goal?

Did he impede the Geelong players arm waving while manning the mark?

He delayed the game. Lucky we didn't get a 50 as well

[mick13]

It was the correct decision and it's happened before.

It's just stupidity, I mean I can understand him thinking he can walk through the mark. But he actually freaking got in the way of Schneider as he was running up to kick the goal.

That's not not knowing the rules, that's just being bloody idiotic.

[Beno88]

It's not a free. All the commentators on the radio confirmed that after the match.

[perfectionist]

Before you all get stuck into our runner, the decision was incorrect. If the OPPOSITION runner enters the protected zone then it is 50 mtrs however your own runner is allowed to run through he just can't stay in the area. The controlling umpire (Chamberlin) correctly told the runner to clear the area, however the umpire 50 mtrs away incorrectly paid a free.
The only person at fault was the umpire.

100% wrong. No official may enter the area of "play". The penalty is a either a free kick to the opposing team where they do not have the ball or a fifty metre penalty to the opposing team where they have the ball. As I said, Razor Ray got it wrong and the other ump got that one right.

[perfectionist]

It's not a free. All the commentators on the radio confirmed that after the match.

Just proves what we already know.

It's Law 15.10.1 (b) (A free kick shall be awarded against)...
an Official of the Team or such other person of the Team
who may from time to time be permitted onto the Playing
Surface, intentionally, recklessly or negligently interferes
with the football, a Player of the opposition Team, an
Umpire or general play;

They are interfering with general play by going through the protected area.

[Enrico_Misso]

If a teammate runs across the mark it is no free kick.
Why should it be different for a runner?

[perfectionist]

Why should it be different for a runner?

See my edit. It's one of the rules.

[R. Harvey 3 votes!]

This runner should be replaced immediatly. He is a repeat offender and possibly cost us the game as he changed the momentum early in the game. He also runs around like a headless chook and even after giving away a free and a certain goal nearly got involved in the game 15 mins later.

d

Bahahaha....cost us the game? We lost the game because we are simply not good enough to be beat a Geelong team without Selwood and also Bartel for 3 and a 1/2 quaters! What a load of rubbish!

[desertsaint]

way back when in the time b.d. runners had a place in footy.
now just get rid of them altogether or use only to call players off.