The St Kilda runner strikes again
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7220
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 516 times
The St Kilda runner strikes again
FFS!!!!
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
- Jonathan Swift
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4432
- Joined: Sun 25 May 2008 5:39pm
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.....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4324
- Joined: Fri 17 Nov 2006 1:05am
- Has thanked: 56 times
- Been thanked: 244 times
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1906
- Joined: Fri 19 Mar 2004 5:47pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 17 times
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.
The Saints are coming!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11351
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 12:57am
- Location: South of Heaven
- Has thanked: 1344 times
- Been thanked: 459 times
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 641
- Joined: Fri 19 Sep 2008 2:19pm
- Been thanked: 8 times
Was a different runner tonight than the usual offender....sasaint wrote: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.
yep...ran straight between sneids and the man on the mark...just as he started his run in....Sainternist wrote: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.
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9053
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 353 times
Yes. Posted this in first thread on subject:SainterK wrote:Is that even a free to the opposition though?..
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.
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2378
- Joined: Tue 10 Jul 2007 11:14am
- Location: Bentleigh East
- Has thanked: 272 times
- Been thanked: 628 times
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.
The only person at fault was the umpire.
- Bernard Shakey
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11240
- Joined: Sun 18 Mar 2007 11:22pm
- Location: Down By The River 1989, 2003, 2009 & 2013
- Has thanked: 126 times
- Been thanked: 137 times
He delayed the game. Lucky we didn't get a 50 as wellSainterK wrote: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?
Old enough to repaint, but young enough to sell
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.
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.
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9053
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 353 times
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.Beno88 wrote: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.
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9053
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 353 times
Just proves what we already know.Beno88 wrote:It's not a free. All the commentators on the radio confirmed that after the match.
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.
Last edited by perfectionist on Sun 19 Jun 2011 12:53am, edited 2 times in total.
- Enrico_Misso
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11662
- Joined: Tue 13 Jun 2006 12:11am
- Location: Moorabbin Chapter of The Royal Society of Hagiographers
- Has thanked: 315 times
- Been thanked: 720 times
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9053
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 353 times
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Mon 04 Aug 2008 7:46pm
- Been thanked: 7 times
dsasaint wrote: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.
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!
When Harvey played his first game in 1988, I was a 12yo wearing short pants and struggling with my readin', writin' and 'rithmetic in grade eight. Now, I'm a father of three and a retired AFL player. And he's still going. Amazing! - Michael Voss
- desertsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10426
- Joined: Sun 27 Apr 2008 2:02pm
- Location: out there
- Has thanked: 190 times
- Been thanked: 713 times