word play at MRP

[saintbrat]

David Armitage cleared contact
David Armfield - bump within 5m of ball, no forceful high contact & bump not unreasonable in circumstances.
(

[Viking3]

So that means the umpire was wrong in awarding the free kick to Carlton!?

[plugger66]

So that means the umpire was wrong in awarding the free kick to Carlton!?

Why is that?

[Dr Spaceman]

Did they check Armfield for a hot spot?

[gringo]

Umpires are always wrong in awarding Carlton free kicks.

[saintbrat]

The other suspensio of note is Cornes -1week

[busso mick]

Did they check Armfield for a hot spot?

Speaking of which Doc have you ever seen Umpire Erasmus and Geoff Gieschen in the same room?

[Viking3]

So that means the umpire was wrong in awarding the free kick to Carlton!?

Why is that?

It was a statement and a question ("!?").
The umpire paid a down field free against Armo for the bump.
MRP said it was within 5 metres and there was no high contact. That would imply it was legal, would it not??

[ozrulestrace]

What about Pavilich and the player who laid out Ballantine with the high elbow?

[elizabethr]

Don't be confused by his high tackle in Walker and then subsequent 59 m penalty conceded.

[stinger]

So that means the umpire was wrong in awarding the free kick to Carlton!?

yes...happened right in front of me...i was also listening to the 3aw commentators at the time...said that roo was the one who should have got the freekick.....


we may have led the free kick count 18 to 16...but they got 4 goals from free kicks...we got none...as usual.....

after roo bagging the ump on air in the doggies v dons game...saying the maggot didn't understand the game...doubt if he will ever get a free kick again in his career.....

[plugger66]

So that means the umpire was wrong in awarding the free kick to Carlton!?

Why is that?

It was a statement and a question ("!?").
The umpire paid a down field free against Armo for the bump.
MRP said it was within 5 metres and there was no high contact. That would imply it was legal, would it not??

When did the match reveiw say there was no high contact?

[perfectionist]

MRP

"Contact between St Kilda’s David Armitage and Carlton’s David Armfield from the fourth quarter of Saturday’s match was assessed. Carlton’s Sam Rowe has the ball and Armfield runs past his teammate. As Rowe handballs the ball to Kade Simpson, Armfield is met with a bump from Armitage. After viewing all available footage and receiving a medical report from the Carlton Football Club, it was the view of the panel the bump was within five metres of the ball, there was no forceful high contact made and the bump was not unreasonable in the circumstances. "

I suspect the insertion of the word "forceful" was part of the umpire protection program.

[saintbrat]

Cornes out for the week

AFL Tribunal‏@AFLTribunal
The jury has decided there are no exceptional and compelling circumstances. The penalty will therefore stay at 168.75 points.