Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Actually, being an umpire I can confirm the rule is as follows:
If a player is having a shot for goal and their own runner runs through the mark, the player having a shot still has his shot.... If an opposition player runs through the mark that is 50m... Kosi should have been allowed the shot on goal.. Extremely poor decision, they should know better
According to the laws of the game a free shall be paid if:
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;
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
Our local club got one against us last week. if you are having a shot no runner can be in the 50. Just dumb and I reckon RL would have been pissed but probably not as pissed as Clarkson.
plugger66 wrote:Our local club got one against us last week. if you are having a shot no runner can be in the 50. Just dumb and I reckon RL would have been pissed but probably not as pissed as Clarkson.
But the thing is that he was not interfering in any play Kosi was still going back to get ready for the kick.
plugger66 wrote:Our local club got one against us last week. if you are having a shot no runner can be in the 50. Just dumb and I reckon RL would have been pissed but probably not as pissed as Clarkson.
But the thing is that he was not interfering in any play Kosi was still going back to get ready for the kick.
Question is why would you risk it? Because you reckon you've got a better handle on technicalities than the ump?
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
plugger66 wrote:Our local club got one against us last week. if you are having a shot no runner can be in the 50. Just dumb and I reckon RL would have been pissed but probably not as pissed as Clarkson.
But the thing is that he was not interfering in any play Kosi was still going back to get ready for the kick.
Not allowed in when having a shot at goal because you could be taking up space.
If our runner was in the wrong, it was stupidity of the highest order.
I can take it if the play moves towards the runner and he gets stuck near the ball, but this was a set shot!
STRENGTH THROUGH LOYALTY.
''I still get really excited, and I've got the '66 thing up on the wall in a frame … You look at it and think: one day, we want to achieve that.''- Arryn Siposs
What about a runner who is giving a player water, or a message, or medical attention? 50m penalty? Does seem strange, certainly, the commentary team thought it was an incorrect decision.
degruch wrote:What about a runner who is giving a player water, or a message, or medical attention? 50m penalty? Does seem strange, certainly, the commentary team thought it was an incorrect decision.
You cant do any of that when you are having a shot at goal. Medical attention is obviously different.
Was it paid because the runner was inside the 50 or because the runner ran through the mark?
If the latter, I sympathise with the runner to an extent because Kosi's run-up is ridiculously long and those runners are in a constant frenzy trying to remember crucial messages and who to relay them to.
Beej wrote:Was it paid because the runner was inside the 50 or because the runner ran through the mark?
If the latter, I sympathise with the runner to an extent because Kosi's run-up is ridiculously long and those runners are in a constant frenzy trying to remember crucial messages and who to relay them to.
degruch wrote:What about a runner who is giving a player water, or a message, or medical attention? 50m penalty? Does seem strange, certainly, the commentary team thought it was an incorrect decision.
not sure that's true. they thought it was unjust, but i don't think any of them have a handle on the minutiae of the rules so they wouldn't know if it was incorrect or not.
on my counting that's the third time this year our runner has cost us possession - he needs to be more aware of what's going on - running that close to kosi and the hawthorn dude was fraught with danger - we deserved to get penalised, much as it irks me to say it.
Jiggster wants to know just ONE thing; the runners name wouldn't happen be Peter Hoare would it? Because this runner is becoming a bigger serial pest!!!!
Beej wrote:Was it paid because the runner was inside the 50 or because the runner ran through the mark?
If the latter, I sympathise with the runner to an extent because Kosi's run-up is ridiculously long and those runners are in a constant frenzy trying to remember crucial messages and who to relay them to.
The message is NOT crucial, being aware of what is going on in the play, and especially a set on shot on goal IS crucial.
The runners failure was so crucial that it was the difference between winning and a draw.
As of course were other errors the players and umpires made.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
lendog heaven wrote:on my counting that's the third time this year our runner has cost us possession - he needs to be more aware of what's going on - running that close to kosi and the hawthorn dude was fraught with danger - we deserved to get penalised, much as it irks me to say it.
We have two runners and this was not the one who infringed last time.
Ivy was on SEN at the end of Ross' interview and they said to her "do you have anything to say to Ross", and she said "Do something about the stupid runner" Everyone laughed. Ross said something, though couldn't hear it over the laughing. He was certainly annoyed by another Runner incident and in his post match they asked him and he said he had given feedback....immediately!!
Feels like the 5th or 6th time its happened rather than the third. Though only one other was in such a bad time like last night. I think the others had less impact on the game. Also we have two runners and the one last night was not the same one as the last two.
"At the end of the day, a coach and a fitness adviser doesn't make a good football team, they're not the only ones who got us to two Grand Finals." Lenny Hayes. 27/9/2011.
Beej wrote:Was it paid because the runner was inside the 50 or because the runner ran through the mark?
If the latter, I sympathise with the runner to an extent because Kosi's run-up is ridiculously long and those runners are in a constant frenzy trying to remember crucial messages and who to relay them to.
but why was he ...alone amongst 50000 fans......unaware that kossi was kicking for goal....
.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.
( God help me)
