Slide rule decision on Lenny

[chook23]

errr
chook

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2013-02-04/ ... s-for-2013

clearly says forceful

errr matrix

see my quote from THE OFFICIAL AFL LAWS OF AUSTRALIAN FOOTBALL 2013



the vid and rules book at odds then

[matrix]

correct pluggs
this is an amendment to 15.4.5.a
there is already (i) now there is (ii).... forceful contact

[matrix]

chook its a f****** amendment to that rule you posted

it clearly says it and you can hear it and read it on the screen when its playing, that its an amendment to 15.4.5.a
thee was always what you had in the post
now there is (ii) included in 15.4.5.a

forceful contact below the knees

[chook23]

chook its a f****** amendment to that rule you posted

it clearly says it and you can hear it and read it on the screen when its playing, that its an amendment to 15.4.5.a
thee was always what you had in the post
now there is (ii) included in 15.4.5.a

forceful contact below the knees

there Already is a 15.4.5.a (ii)......below the knees....................maybe ii was amended it was not added

[plugger66]

chook its a f****** amendment to that rule you posted

it clearly says it and you can hear it and read it on the screen when its playing, that its an amendment to 15.4.5.a
thee was always what you had in the post
now there is (ii) included in 15.4.5.a

forceful contact below the knees

there Already is a 15.4.5.a (ii)......maybe ii was amended it was not added

i looked it up. They said in the rule book it isnt a new rule so they didnt requite a rule in there. it is going to be enforced more strictly and part of it is the forceful contact below the knees.

[chook23]

chook its a f****** amendment to that rule you posted

it clearly says it and you can hear it and read it on the screen when its playing, that its an amendment to 15.4.5.a
thee was always what you had in the post
now there is (ii) included in 15.4.5.a

forceful contact below the knees

there Already is a 15.4.5.a (ii)......maybe ii was amended it was not added

i looked it up. They said in the rule book it isnt a new rule so they didnt requite a rule in there. it is going to be enforced more strictly and part of it is the forceful contact below the knees.

makes it very grey then

[matrix]

yup

if you amend a rule then each year have a printable readable copy of the lot in one place imo

[plugger66]

there Already is a 15.4.5.a (ii)......maybe ii was amended it was not added

i looked it up. They said in the rule book it isnt a new rule so they didnt requite a rule in there. it is going to be enforced more strictly and part of it is the forceful contact below the knees.

makes it very grey then

I dont think so. i have seen the video and it is quite obvious what they are trying to pay. The players and umpires have obviously seen it as well. I reckon the umpire made a clear mistake as they do at least 6-8 times a game.

[chook23]

the interpretation of what is FORCEFUL is clearly leading to the mistakes..................or the chance of the umpire making it or being inconsistent when judging.

[matrix]

agreed

[matrix]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/fury- ... 6609584338

Hayes was nabbed after pouncing on the loose ball, his head and shoulders merely brushing, but not moving, the legs of Gold Coast star Jared Brennan, during the second quarter of the hotly contested clash at Metricon Stadium.

[georgie girl]

Crazy interpretation of the rule. Should not have been a free kick. Interesting to see the Gold Coast player remonstrating, clearly thought he was being pinned for head high contact on Lenny. Should have been a play on call.

[Junction Oval]

Thanks Matrix. Having now "read" the formal AFL interpretation rules, I am well armed for "verbal conflict" at the footy this year.

As I said in my earlier pm - commonsense went out the window and a technical decision was made "in error." I don't normally get into umpiring decisions - you win some/lose some, but this being a new rule and an unfair decision, was worth discussing.

No doubt, if we had won, it wouldn't have been a major discussion point.

[BigMart]

Joke.

I used to purposely coach that lower and harder = better and shows you want the footy more.... Keeping your feet is good, but if you have to crack in low, so be it.... And if you can take out an opponent... A bonus.

I asked that every tackle, smother, spoil, HBG was done with intent to be harder than your opponent and hopefully hurt them. So they think twice in the next contest, or hopefully are no longer able to be in the next contest. It's a mans contact sport, injuries happen.

[gringo]

I think it was just a wrong decision. have no idea why thats makes it a bad rule. If it is a corrrect decision then they need to look at it. The reason i think it is a wrong decision is that there was no forceful contact. hardly any contact.

There were at least 3 others that were actual slides that won't paid in that game they usually pay the free to people who drop the knees into the prone player. We should look to kick every prone player in the head to get the free.

[stevie]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/fury- ... 6609584338

Hayes was nabbed after pouncing on the loose ball, his head and shoulders merely brushing, but not moving, the legs of Gold Coast star Jared Brennan, during the second quarter of the hotly contested clash at Metricon Stadium.

Very controversial - referring to Jared Brennan as a 'star'? Lol


But seriously, the NFL brought in a similar rule a few years back when Tom Brady did his ACL after being hit low. Prior to that, it wasnt illegal to smash the QB below the knees. Ok, slightly different than the current AFL rubbish rule but along the same lines.

[kosifantutti]

I thought it was a free. I don't know how the rule is worded but Lenny seemed to roll over with the ball so that his body would come into contact with his opponents legs. When the rule was first introduced I thought Lenny would have to make an alteration to his game style.

There were many worse decisions last night. Stanley being called to play on when he clearly hadn't. 50 against Lenny for grabbing a guy who was in front of the mark and trying to run forward. The mark payed to Shaw? when he had two bites and didn't hold either.

[saintbob]

s*** rule, I agree with Stevie Baker it turns me off watching the game!!!

[ozrulestrace]

And of course KB this morning, gave every interpretation of Lenny's action to justify that is was sliding, therefore a free and of course Patrick Smith disagreed and said it wasn't a free and calls into question the decision making ability of the umpire.

Totally agree with Patrick and ignore everything that old fart says.

[bigcarl]

Watching the end of the Hawks Cats and the rule has gone completely out the window. Some clarity on it would be handy

[plugger66]

And of course KB this morning, gave every interpretation of Lenny's action to justify that is was sliding, therefore a free and of course Patrick Smith disagreed and said it wasn't a free and calls into question the decision making ability of the umpire.

Totally agree with Patrick and ignore everything that old fart says.

Wish I had heard that. How did KB justify that it was forceful contact?

[magnifisaint]

Bartlett is a bitter old flog who is still pissed off at being sacked as Richmond coach

[sunsaint]

one of the problems for fans is when you get complete flogs "commenting" on games, when he cleary has never bothered to keep up
There was stark difference between his headless chook act on saturday night with an umpires bad call in the hayes decision
and on monday in a similar incident with Commetti & Matthews, understanding there was a bad call by the ump, explain the reason why it was a bad call & move on

[mr six o'clock]

Rules like this are making the game harder to watch , having seen 3 games on the weekend i believe players are staging for free kicks more than ever . The way that some players hit the ground like they've been shot only to miraculously jump to there feet when they get a free would make Hulk Hogan proud .

[I Love Peter Kiel]

A short description of that decision .

a) corrupt
b) bulls***!