Last kickoff over the goal line?

[saintspremiers]

After Savage's final draw saving miss of the night, I've read that someone tweeted that the Cats player kicking out from the behind may have stepped over the goal square.

Anyone have any info on that?

A bounce on the goal line may have resulted in another behind (or goal) to us in the dying 14 seconds and given us the match.

[supersaints]

There's a photo on the bigfooty forum that would seem to indicate it's a least on the line.. Umpire only three or four Meyers in front...

[kosifantutti]

Eddie mentioned it straight after game on Foxtel.

[asiu]

yea , saw it.
... whats the 'Rule' for legal ?
(behind the line or on the line)

[plugger66]

yea , saw it.
... whats the 'Rule' for legal ?
(behind the line or on the line)

On the line is out. Behind the line is not out.

[asiu]

... best i go to a cricket forum then ,
'n ask about footy rules there.
Seems to make sense.

[Sainter_Dad]

The rule states that the ball must be kicked from within goal square - ie before any part of the foot touches the line.

13.1 FOOTBALL MUST BE KICKED
Unless Law 12.4 applies, when a Behind has been recorded, the following
shall apply:
(a) the football must be Kicked back into play by any Player of the defending
Team within a reasonable time;
(b) the football must be Kicked from within the Goal Square. For the
avoidance of doubt, one foot of the Player must be behind any of the
lines which define the Goal Square at the time when the Player Kicks
the football;
(c) Other than the Player kicking the football into play, all Players must
immediately vacate the area within 5 metres of the Goal Square.
(d) the Player Kicking the football into play may, provided they have Kicked
the football clear from their hands, regain possession and play on from
within the Goal Square.

[asiu]

ta SD.
... twas a legal kickin then , by the reading of b)

[plugger66]

ta SD.
... twas a legal kickin then , by the reading of b)

Foot on the line is illegal.

[desertsaint]

ta SD.
... twas a legal kickin then , by the reading of b)

illegal - one foot in the air kicking the ball, the other foot planted on the line.

[ace]

After Savage's final draw saving miss of the night, I've read that someone tweeted that the Cats player kicking out from the behind may have stepped over the goal square.

Anyone have any info on that?

A bounce on the goal line may have resulted in another behind (or goal) to us in the dying 14 seconds and given us the match.

Jimmy Bartel steps on the line while kicking a torpedo to the centre of the ground.
Umpire tosses it up.
Holmes uses his incredible leap to get first hit on the ball, put it through for a behind.
Certain win to St Kilda
We was robbed.

They zoomed out a little to soon but it did look like he was on the line when he kicked it.

[ace]

The rule is very clumsy.
"the football must be Kicked from within the Goal Square"
As everyone who has ever seen a game knows the ball is in front of the player who is in front of his grounded foot when he kicks the ball.
Virtually every time the ball is kicked in the ball is kicked while outside the square but the players other foot is grounded inside the square.
But then they include a conflicting interpretation.
For the avoidance of doubt, one foot of the Player must be behind any of the lines which define the Goal Square at the time when the Player Kicks the football;

[plugger66]

The rule is very clumsy.
"the football must be Kicked from within the Goal Square"
As everyone who has ever seen a game knows the ball is in front of the player who is in front of his grounded foot when he kicks the ball.
Virtually every time the ball is kicked in the ball is kicked while outside the square but the players other foot is grounded inside the square.
But then they include a conflicting interpretation.
For the avoidance of doubt, one foot of the Player must be behind any of the lines which define the Goal Square at the time when the Player Kicks the football;

For avoidance of doubt is mentioned. That is why you need to read the whole rule.

[ace]

yea , saw it.
... whats the 'Rule' for legal ?
(behind the line or on the line)

We don't play by the rules we play by the interpretation "to avoid doubt".
The interpretation is one foot behind the line when the ball is kicked, on the line you should be pinged.

[plugger66]

yea , saw it.
... whats the 'Rule' for legal ?
(behind the line or on the line)

We don't play by the rules we play by the interpretation "to avoid doubt".
The interpretation is one foot behind the line when the ball is kicked, on the line you should be pinged.

This is a factual rule. There is no interpretation. If the foot is on the line or over it then its a ball up but only if the umpire sees it. Much harder to see the front line but you should always be able to see the side lines.

[snoopygirl]

yea , saw it.
... whats the 'Rule' for legal ?
(behind the line or on the line)

We don't play by the rules we play by the interpretation "to avoid doubt".
The interpretation is one foot behind the line when the ball is kicked, on the line you should be pinged.

This is a factual rule. There is no interpretation. If the foot is on the line or over it then its a ball up but only if the umpire sees it. Much harder to see the front line but you should always be able to see the side lines.

Maybe the goal umpire could be brought in to it then? Either that or the field umpire needs to position himself better.

[karnaby]

I reckon that I notice this about once every couple of weeks. Umpires need to both position themselves better and to watch!

[magnifisaint]

There's a photo on the bigfooty forum that would seem to indicate it's a least on the line.. Umpire only three or four Meyers in front...

Post it up

[asiu]

i'd also like to see the photo.
... i waited a bit to see the replay of the incident last night
but it didnt show.

certainly u'd think the odds were in our favour for a point from a ball up
if it deserved to be pinged.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Worse was the missed 50 to Weller with about 40 seconds to go.

Would have put him 10 metres out in front for a goal and an almost certain win.

Umpires did everything in their power to rob us last night.

Cats 5 frees inside fifty, those deliberate idiot frees, the missed 50, the missed cheating kickout.

So incompetent with their cheating we still managed a draw.

All three should be dropped like that blonde idiot who cheated us in the WCE game

[plugger66]

Worse was the missed 50 to Weller with about 40 seconds to go.

Would have put him 10 metres out in front for a goal and an almost certain win.

Umpires did everything in their power to rob us last night.

Cats 5 frees inside fifty, those deliberate idiot frees, the missed 50, the missed cheating kickout.

So incompetent with their cheating we still managed a draw.

All three should be dropped like that blonde idiot who cheated us in the WCE game

So they cheated against us? Seems strange they stopped the Motlop goal then. And I still don't know why they cheat against us against all the other sides. Its obviously an AFL thing but it doesn't seem logical. Do you have any idea why they want us to lose every game?

[older saint]

Weller no 50 was a bigger miss as more obvious and paid all the time, Case of umpire scared to make a tough call at the end of the game, should be called the same regardless of when it occurs

[resaintlee]

Worse was the missed 50 to Weller with about 40 seconds to go.

Would have put him 10 metres out in front for a goal and an almost certain win.

Umpires did everything in their power to rob us last night.

Cats 5 frees inside fifty, those deliberate idiot frees, the missed 50, the missed cheating kickout.

So incompetent with their cheating we still managed a draw.

All three should be dropped like that blonde idiot who cheated us in the WCE game

So they cheated against us? Seems strange they stopped the Motlop goal then. And I still don't know why they cheat against us against all the other sides. Its obviously an AFL thing but it doesn't seem logical. Do you have any idea why they want us to lose every game?

Wouldn't have anything to do with betting odds?

[maverick]

Worse was the missed 50 to Weller with about 40 seconds to go.

Would have put him 10 metres out in front for a goal and an almost certain win.

Umpires did everything in their power to rob us last night.

Cats 5 frees inside fifty, those deliberate idiot frees, the missed 50, the missed cheating kickout.

So incompetent with their cheating we still managed a draw.

All three should be dropped like that blonde idiot who cheated us in the WCE game

So they cheated against us? Seems strange they stopped the Motlop goal then. And I still don't know why they cheat against us against all the other sides. Its obviously an AFL thing but it doesn't seem logical. Do you have any idea why they want us to lose every game?

Query then, was that a 50 or not to Weller.
Right in front of me, interesting call.
Don't think they cheated, just not strong enough.

[plugger66]

Worse was the missed 50 to Weller with about 40 seconds to go.

Would have put him 10 metres out in front for a goal and an almost certain win.

Umpires did everything in their power to rob us last night.

Cats 5 frees inside fifty, those deliberate idiot frees, the missed 50, the missed cheating kickout.

So incompetent with their cheating we still managed a draw.

All three should be dropped like that blonde idiot who cheated us in the WCE game

So they cheated against us? Seems strange they stopped the Motlop goal then. And I still don't know why they cheat against us against all the other sides. Its obviously an AFL thing but it doesn't seem logical. Do you have any idea why they want us to lose every game?

Query then, was that a 50 or not to Weller.
Right in front of me, interesting call.
Don't think they cheated, just not strong enough.

Of course it was a 50.