30-14

[Mr Magic]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Yep. They were robbed. Just goes to prove that who ever the maggot lover was who said that umpires never decide games was clearly talking out of their f****** arse.

That maggot should be stood down for either being gutless or being a cats supporter. Disgraceful.

PS Gary Rohan should get 2 to 3 weeks.

Fun fact: A goal is worth the same amount of points whether it’s the first or last minute of the game.

The big question is, was the decision worse than the incorrect decision that handed us the game last week?

We won by 8 points last week
Unless a goal is now worth 8 points you’re telling a lie by saying the decision handed us the game

[The Billings Method]

i buried our dog today

play nice ... in remembrance

she was good dog
... had us all very well trained

we did the listening
she did the directing

Sorry for your loss, asiu. Dogs are the true conveyors of unconditional love. We could all learn something from them.

[Joffa Burns]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Yep. They were robbed. Just goes to prove that who ever the maggot lover was who said that umpires never decide games was clearly talking out of their f****** arse.

That maggot should be stood down for either being gutless or being a cats supporter. Disgraceful.

PS Gary Rohan should get 2 to 3 weeks.

Also got the lead back thanks to a soft free to selwood / and a 50 cos zorko told the ump what he thought of that decision. Then another soft one on the wing which lead to the ball going deep . Which they were then good enough to score from .
You'd have to be pissed off if you were a lions fan

Personally thought the worst decision fir the game was the Selwood goal where Guthrie was spun 360 in the tackle and gave the ball to Selwood in the goal square.

[terry smith rules]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Yep. They were robbed. Just goes to prove that who ever the maggot lover was who said that umpires never decide games was clearly talking out of their f****** arse.

That maggot should be stood down for either being gutless or being a cats supporter. Disgraceful.

PS Gary Rohan should get 2 to 3 weeks.

Also got the lead back thanks to a soft free to selwood / and a 50 cos zorko told the ump what he thought of that decision. Then another soft one on the wing which lead to the ball going deep . Which they were then good enough to score from .
You'd have to be pissed off if you were a lions fan

Personally thought the worst decision fir the game was the Selwood goal where Guthrie was spun 360 in the tackle and gave the ball to Selwood in the goal square.

Exactly

At least the commentators (BT and JB) are calling out throws now. Never really got commented on with Bruce.

With that commentary it may start some pressure for the AFL to start directing umpires to look for it more.

The throw from Sellwood coming out of the middle. The umpire was looking directly at it. And as Brayshaw said, there are a few teams who obviously practice the deception. Hawthorn have done it for years

[samuraisaint]

Brisbane did very well to get that close. From memory they have pushed Geelong at Kardinia Park a few times, and end up just losing.

A game of inches sometimes. Cruel.

Hopefully we can improve our record down there this year but I'm not holding my breath.

[Yorkeys]

One more step towards a "captain's challenge" rule that would stifle the game. It was so obvious; hard to understand the umpiring and there are 3 of them apparently. Need to hear from the ump ic given the stakes, fans deserve to know was it unsighted (barely credible); froze (professionally unacceptable); home town [non] decision (likely); cannot claim it was correct under the rules of the game. Then there can be conspiracy theories e.g. betting involved.

[Joffa Burns]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Yep. They were robbed. Just goes to prove that who ever the maggot lover was who said that umpires never decide games was clearly talking out of their f****** arse.

That maggot should be stood down for either being gutless or being a cats supporter. Disgraceful.

PS Gary Rohan should get 2 to 3 weeks.

Also got the lead back thanks to a soft free to selwood / and a 50 cos zorko told the ump what he thought of that decision. Then another soft one on the wing which lead to the ball going deep . Which they were then good enough to score from .
You'd have to be pissed off if you were a lions fan

Personally thought the worst decision fir the game was the Selwood goal where Guthrie was spun 360 in the tackle and gave the ball to Selwood in the goal square.

Exactly

At least the commentators (BT and JB) are calling out throws now. Never really got commented on with Bruce.

With that commentary it may start some pressure for the AFL to start directing umpires to look for it more.

The throw from Sellwood coming out of the middle. The umpire was looking directly at it. And as Brayshaw said, there are a few teams who obviously practice the deception. Hawthorn have done it for years

Selwood kicked the goal from the Guthrie pass that I believe should have been holding the ball then the throw you refer was the center bounce following his goal that resulted in a set shot to Hawkins for a behind.

Lots of throws creeping in but I doubt it will be a huge AFL focus as it keeps the game moving quickly which appears to be an AFL mantra.

[CarlD]

Would love to be a fly on the wall for the umpire's game review. Some awful non-decisions in the bits I saw.

[saynta]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Yep. They were robbed. Just goes to prove that who ever the maggot lover was who said that umpires never decide games was clearly talking out of their f****** arse.

That maggot should be stood down for either being gutless or being a cats supporter. Disgraceful.

PS Gary Rohan should get 2 to 3 weeks.

Fun fact: A goal is worth the same amount of points whether it’s the first or last minute of the game.

The big question is, was the decision worse than the incorrect decision that handed us the game last week?

100 times worse, no make it a thousand times worse because that gutless maggot cost the Lions the game. Even a moron should be able to work that one out.

[Ghost Like]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Yes plus...

The boundary umpires were closer to handballing than the Geelong players. A very inept performance by the umpires. Particularly the blonde Thunderbird looking one.

Plus...

The Lions kicking for goal in the first half was woeful, that's on them.

[saynta]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Yes plus...

The boundary umpires were closer to handballing than the Geelong players. A very inept performance by the umpires. Particularly the blonde Thunderbird looking one.

Plus...

The Lions kicking for goal in the first half was woeful, that's on them.

Yep.

[Life Long Saint]

This place would melt down if we copped that umpiring last night. Definitely cost Brisbane the game.
Not just the late one but there were two goals to the Cats in the 3rd quarter that should have been Brisbane frees.

[longtimesaint]

Watching Geelong the last two weeks I am thinking that their time as a power might be nearing the end.
Their policy of continually topping up with over 30 players is a very risky one as sooner or later they will hit the wall.
Brisbane should have won that match by two or three goals, and it wa# on their cramped ground.
Looking forward to seeing how they go at a fast Marvel Stadium or the space of the MCG

[perfectionist]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Probably not. The rule changed a few years ago. Before then, it should have an obvious free for "incorrect disposal" or "dropping the ball" as the fans would say. However, now, you are allowed to drop the ball as long as you have not had a chance to dispose of it - "a prior opportunity". So if you get it, and the next action is to try to kick it, but miss and drop it, it's play on. On the other hand, if you have had a "prior opportunity" and drop it, then it's a free. So, if you get it, think about a handpass, change your mind and try to kick it and miss, then it's a free for incorrect disposal. Of course, the change in the rule introduced more "interpretation" into the officiating than before, the rationale (I assume) being that there are less frees and the game moves more quickly. On the incident in the goal square, it was 50/50. Blicavs didn't drop it immediately (he was half swung) but didn't try to do anything else with it either. He is a slow thinking player which is why I saw it as 50/50 - one of those more likely to go to the home team than the away team.

On the issue of throws, the ship has sailed well and truly on that. Once, a throw was easily identifiable because only one hand could do the directing of the ball, the one hitting the ball. Now, both hands can direct (it seems) which leads to a handpass over the head which should be automatically deemed a throw (but isn't). The throw from Hawkins resulted in a goal and was very poor umpiring. If we really want the game to "move along" we should get rid of handpassing and allow the ball to be thrown. But that won't ever happen.

[The_Dud]

Free kick count:
Lions 23 - Cats 21

[Ghost Like]

It should have been

Lions 30
Cats 18

[Joffa Burns]

Free kick count:
Lions 23 - Cats 21

That makes a very valid point about the free kick tally and its relevance in this instance The Dud.

Geelong in my humble opinion were the beneficiary of two free kicks not being paid against them in the goal square that may have directly impacted the result, yet they lost the free kick tally.

It’s where you get/ don’t get them not the tally that is most critical.

[saynta]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Probably not. The rule changed a few years ago. Before then, it should have an obvious free for "incorrect disposal" or "dropping the ball" as the fans would say. However, now, you are allowed to drop the ball as long as you have not had a chance to dispose of it - "a prior opportunity". So if you get it, and the next action is to try to kick it, but miss and drop it, it's play on. On the other hand, if you have had a "prior opportunity" and drop it, then it's a free. So, if you get it, think about a handpass, change your mind and try to kick it and miss, then it's a free for incorrect disposal. Of course, the change in the rule introduced more "interpretation" into the officiating than before, the rationale (I assume) being that there are less frees and the game moves more quickly. On the incident in the goal square, it was 50/50. Blicavs didn't drop it immediately (he was half swung) but didn't try to do anything else with it either. He is a slow thinking player which is why I saw it as 50/50 - one of those more likely to go to the home team than the away team.

On the issue of throws, the ship has sailed well and truly on that. Once, a throw was easily identifiable because only one hand could do the directing of the ball, the one hitting the ball. Now, both hands can direct (it seems) which leads to a handpass over the head which should be automatically deemed a throw (but isn't). The throw from Hawkins resulted in a goal and was very poor umpiring. If we really want the game to "move along" we should get rid of handpassing and allow the ball to be thrown. But that won't ever happen.

From the age.com.au

"A right foot snap from recruit Isaac Smith with three minutes to play and a lucky umpiring decision in the final minute that went Mark Blicavs’ way when he was tackled in the goalsquare saw Geelong record a dramatic win over a brave Brisbane Lions at GMHBA Stadium on Friday night."

"They then held on as the Lions scored two behinds with the final behind coming after they rushed the ball through when Zac Bailey tackled Blicavs as he tried to get rid of the ball. He was very fortunate not to be penalised for incorrect disposal."

from heraldsun.com.au

"AFL Geelong v Brisbane: Cats win thriller as ump ‘howler’ proves costly for Lions"

[Life Long Saint]

Did Brisbane just lose a game because an umpire didn’t pay an obvious free 5 metres out from goal in the last 20 seconds?

Probably not. The rule changed a few years ago. Before then, it should have an obvious free for "incorrect disposal" or "dropping the ball" as the fans would say. However, now, you are allowed to drop the ball as long as you have not had a chance to dispose of it - "a prior opportunity". So if you get it, and the next action is to try to kick it, but miss and drop it, it's play on. On the other hand, if you have had a "prior opportunity" and drop it, then it's a free. So, if you get it, think about a handpass, change your mind and try to kick it and miss, then it's a free for incorrect disposal. Of course, the change in the rule introduced more "interpretation" into the officiating than before, the rationale (I assume) being that there are less frees and the game moves more quickly. On the incident in the goal square, it was 50/50. Blicavs didn't drop it immediately (he was half swung) but didn't try to do anything else with it either. He is a slow thinking player which is why I saw it as 50/50 - one of those more likely to go to the home team than the away team.

On the issue of throws, the ship has sailed well and truly on that. Once, a throw was easily identifiable because only one hand could do the directing of the ball, the one hitting the ball. Now, both hands can direct (it seems) which leads to a handpass over the head which should be automatically deemed a throw (but isn't). The throw from Hawkins resulted in a goal and was very poor umpiring. If we really want the game to "move along" we should get rid of handpassing and allow the ball to be thrown. But that won't ever happen.

It looked like he threw the ball to me. Prior opportunity doesn't apply when you throw it.
If he'd have hung on to the ball and absorbed the tackle then it would have been a ball up and I think we'd all be OK with that.
He out and out threw the ball attempting a handball.
Free kick every day of the week (except Friday 26th March, 2021).

[The_Dud]

Free kick count:
Lions 23 - Cats 21

That makes a very valid point about the free kick tally and its relevance in this instance The Dud.

Geelong in my humble opinion were the beneficiary of two free kicks not being paid against them in the goal square that may have directly impacted the result, yet they lost the free kick tally.

It’s where you get/ don’t get them not the tally that is most critical.

Yep, it's an easy stat for the casuals to use as 'evidence' of a good/bad umpiring performance.

There is no rule saying the free kick count must be even. Nothing of the sort.

You could lose the free kick count 10-30 and still have had the rub of the green.

You could also win the free kick count 30-10 and have been robbed.

But it's a simple stat for simple arguments.

[Mr Magic]

Free kick count:
Lions 23 - Cats 21

That makes a very valid point about the free kick tally and its relevance in this instance The Dud.

Geelong in my humble opinion were the beneficiary of two free kicks not being paid against them in the goal square that may have directly impacted the result, yet they lost the free kick tally.

It’s where you get/ don’t get them not the tally that is most critical.

Yep, it's an easy stat for the casuals to use as 'evidence' of a good/bad umpiring performance.

There is no rule saying the free kick count must be even. Nothing of the sort.

You could lose the free kick count 10-30 and still have had the rub of the green.

You could also win the free kick count 30-10 and have been robbed.

But it's a simple stat for simple arguments.

So when did a goal become 8 points?

[Yorkeys]

See 1st qtr Swans v Crows: Tex, 2 htb free goals. Completely different from the rule(s) applied to Blicsavs. Sack the Director of Umpiring I say. Bring back....um who was good at it?

[The_Dud]

Free kick count:
Lions 23 - Cats 21

That makes a very valid point about the free kick tally and its relevance in this instance The Dud.

Geelong in my humble opinion were the beneficiary of two free kicks not being paid against them in the goal square that may have directly impacted the result, yet they lost the free kick tally.

It’s where you get/ don’t get them not the tally that is most critical.

Yep, it's an easy stat for the casuals to use as 'evidence' of a good/bad umpiring performance.

There is no rule saying the free kick count must be even. Nothing of the sort.

You could lose the free kick count 10-30 and still have had the rub of the green.

You could also win the free kick count 30-10 and have been robbed.

But it's a simple stat for simple arguments.

So when did a goal become 8 points?

A goal has always been 6 points, maybe you're getting confused with cricket?

Australia gave up the 8 ball over at the end of the 70's, and have stuck with the now standard 6 ball over since then.

[The_Dud]

See 1st qtr Swans v Crows: Tex, 2 htb free goals. Completely different from the rule(s) applied to Blicsavs. Sack the Director of Umpiring I say. Bring back....um who was good at it?

That Sydney ruckman goes alright, anyone catch his name?

[Mr Magic]

Free kick count:
Lions 23 - Cats 21

That makes a very valid point about the free kick tally and its relevance in this instance The Dud.

Geelong in my humble opinion were the beneficiary of two free kicks not being paid against them in the goal square that may have directly impacted the result, yet they lost the free kick tally.

It’s where you get/ don’t get them not the tally that is most critical.

Yep, it's an easy stat for the casuals to use as 'evidence' of a good/bad umpiring performance.

There is no rule saying the free kick count must be even. Nothing of the sort.

You could lose the free kick count 10-30 and still have had the rub of the green.

You could also win the free kick count 30-10 and have been robbed.

But it's a simple stat for simple arguments.

So when did a goal become 8 points?

A goal has always been 6 points, maybe you're getting confused with cricket?

Australia gave up the 8 ball over at the end of the 70's, and have stuck with the now standard 6 ball over since then.

So Dud, if that's the case and you agree that a goal is only worth 6 points, how then did we get gifted a game, that we were already 2 points up in before the decision?
A simple answer without obfuscation would be appreciated.
It's a relatively easy thing to admit that you made a mistake.