Joey's winning point questioned on F.C.
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4951
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 343 times
- Been thanked: 497 times
Joey's winning point questioned on F.C.
I will preface this by saying I love Paul Roos, as a former Roy boy barracker from the 80's and early 90's he was my favourite player. I have usually loved him as a coach. Appears to have coaching in perspective, and has a good sense of humour. Plus he's a great coach.
However..... maybe I'm being a bit sensitive, but this isn't the first time he has casually questioned how his team was beaten. IN his off the cuff, I couldn't really care less manner however I will mention it anyway kind of way, he basically said that Montagna cheated by throwing Keiran Jack to the ground prior to roving the pack and kicking a point. They then cut to the footage of it. In the cnr of the screen you see Jack not even looking at the ball but facing Joey who is trying to run at the ball. Jack is blocking him. There is grappling between the pair of them for a very short period of time (Jack still has his back to the play) before Joey side steps around Jack. Jack's fwd momentum (assisted by Joey) causes Jack to fall to the ground.
They pan back to the 'experts' who are all sniggering about it, as if to suggest that Roos has a point.
Firstly I didn't see Joey do anything against the rules.
Secondly, if anyone was playing outside of the rules it was Jack, who wasn't even watching the ball!
I can't stand it when coaches infer that there's something more sinister at work in the game, and that 'to be honest, his team could have won, but what can you do?' type attitude.
I'll go and have a lie down now and cool off
However..... maybe I'm being a bit sensitive, but this isn't the first time he has casually questioned how his team was beaten. IN his off the cuff, I couldn't really care less manner however I will mention it anyway kind of way, he basically said that Montagna cheated by throwing Keiran Jack to the ground prior to roving the pack and kicking a point. They then cut to the footage of it. In the cnr of the screen you see Jack not even looking at the ball but facing Joey who is trying to run at the ball. Jack is blocking him. There is grappling between the pair of them for a very short period of time (Jack still has his back to the play) before Joey side steps around Jack. Jack's fwd momentum (assisted by Joey) causes Jack to fall to the ground.
They pan back to the 'experts' who are all sniggering about it, as if to suggest that Roos has a point.
Firstly I didn't see Joey do anything against the rules.
Secondly, if anyone was playing outside of the rules it was Jack, who wasn't even watching the ball!
I can't stand it when coaches infer that there's something more sinister at work in the game, and that 'to be honest, his team could have won, but what can you do?' type attitude.
I'll go and have a lie down now and cool off
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1165
- Joined: Tue 11 Apr 2006 9:45pm
- Location: Tassies Wild West
- Been thanked: 1 time
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1704
- Joined: Fri 31 Mar 2006 9:20pm
- Location: Level 1, next to the race -social club
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
If he seriously wants to question that i suggest he take a look at Crouch's game on Milne, even have a look at the time wasters behind the goals.
At the end of the day the points read Saints: 4, Swans: 0. Read it and weep Swannies, close but you're just not good enough.
At the end of the day the points read Saints: 4, Swans: 0. Read it and weep Swannies, close but you're just not good enough.
Destiny. It's in our hands.
Harder. Better. Faster. Stronger.
Fair enough for Roos to point out the holding, just like he pointed out the Swans holding and hands in the back of WCE players in the 2005 GF when Barry took that mark.
Oh he didn't say anything about that??? Well I'll be....
Oh he didn't say anything about that??? Well I'll be....
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Sun 26 Jul 2009 2:34pm
- ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10800
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 31 times
- Been thanked: 837 times
Have some sympathy for Paul Roos
He has soiled his own pants and he knows it.
He has kept his job by keeping Sydney competitive.
He achieved this by trading draft picks (that provide youngsters) for mature players, just like Sheedy did at Essendon.
Now he has a list better suited to an age care facility.
The only thing that will keep Roos in his job is that any aspiring coach would realise that now Sydney has to rebuild.
And trying to rebuild in an era of compromised drafts will ensure a failed coaching career.
Once you fail you never get asked again.
James Hird has rejected a Port Adelaide assistant role with the senior job in two years.
He has recognised that he would have to rebuild the team without decent draft picks.
He will remain in the media until normal drafts resume and then he can attempt to build a team as coach.
Roos your team lost because you didn't have the players to win.
He has soiled his own pants and he knows it.
He has kept his job by keeping Sydney competitive.
He achieved this by trading draft picks (that provide youngsters) for mature players, just like Sheedy did at Essendon.
Now he has a list better suited to an age care facility.
The only thing that will keep Roos in his job is that any aspiring coach would realise that now Sydney has to rebuild.
And trying to rebuild in an era of compromised drafts will ensure a failed coaching career.
Once you fail you never get asked again.
James Hird has rejected a Port Adelaide assistant role with the senior job in two years.
He has recognised that he would have to rebuild the team without decent draft picks.
He will remain in the media until normal drafts resume and then he can attempt to build a team as coach.
Roos your team lost because you didn't have the players to win.
Last edited by ace on Tue 04 Aug 2009 11:43am, edited 1 time in total.
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
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
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4655
- Joined: Sun 18 Jun 2006 2:04pm
- Location: Melb
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 23 times
The fact that these clowns can ever complain about anything is a farce, which I reminded them about 40 squillion times saturday night.
I thought in the stands,the euphoria was as good as the Geelong game in that final 20 seconds,and we celebrated long and hard!
Stick that up ya gay mardigra!
I thought in the stands,the euphoria was as good as the Geelong game in that final 20 seconds,and we celebrated long and hard!
Stick that up ya gay mardigra!
Bring back the Lockett era
- Selhurst Saint
- Club Player
- Posts: 1772
- Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004 9:09am
- Location: I do like to be beside the seaside
- Been thanked: 40 times
The win that should have been questioned is the Richmond win.
The siren started sounding while the ball was still in the air prior to McMahon marking it.
I didn't see Connolly jumping off the bench and running onto the field this time around. The comentators made a small mention of it at the time but then forgot about it. Seems like the rest of the football world has as well.
The siren started sounding while the ball was still in the air prior to McMahon marking it.
I didn't see Connolly jumping off the bench and running onto the field this time around. The comentators made a small mention of it at the time but then forgot about it. Seems like the rest of the football world has as well.
"...If there has been one recurring theme through this whole shocking mess, it has been the misguided, inflated egos and their ill-judged determination to cling to long-standing old boy friendships. The bad advice that has guided the selfish and culpable James Hird has not only punctuated this saga but symbolised it..."
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Sun 26 Jul 2009 2:34pm
thats a good point SS. just a fraction of a second in it but yeah, you're 100% correct.Selhurst Saint wrote:The win that should have been questioned is the Richmond win.
The siren started sounding while the ball was still in the air prior to McMahon marking it.
I didn't see Connolly jumping off the bench and running onto the field this time around. The comentators made a small mention of it at the time but then forgot about it. Seems like the rest of the football world has as well.
- B W and R all over
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2220
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 3:14pm
- Location: Northcote
Judd and Sampi's jumpers got a good stretching out in that one.joffaboy wrote:Fair enough for Roos to point out the holding, just like he pointed out the Swans holding and hands in the back of WCE players in the 2005 GF when Barry took that mark.
Oh he didn't say anything about that??? Well I'll be....
25 minutes to make a name for yourself like you've never made before.
- matrix
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 21475
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 1:55pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
care factor is zero
if the bloke is getting it down to the last roll of the dice that happened for the game and using it as an excuse...then he has a prob.
so the game must of went for those last 20 secs.
what a knob roos
as soon as there is somnething close or slightly questionable he goes whinning off his head.
jack wasnt even looking at the cherry
suck it up pauly boy
if the bloke is getting it down to the last roll of the dice that happened for the game and using it as an excuse...then he has a prob.
so the game must of went for those last 20 secs.
what a knob roos
as soon as there is somnething close or slightly questionable he goes whinning off his head.
jack wasnt even looking at the cherry
suck it up pauly boy
- ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10800
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 31 times
- Been thanked: 837 times
Sirens are a poor way to determine the end of a match.Selhurst Saint wrote:The win that should have been questioned is the Richmond win.
The siren started sounding while the ball was still in the air prior to McMahon marking it.
I didn't see Connolly jumping off the bench and running onto the field this time around. The comentators made a small mention of it at the time but then forgot about it. Seems like the rest of the football world has as well.
Anyone who has watched the cricket at the MCG will have noticed that you see the batsman hit the ball and then after a short time hear the thwack.
That is because sound travels at about 343 m/sec in dry air at 20C.
It varies with temperatue and humidity but not much with pressure differences.
The time keepers box at the MCG is the first "box" next to the eastern end of level 3 of the MCC members stand.
They press two mushroom head switches simultaneously to sound the siren.
Electricity travels at over 100,000km a second in copper wires.
So effectively the siren sounds immediately the buttons are pushed.
The sirens are located under the roof of the top deck of the stands and their location is most important.
Even if you surrounded the boundary with sirens the middle of the ground would still be 70 metre further from the siren than the boundary.
That is 0.2 sec.
If the ball is kicked horizontally at 180km per hour it will travel 10 metres in 0.2 sec.
But with the sirens mounted in the stands the time from the siren to the controlling umpire can easily be as much as 170 metre. That's 0.5 second and a 25 metre kick.
The AFL rule is that the game ends when the controlling umpire hears the siren, not the crowd and not the TV, and he then signals the end.
Except if the game is against St Kilda in which case the AFL Commission can end the game at any time to the detriment of St Kilda.
Of more concern should be the response time of the time keepers. They often let the clock run on for 2 or 3 seconds after the umpire has signalled play on and again are slow to react when the umpire signals time off.
You can see this on the television coverage each time the umpire signals time on.
They are equally slow when the count down clock reaches zero despite both hands hovering over the mushroon head switches.
I have watched the time keepers in action at the MCG, they move their arms slower than geriatirics.
AFL football has many unpredictables like the bounce of the ball but time keeping is not usually recognised as the real variable that it is.
Last edited by ace on Tue 04 Aug 2009 1:01pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
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
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18655
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1994 times
- Been thanked: 873 times
- meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7223
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 516 times
I can put my hand on my heart and say "the same".Eastern wrote:Back to the OP
How would we react if the roles were reversed? !!
While I can't stand the way the umpires generally go on these days, they should be left in charge and if they call "play on", then that's the end of it.
When the umpire's call goes against you, it can be disappointing. But it takes crappy decisions from the AFL like Sirengate and allowing Hall to play in the 2005 GF to get my blood pressure up.
Anyway, as others have said, Montagna's push on Jack wasn't anything much to write home about. Heaps of these occur in every AFL game: some get penalised, some get missed by the umps, and some get seen and let go.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
- Jonathan Swift
- mordi
- Club Player
- Posts: 720
- Joined: Tue 18 May 2004 7:15pm
- Location: out of the back pocket...bound for HBF
- Been thanked: 4 times
GT responded with "what about Barry hall in 2005". One of the idiots started to tell GT to effectively get over it....
His response............"you never forget" ... pure gold.
and btw.........Joey's action was the sort of incident that happens in every second stoppage.......what do they want!!
His response............"you never forget" ... pure gold.
and btw.........Joey's action was the sort of incident that happens in every second stoppage.......what do they want!!
What's the Point of it All?
- Dis Believer
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5098
- Joined: Sun 28 Mar 2004 1:42pm
- Location: The terraces at Moorabbin, in the pouring rain.......
- Has thanked: 289 times
- Been thanked: 281 times
Why, did Joey break a rule?Eastern wrote:Back to the OP
How would we react if the roles were reversed? !!
Unless Joey contacted high, then there was no infringemnet, so no issue.
If Jack can't keep his feet then I can't see how joey is at fault. He attempted to block Joey's run at the ball, they were face to face, and Jack ended up on his backside - I can't see the infringement ??
The heavy metal artist formerly known as True Believer!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9054
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 353 times
Good points. However, the umpires are "'wired" to receive the siren sound electronically so that only sound delay is between the piece and the ear. The rest of it is almost instantaneous.ace wrote: Sirens are a poor way to determine the end of a match.
Anyone who has watched the cricket at the MCG will have noticed that you see the batsman hit the ball and then after a short time hear the thwack.
That is because sound travels at about 343 m/sec in dry air at 20C.
It varies with temperatue and humidity but not much with pressure differences.
The time keepers box at the MCG is the first "box" next to the eastern end of level 3 of the MCC members stand.
They press two mushroom head switches simultaneously to sound the siren.
Electricity travels at over 100,000km a second in copper wires.
So effectively the siren sounds immediately the buttons are pushed.
The sirens are located under the roof of the top deck of the stands and their location is most important.
Even if you surrounded the boundary with sirens the middle of the ground would still be 70 metre further from the siren than the boundary.
That is 0.2 sec.
If the ball is kicked horizontally at 180km per hour it will travel 10 metres in 0.2 sec.
But with the sirens mounted in the stands the time from the siren to the controlling umpire can easily be as much as 170 metre. That's 0.5 second and a 25 metre kick....
Used to be the case but is no longer. Any of the umpires can signal the end of the game i.e. the first to hear it....The AFL rule is that the game ends when the controlling umpire hears the siren, not the crowd and not the TV, and he then signals the end.
All good points and seems to account for the fact that Richmond won the game with a mark after the siren. The clock counted to 2 seconds then disappeared but the mark was taken a good three seconds later. I could not tell just when the siren sounded in all of that but Melbourne were robbed. The only solution to the delay in pushing the button is not to have a button. A rather simple electronic device should activate the siren when the countdown reaches zero. On the other hand, no system is perfect whenever either electronics or humans are involved....Of more concern should be the response time of the time keepers. They often let the clock run on for 2 or 3 seconds after the umpire has signalled play on and again are slow to react when the umpire signals time off.
You can see this on the television coverage each time the umpire signals time on.
They are equally slow when the count down clock reaches zero despite both hands hovering over the mushroon head switches.
I have watched the time keepers in action at the MCG, they move their arms slower than geriatirics.
Agree....AFL football has many unpredictables like the bounce of the ball but time keeping is not usually recognised as the real variable that it is.
And on the Sydney issue, it might have been free to Jack depending on where the ball was and whether Leigh Montagna pushed him aside or grabbed him and threw him aside. Given that we were not paid about three high tackles in a frantic last quarter, and they had a couple missed as well, Paul Roos would have been better not commenting about the decision, for which he should be sent a please explain and fined. Just because he was smiling when he questioned the decision does not alter the fact that he acted against the rules - a point not lost on Grant Thomas last night when he also made mention of the lack of Roos complaint about the Barry Hall/Matt Maguire incident four years ago.
- Dis Believer
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5098
- Joined: Sun 28 Mar 2004 1:42pm
- Location: The terraces at Moorabbin, in the pouring rain.......
- Has thanked: 289 times
- Been thanked: 281 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4951
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 343 times
- Been thanked: 497 times
THat's the whole point I reckon. Why do coaches feel the need to comment? Roos initiated the comment I think, and wasn't asked a direct question about it. It was like he just needed to get it out there, that his team was robbed.perfectionist wrote:
And on the Sydney issue, it might have been free to Jack depending on where the ball was and whether Leigh Montagna pushed him aside or grabbed him and threw him aside. Given that we were not paid about three high tackles in a frantic last quarter, and they had a couple missed as well, Paul Roos would have been better not commenting about the decision, for which he should be sent a please explain and fined. Just because he was smiling when he questioned the decision does not alter the fact that he acted against the rules - a point not lost on Grant Thomas last night when he also made mention of the lack of Roos complaint about the Barry Hall/Matt Maguire incident four years ago.
Even Bomber Thompson had the good sense to shut up after the cats game and not comment on the supposed contentious advantage decision in the last 1/4. In close games there is ALWAYS going to be decisions debated. I reckon you show more class in defeat by just shutting the F*** up and getting on with it.