50 against Joey

FraserGehrig · Sat 24 Jul 2010 12:25am

Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others

evertonfc · Post: # 961175Post **evertonfc** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 12:27am

Buddy shouldn't be allowed that space.

Montagna was an absolute idiot for moving before play on was called.

Catch 22.

Thinline · Post: # 961176Post **Thinline** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 12:27am

FraserGehrig wrote:Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others

Especially as he wasn't allowed to have a natural arc when he was having that shot after the siren at the end of the second half. Silly. And unfair.

FraserGehrig · Sat 24 Jul 2010 12:28am

evertonfc wrote:Buddy shouldn't be allowed that space.

Montagna was an absolute idiot for moving before play on was called.

Catch 22.

Yeah wasnt the smartest bit of play by Montagna but the explaination was ridiculous

kosifantutti23 · Sat 24 Jul 2010 12:32am

Thinline wrote:
FraserGehrig wrote:Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others
Especially as he wasn't allowed to have a natural arc when he was having that shot after the siren at the end of the second half. Silly. And unfair.

I thought he went way off his line for that shot, AGAINST his natural arc.

saint3d · Post: # 961337Post **saint3d** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:30am

I wonder where the term natural arc appears in the rule book.

Besides how ridiculous it sounds to begin with, he was running at least thirty degrees off his line.

jonesy · Post: # 961339Post **jonesy** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:32am

FraserGehrig wrote:Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others

Its the Stkilda rule.....

One rule for one,another rule for the other 15

laughable

Buckets · Post: # 961341Post **Buckets** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:32am

It was very silly by Joey, esp considering Buddy missed the shot anyway!!!!! Def had a bad game tonight!

degruch · Post: # 961343Post **degruch** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:32am

saint3d wrote:I wonder where the term natural arc appears in the rule book.

Besides how ridiculous it sounds to begin with, he was running at least thirty degrees off his line.

We should be thankful that his natural arc doesn't involve running directly through the goal square, otherwise he'd have kicked 12 goals!

plugger66 · Post: # 961344Post **plugger66** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:33am

jonesy wrote:
FraserGehrig wrote:Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others
Its the Stkilda rule.....

One rule for one,another rule for the other 15

laughable

Yes that makes sense. Joey was stupid. There was no play on call.

jonesy · Post: # 961368Post **jonesy** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:41am

plugger66 wrote:
jonesy wrote:
FraserGehrig wrote:Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others
Its the Stkilda rule.....

One rule for one,another rule for the other 15

laughable
Yes that makes sense. Joey was stupid. There was no play on call.

It makes sense when someone go's on a 8 meter ark off there line that it's play on. You heard the umpirie though ...it was "his natural ark"....fair dinkum. Absolute farce...... a discraceful blight on our game tonight was. They are ruining it quick fast if they continue to single handedly determine results like this

Moods · Post: # 961371Post **Moods** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:42am

plugger66 wrote:
jonesy wrote:
FraserGehrig wrote:Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others
Its the Stkilda rule.....

One rule for one,another rule for the other 15

laughable
Yes that makes sense. Joey was stupid. There was no play on call.

Agreed he probably should have waited until the play-on call came. But how long do you wait? If you've played footy all your life, you know when someone's run off their line. Buddy shouldn't be allowed to improve the angle of his kick b/c of some 'natural arc.' And if he's got a natural arc that they are allowing for - why wasn't he allowed to use it on the half time siren?

Sorry but the umpy's had an absolute shocker tonight. Were way too technical - just let the boys play for christ sake!

Mr Magic · Post: # 961373Post **Mr Magic** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:42am

I heard the umpire explain to Joey (on teh replay) that it was Buddy's 'natural arc'.

Could someone who knows the rules please explain where I can find 'natural arc' in either the rulebook or the DVD so that I can better understand how a player on the boundary line can move 5 steps to his side without it being 'play on' and yet others can move 1 step and be called to 'play on'?

Who determines each player's 'natural arc'?

And was this the same umpire who got the Milne free kick wrong in the last quarter of the Geelong game?

plugger66 · Post: # 961374Post **plugger66** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:43am

jonesy wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
jonesy wrote:
FraserGehrig wrote:Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others
Its the Stkilda rule.....

One rule for one,another rule for the other 15

laughable
Yes that makes sense. Joey was stupid. There was no play on call.

It makes sense when someone go's on a 8 meter ark off there line that it's play on. You heard the umpirie though ...it was "his natural ark"....fair dinkum. Absolute farce...... a discraceful blight on our game tonight was. They are ruining it quick fast if they continue to single handedly determine results like this

Well every time he kicks, to me he has exactly the same ark. Forgetting all that though the umpire must call play on.

saintnick12 · Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:43am

Mr Magic wrote:I heard the umpire explain to Joey (on teh replay) that it was Buddy's 'natural arc'.

Could someone who knows the rules please explain where I can find 'natural arc' in either the rulebook or the DVD so that I can better understand how a player on the boundary line can move 5 steps to his side without it being 'play on' and yet others can move 1 step and be called to 'play on'?

Who determines each player's 'natural arc'?

Apparently its a new rule - the "Buddy Rule"

He is allowed to run out on whatever arc he wants.

dcstkfc · Post: # 961379Post **dcstkfc** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:44am

FraserGehrig wrote:Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others

Shocking call, only player in the league who gets the allowance. Double standards.

plugger66 · Post: # 961382Post **plugger66** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:46am

Why would he run to kick like that if it wasnt his natural ark. He wasnt opening up the angle for a shot at goal. The umpires were poor toniight but that decision was 100% correct.

jonesy · Post: # 961383Post **jonesy** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:46am

Mr Magic wrote:I heard the umpire explain to Joey (on teh replay) that it was Buddy's 'natural arc'.

Could someone who knows the rules please explain where I can find 'natural arc' in either the rulebook or the DVD so that I can better understand how a player on the boundary line can move 5 steps to his side without it being 'play on' and yet others can move 1 step and be called to 'play on'?

Who determines each player's 'natural arc'?

You know the rules are flexible against us don't you? Make them up however you can...it'simple. They don't like Bakes,Milne,Schneider....and have a lasting hatred from the GT days. Probably better that we cleared these lot off at years end,maybe we can play on a level playing field again. Then us supporters can go into games again maybe knowing that we will have a fair game officiated

kosifantutti23 · Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:46am

If allowances are made for his 'natural arc' then he should be placed on a more difficult angle so that his natural arc brings him over the man on the mark.

saint3d · Post: # 961385Post **saint3d** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:46am

plugger66 wrote:
jonesy wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
jonesy wrote:
FraserGehrig wrote:Heard the umpire explaining to Joey that he has to allow for Buddys natural ark, it cant be fair that he gets a larger protected space than others
Its the Stkilda rule.....

One rule for one,another rule for the other 15

laughable
Yes that makes sense. Joey was stupid. There was no play on call.

It makes sense when someone go's on a 8 meter ark off there line that it's play on. You heard the umpirie though ...it was "his natural ark"....fair dinkum. Absolute farce...... a discraceful blight on our game tonight was. They are ruining it quick fast if they continue to single handedly determine results like this
Well every time he kicks, to me he has exactly the same ark. Forgetting all that though the umpire must call play on.

By that logic Milne should be allowed to run around on either side. His natural arc puts him at right angles with the goals.

plugger66 · Post: # 961388Post **plugger66** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:47am

jonesy wrote:
Mr Magic wrote:I heard the umpire explain to Joey (on teh replay) that it was Buddy's 'natural arc'.

Could someone who knows the rules please explain where I can find 'natural arc' in either the rulebook or the DVD so that I can better understand how a player on the boundary line can move 5 steps to his side without it being 'play on' and yet others can move 1 step and be called to 'play on'?

Who determines each player's 'natural arc'?
You know the rules are flexible against us don't you? Make them up however you can...it'simple. They don't like Bakes,Milne,Schneider....and have a lasting hatred from the GT days. Probably better that we cleared these lot off at years end,maybe we can play on a level playing field again. Then us supporters can go into games again maybe knowing that we will have a fair game officiated

What are you saying? that they wanted the hawks to win.

Mr Magic · Post: # 961389Post **Mr Magic** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:47am

plugger66 wrote:Why would he run to kick like that if it wasnt his natural ark. He wasnt opening up the angle for a shot at goal. The umpires were poor toniight but that decision was 100% correct.

You're mistaken.
Of course it was opening up the angle of the goal.
He was on the boundary line at the Lockett end, kicking on his left. He ran inwards, not outwards to the boundary line.

degruch · Post: # 961391Post **degruch** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:48am

His 'natural arc' took him within a meter or so of Joey, standing 5m off the ball...can't see any free in it whatsoever. New rules every week...sure is exciting.

saint3d · Post: # 961394Post **saint3d** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:49am

plugger66 wrote:Why would he run to kick like that if it wasnt his natural ark. He wasnt opening up the angle for a shot at goal. The umpires were poor toniight but that decision was 100% correct.

It was only correct if/because the umpire didn't call play on. You can't say the umpire shouldn't have called play on, though.

plugger66 · Post: # 961395Post **plugger66** » Sat 24 Jul 2010 1:49am

Mr Magic wrote:
plugger66 wrote:Why would he run to kick like that if it wasnt his natural ark. He wasnt opening up the angle for a shot at goal. The umpires were poor toniight but that decision was 100% correct.
You're mistaken.
Of course it was opening up the angle of the goal.
He was on the boundary line at the Lockett end, kicking on his left. He ran inwards, not outwards to the boundary line.

Not to mant left footers run outwards. Whatch him kick every time it the same. Did the umpire call play on?

50 against Joey

50 against Joey

Re: 50 against Joey

Re: 50 against Joey

Re: 50 against Joey

Re: 50 against Joey

Re: 50 against Joey

Re: 50 against Joey

Re: 50 against Joey

Re: 50 against Joey

Re: 50 against Joey