50 against Marshall

[Trixilver]

What the **** was that? Was literally struggeling to stand up and because he was injured he lifted his leg and that means a 50 metre penalty because of the man-on-the-mark rule. Do we seriously want this in our game?

[Munga]

Yeah the guy could hardly put weight on it. You'd think common sense would prevail.

[kosifantutti]

Meanwhile, Kennedy was able to do the Time Warp while standing the mark.

[The_Dud]

It’s a terrible rule, was always going to happen.

[saynta]

What the **** was that? Was literally struggeling to stand up and because he was injured he lifted his leg and that means a 50 metre penalty because of the man-on-the-mark rule. Do we seriously want this in our game?

No. that was a f****** joke but typical of the mindset from the type of arsehole who wants to be a maggot.

They remind me of school prefects.

[Mr Magic]

It’s a terrible rule, was always going to happen.

But correct?

[The_Dud]

It’s a terrible rule, was always going to happen.

But correct?

Yep, correct decision according to the rule.

[ace]

Yeah the guy could hardly put weight on it. You'd think common sense would prevail.

What would the umpire do if he sat down.
Would he shout "stand".

[ace]

What the **** was that? Was literally struggeling to stand up and because he was injured he lifted his leg and that means a 50 metre penalty because of the man-on-the-mark rule. Do we seriously want this in our game?

No. that was a f****** joke but typical of the mindset from the type of arsehole who wants to be a maggot.

They remind me of school prefects.

We called them "Defects".
Ignored their friends misdemeanors but enforced on others.

[SAINT-LEE]

Speaking of clarity on rules...
In the 4th, inside Saints 50....Liam runs too far and Crouch just misses a tackle, whistle blows and King runs up and gives Liam a light bump in the back ( maybe a tiny bit of Liam's shoulder)....Crouch prepares to kick and umpire gives King the ball because Crouch didn't lay the tackle? WTF?
The whistle blew, King didn't lay a tackle...why did he get the ball? He actually ran into a player who stopped running, Feck all effort in actual play...

So why?

[Mr Magic]

Speaking of clarity on rules...
In the 4th, inside Saints 50....Liam runs too far and Crouch just misses a tackle, whistle blows and King runs up and gives Liam a light bump in the back ( maybe a tiny bit of Liam's shoulder)....Crouch prepares to kick and umpire gives King the ball because Crouch didn't lay the tackle? WTF?
The whistle blew, King didn't lay a tackle...why did he get the ball? He actually ran into a player who stopped running, Feck all effort in actual play...

So why?

Liam ran too far and King was the closest Saints player

[Sainter_Dad]

Speaking of clarity on rules...
In the 4th, inside Saints 50....Liam runs too far and Crouch just misses a tackle, whistle blows and King runs up and gives Liam a light bump in the back ( maybe a tiny bit of Liam's shoulder)....Crouch prepares to kick and umpire gives King the ball because Crouch didn't lay the tackle? WTF?
The whistle blew, King didn't lay a tackle...why did he get the ball? He actually ran into a player who stopped running, Feck all effort in actual play...

So why?

The free was for running too far - and King was the nearest player (having just bumped) at the time the free was paid.

[SAINT-LEE]

Speaking of clarity on rules...
In the 4th, inside Saints 50....Liam runs too far and Crouch just misses a tackle, whistle blows and King runs up and gives Liam a light bump in the back ( maybe a tiny bit of Liam's shoulder)....Crouch prepares to kick and umpire gives King the ball because Crouch didn't lay the tackle? WTF?
The whistle blew, King didn't lay a tackle...why did he get the ball? He actually ran into a player who stopped running, Feck all effort in actual play...

So why?

The free was for running too far - and King was the nearest player (having just bumped) at the time the free was paid.

Right, I thought the closest rule is superseded if a played is touched before the whistle blows.

[SAINT-LEE]

Speaking of clarity on rules...
In the 4th, inside Saints 50....Liam runs too far and Crouch just misses a tackle, whistle blows and King runs up and gives Liam a light bump in the back ( maybe a tiny bit of Liam's shoulder)....Crouch prepares to kick and umpire gives King the ball because Crouch didn't lay the tackle? WTF?
The whistle blew, King didn't lay a tackle...why did he get the ball? He actually ran into a player who stopped running, Feck all effort in actual play...

So why?

The free was for running too far - and King was the nearest player (having just bumped) at the time the free was paid.

Right, I thought the closest player rule is superseded if a player is touched before the whistle blows.

[The_Dud]

Yep, that was another little gift from the umps in the last quarter

[saynta]

Yep, that was another little gift from the umps in the last quarter

What, you saying a player can run as far as he wants without bouncing the ball, and if a maggot pings him it's a gift. f***, you really don't know the rules do you?

[therabbitinthehat]

Yep, that was another little gift from the umps in the last quarter

What, you saying a player can run as far as he wants without bouncing the ball, and if a maggot pings him it's a gift. f***, you really don't know the rules do you?

I think he was implying giving the kick to King instead of Crouch was the gift

[Sainter_Dad]

Yep, that was another little gift from the umps in the last quarter

What, you saying a player can run as far as he wants without bouncing the ball, and if a maggot pings him it's a gift. f***, you really don't know the rules do you?

I think he was implying giving the kick to King instead of Crouch was the gift

No - you are wrong - go and stand in the corner and wallow in your wrongness - to "The_Dud" every free against St Kilda is warranted - every one to St Kilda is a gift

[The_Dud]

Yep, that was another little gift from the umps in the last quarter

What, you saying a player can run as far as he wants without bouncing the ball, and if a maggot pings him it's a gift. f***, you really don't know the rules do you?

I think he was implying giving the kick to King instead of Crouch was the gift

No - you are wrong - go and stand in the corner and wallow in your wrongness - to "The_Dud" every free against St Kilda is warranted - every one to St Kilda is a gift

No, you’re thinking of Curly but in reverse.

I’m actually clever enough to realise that some go your way and some don’t, and over time it all evens itself out.

And then some genuine argued the Wilkie blatant jumper pull of Cripps was a wrong decision. Yes, people are that clueless.

Where do you stand?

[stevie]

At the G, the maggots are doing everything possible to keep Geebung in it But to no avail It’s a disgrace

[Sainter_Dad]

Yep, that was another little gift from the umps in the last quarter

What, you saying a player can run as far as he wants without bouncing the ball, and if a maggot pings him it's a gift. f***, you really don't know the rules do you?

I think he was implying giving the kick to King instead of Crouch was the gift

No - you are wrong - go and stand in the corner and wallow in your wrongness - to "The_Dud" every free against St Kilda is warranted - every one to St Kilda is a gift

No, you’re thinking of Curly but in reverse.

I’m actually clever enough to realise that some go your way and some don’t, and over time it all evens itself out.

And then some genuine argued the Wilkie blatant jumper pull of Cripps was a wrong decision. Yes, people are that clueless.

Where do you stand?

I am sorry if I have mistaken which side of the fence you stand - but in truth you both blend into this annoying buzz during the the Match Thread

I used to Umpire at a lower level - Umpires have their days some good some bad - but railing against the Umpiring is like shouting at the Wind - you should be good enough to negate their bad days - having said that - I am as St Kilda biased as the next person. Umpiring can change a game - but if you are good enough you will still overcome

Also - I am a fan of consistent umpiring - which I feel we have not had since multiple umpires were introduced as each will see an event differently - I would rather that frees are missed completely due to a single umpire not being able to cover the ground than a holding free at one end being paid as an incorrect disposal at the other

Also,also - I know that Umpire Interpretation is an evil concept - but I would rather that an umpire call for 'dangerous tackle' rather than too high - if it is a touch on the shoulder that does not impede - then it should not be a free to Mr Selwood. If you touch a player but they recover to still compete for the ball - nothing to see here

[saynta]

What the **** was that? Was literally struggeling to stand up and because he was injured he lifted his leg and that means a 50 metre penalty because of the man-on-the-mark rule. Do we seriously want this in our game?

No. that was a f****** joke but typical of the mindset from the type of arsehole who wants to be a maggot.

They remind me of school prefects.

We called them "Defects".
Ignored their friends misdemeanors but enforced on others.

There you are then. Exactly the same as maggots.

If you replace the wordfriendswith the word favourites.

[The_Dud]

Yep, that was another little gift from the umps in the last quarter

What, you saying a player can run as far as he wants without bouncing the ball, and if a maggot pings him it's a gift. f***, you really don't know the rules do you?

I think he was implying giving the kick to King instead of Crouch was the gift

No - you are wrong - go and stand in the corner and wallow in your wrongness - to "The_Dud" every free against St Kilda is warranted - every one to St Kilda is a gift

No, you’re thinking of Curly but in reverse.

I’m actually clever enough to realise that some go your way and some don’t, and over time it all evens itself out.

And then some genuine argued the Wilkie blatant jumper pull of Cripps was a wrong decision. Yes, people are that clueless.

Where do you stand?

I am sorry if I have mistaken which side of the fence you stand - but in truth you both blend into this annoying buzz during the the Match Thread

I used to Umpire at a lower level - Umpires have their days some good some bad - but railing against the Umpiring is like shouting at the Wind - you should be good enough to negate their bad days - having said that - I am as St Kilda biased as the next person. Umpiring can change a game - but if you are good enough you will still overcome

Also - I am a fan of consistent umpiring - which I feel we have not had since multiple umpires were introduced as each will see an event differently - I would rather that frees are missed completely due to a single umpire not being able to cover the ground than a holding free at one end being paid as an incorrect disposal at the other

Also,also - I know that Umpire Interpretation is an evil concept - but I would rather that an umpire call for 'dangerous tackle' rather than too high - if it is a touch on the shoulder that does not impede - then it should not be a free to Mr Selwood. If you touch a player but they recover to still compete for the ball - nothing to see here

Yes I agree there should be little to no umpire talk in the match thread.

I would also prefer the umps let more go, like they generally do in finals, makes for a better game.

But then some expect every ticky-tack free to go our way and basic assault against our opposition to not be paid, it’s laughable!

[saynta]

Yep, that was another little gift from the umps in the last quarter

What, you saying a player can run as far as he wants without bouncing the ball, and if a maggot pings him it's a gift. f***, you really don't know the rules do you?

I think he was implying giving the kick to King instead of Crouch was the gift

No - you are wrong - go and stand in the corner and wallow in your wrongness - to "The_Dud" every free against St Kilda is warranted - every one to St Kilda is a gift

No, you’re thinking of Curly but in reverse.

I’m actually clever enough to realise that some go your way and some don’t, and over time it all evens itself out.

And then some genuine argued the Wilkie blatant jumper pull of Cripps was a wrong decision. Yes, people are that clueless.

Where do you stand?

I am sorry if I have mistaken which side of the fence you stand - but in truth you both blend into this annoying buzz during the the Match Thread

I used to Umpire at a lower level - Umpires have their days some good some bad - but railing against the Umpiring is like shouting at the Wind - you should be good enough to negate their bad days - having said that - I am as St Kilda biased as the next person. Umpiring can change a game - but if you are good enough you will still overcome

Also - I am a fan of consistent umpiring - which I feel we have not had since multiple umpires were introduced as each will see an event differently - I would rather that frees are missed completely due to a single umpire not being able to cover the ground than a holding free at one end being paid as an incorrect disposal at the other

Also,also - I know that Umpire Interpretation is an evil concept - but I would rather that an umpire call for 'dangerous tackle' rather than too high - if it is a touch on the shoulder that does not impede - then it should not be a free to Mr Selwood. If you touch a player but they recover to still compete for the ball - nothing to see here

Yes I agree there should be little to no umpire talk in the match thread.

I would also prefer the umps let more go, like they generally do in finals, makes for a better game.

But then some expect every ticky-tack free to go our way and basic assault against our opposition to not be paid, it’s laughable!

What's laughable is your boring defence of f****** wrong maggot decisions and your recent attempts to stifle free speech in match threads .

Let's not forget that the forum boss has only put two posters on notice with a ban threat for certain argumentive posts in the match thread, one of which is you.

[The_Dud]

Yep, that was another little gift from the umps in the last quarter

What, you saying a player can run as far as he wants without bouncing the ball, and if a maggot pings him it's a gift. f***, you really don't know the rules do you?

I think he was implying giving the kick to King instead of Crouch was the gift

No - you are wrong - go and stand in the corner and wallow in your wrongness - to "The_Dud" every free against St Kilda is warranted - every one to St Kilda is a gift

No, you’re thinking of Curly but in reverse.

I’m actually clever enough to realise that some go your way and some don’t, and over time it all evens itself out.

And then some genuine argued the Wilkie blatant jumper pull of Cripps was a wrong decision. Yes, people are that clueless.

Where do you stand?

I am sorry if I have mistaken which side of the fence you stand - but in truth you both blend into this annoying buzz during the the Match Thread

I used to Umpire at a lower level - Umpires have their days some good some bad - but railing against the Umpiring is like shouting at the Wind - you should be good enough to negate their bad days - having said that - I am as St Kilda biased as the next person. Umpiring can change a game - but if you are good enough you will still overcome

Also - I am a fan of consistent umpiring - which I feel we have not had since multiple umpires were introduced as each will see an event differently - I would rather that frees are missed completely due to a single umpire not being able to cover the ground than a holding free at one end being paid as an incorrect disposal at the other

Also,also - I know that Umpire Interpretation is an evil concept - but I would rather that an umpire call for 'dangerous tackle' rather than too high - if it is a touch on the shoulder that does not impede - then it should not be a free to Mr Selwood. If you touch a player but they recover to still compete for the ball - nothing to see here

Yes I agree there should be little to no umpire talk in the match thread.

I would also prefer the umps let more go, like they generally do in finals, makes for a better game.

But then some expect every ticky-tack free to go our way and basic assault against our opposition to not be paid, it’s laughable!

What's laughable is your boring defence of f****** wrong maggot decisions and your recent attempts to stifle free speech in match threads .

Let's not forget that the forum boss has only put two posters on notice with a ban threat for certain argumentive posts in the match thread, one of which is you.

Haha, I love how Boomers think ‘free speech’ means no one is allowed to call them out on their crap