Review Cats drop Bombers by 45 at MCG

[Goggin Our Best]

The wild thing about Brad Scott is, he has a perfect example of how to look far more handsome in his twin brother, yet he's sticking to the short hair and no beard. How can we trust anything that guy says or thinks?!

In their playing days , they were known as the Kray Twin brothers , thats how hard they played

 

[Play it Sam]

I think what also screwed Menzie on the rushed behind is that he had the time to look over his shoulder and even with our guys having backed off, he chose to still run it through

I wouldn't be surprised if he may have got away with it had he not taken that look behind, but otherwise it was blatant what he wanted to do

Spot on, exactly what we called at home. That was the dead giveaway. Could have pretended to lose control, not look behind him, and punch it through, but took possession and squibbed it. Serves him right, basic back keeping.

 

[Cataholic]

Yikes, I just read where B Scott unfurled on 360- says AFL told him both Draper non call and Menzie rush were wrong.
Haha. Conversely, his brother C Scott, when we get nutted, says umpiring is a hard ask.
We know who got more weeties in their bowl when they were kids.

Oh to be a fly on the bread at the next family bbq!

 

[cats_09]

Here's the link to the Brad Scott chat on AFL 360 tonight

AFL’s shift on ump verdicts as Bombers coach admitted several errors after furore

AFL’s ‘pivotal’ ump shift as Dons boss reveals league admitted several blunders after furore

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[Play it Sam]

In their playing days , they were known as the Kray Twin brothers , thats how hard they played

Oh I haven't forgotten how DIRTY they played.
Different daze then.

 

[catempire]

Here's the link to the Brad Scott chat on AFL 360 tonight

AFL’s shift on ump verdicts as Bombers coach admitted several errors after furore

AFL’s ‘pivotal’ ump shift as Dons boss reveals league admitted several blunders after furore

www.foxsports.com.au

If that is not deliberate we are back to the 2008 GF.

 

[noclashjumpers]

I think what also screwed Menzie on the rushed behind is that he had the time to look over his shoulder and even with our guys having backed off, he chose to still run it through

I wouldn't be surprised if he may have got away with it had he not taken that look behind, but otherwise it was blatant what he wanted to do

I agree with that reasoning as to why he might've got pinged. But it was still an incorrect decision.

 

[noclashjumpers]

If that is not deliberate we are back to the 2008 GF.

Agree with that too. But with the laws as they are, it wasn't a free. Seems pointless to even have it on the books.

 

[#6 Thorp #7 Selwood LOL]

I agree with that reasoning as to why he might've got pinged. But it was still an incorrect decision.

Why?

Did he deliberately run the ball across the line? Absolutely he did.

Did he have the option not to run it across the line? Without question.

Was he under pressure from an opponent? No, they had both backed off. He may have assumed he was under pressure, but in reality he wasn’t, which the umpire saw, and rightfully paid the free kick.

 

[catempire]

Agree with that too. But with the laws as they are, it wasn't a free. Seems pointless to even have it on the books.

Incorrect. He was not under immediate pressure as the rules require.

 

[Cataholic]

Agree with that too. But with the laws as they are, it wasn't a free. Seems pointless to even have it on the books.

He was under no pressure at all. He waltzes it across the line anyway.

A free every time for me.

 

[Cursed Cat]

Incorrect. He was not under immediate pressure as the rules require.

He was under no pressure at all. He waltzes it across the line anyway.

A free every time for me.

This was paid just a couple of weeks ago.

 

[TEDDY24INC]

This was paid just a couple of weeks ago.

That was like 7 or more years ago

 

[Play it Sam]

This was paid just a couple of weeks ago.

At least that Richmunt player pretended he lost it.
And they are so bad we could believe he did.

 

[year of the cat]

Great speech by his dad!

I was ready to run through brick walls!

 

[cats_09]

 

[Goggin Our Best]

I was ready to run through brick walls!

His father spoke like Maguire the ex Balmain and now NSW State of Origin coach

 

[The_Koulouriotis_Fan]

That was like 7 or more years ago

There was one last week. But interesting how 7 years ago the commentators say it's a free, but in our game they complained on and on that it is not. Maybe the issue is less the umpiring and more the media's reactions.

 

[#6 Thorp #7 Selwood LOL]

If B Scott got a call to say the Ridley decision was wrong, I guess they’ll get on the blower to C Scott tomorrow to apologise for the Tuohy one in the 4th quarter. ZT even legally disposed of the thing!

 

[Cursed Cat]

At least that Richmunt player pretended he lost it.
And they are so bad we could believe he did.

exactly; he at least made a pretense at fumbling, the Essendon dude just ran it over without shame nor contrition.

 

[Gavin Excell]

My god I need them to stfu about this now. Who cares!? We won by 7 goals. I’ve seen a heap of those arm chops not paid before.
I don’t understand the blow up in the media around this?

It seems one of these dickheads in the media points something out and now everyone jumps on it.
There is so many umpiring mistakes in EVERY game.

The media have far too much say. Now David King is jumping on board saying it completely swung the game.
These media clowns almost dictate how the game goes.

It's a deflection from the fact they can't beat anyone in the 8

 

[Art Vandelay_]

What a good effort.

It's only the Bombers, but having a bit of energy on the ground with the youngsters plus a more dynamic forward line without Hawkins seems to be the ticket.

Given the softish run home we should make the 8. Who knows what happens from there.

I don't think we'll win it if we make it but what I want is to be this September's wrecking ball.
Make sure we ruin someone's hopes in the process.

 

[year of the cat]

I don't think we'll win it if we make it but what I want is to be this September's wrecking ball.
Make sure we ruin someone's hopes in the process.

Preferably the Pies.

 

[noclashjumpers]

Incorrect. He was not under immediate pressure as the rules require.

He was under no pressure at all. He waltzes it across the line anyway.

A free every time for me.

For context I absolutely think it should be a free, otherwise it's completely pointless, and as has been rightly pointed out, takes us back to the 2008 GF.

But it stands the criteria for a free kick to be paid for a rushed behind are that the defending player in question:

(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;
(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;
(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or
(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line
or Behind Line on the full.

Now it's important to note that (as written) these are compound criteria and there is not a presumptive 'OR'. (which exists only in reference to the ruck criteria, thus highlighting the lack of the presumptive 'ORs' for the other criteria).

Now with Menzie; clearly a tick to both B & C (although some are trying to dispute B). But in this instance the sticking point is A.

So the problem with criteria A is that it seems disputable as to whether a player can ever be pinged if they walk it over. Because it calls into question the meaning of the nine meters. Does the player need to be nine meters from the goal line when they deliver the ball over the line? ...Or is it they can walk it over, but it can be deemed that when they were at the nine metre mark, they were also in trouble with criteria B and C?

It terms of its application on game day, it's a mess as written.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

If that is not deliberate we are back to the 2008 GF.

That day is NEVER to be spoken about. #toosoon