Autopsy Freo Lose To North at Home
- Thread starter Snuffaluphagus
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
Are you comfortable in the notion that you sound like a lunatic?
It's a brutal competition. If you're off by 1% you get found out. Freo are off by about 15%. Some players are nowhere near where they were last year (won't name names).
We lost to Saints, who absolutely pumped Bullies, and North by 1 point, who are light-years better than last year.
Both teams are in the honeymoon period of a new coach.
Just have to get back to work.
Snuffaluphagus
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 10, 2015
- 25,380
- 87,919
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Thread starter
- #580
Look, I hate the conspiracy shit but can you not see how blatantly dodge the timings are on everything. It's a ****ing bizarre move from the AFL.
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
No, there's reasonable explanations behind everything. I'm not trying to be a dick or troll, I'm just trying to temper the mood a bit because it's a little ridiculous and makes us Freo supporters seem like sore losers all the time.
- Jul 14, 2022
- 1,982
- 3,455
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Thanks mate, shaping to be a good game though I think if Nic Nat and Yeo aren’t back you’ll pump us in the middle and be too strong.
You must of missed our first two games. We have work to do.
- Apr 25, 2011
- 8,053
- 18,895
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Snuffaluphagus
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 10, 2015
- 25,380
- 87,919
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Thread starter
- #587
I know your not, but every single person that thinks that’s some ridiculous shit from the AFL thinks we were worse and didn’t deserve any points. People posting about the umpiring basically say every time that it made no difference, we suck and we have massive issues.
It’s just that the changing the footage and audio timing is ****ing weird and bizarre. The actual match replay marries up with everything else, the AFl released footage (seriously, why would you need to rerelease something that is easily available?) reactions are completely whack.
Again, it makes no difference, we suck, we have massive issues but I have no idea what the fuxk they are playing at changing the audio timing
- Jul 14, 2022
- 1,982
- 3,455
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Yeah your forward line is proper dog shit to be honest, was at the game yesterday and the lack of movement is confusing.
Obviously ball movement isn’t helping but when it clicks it should click fast as the talent is obviously there (maybe not forward
). If you watched us today, we played fast attacking footy for the first time in about 3-4 years, I think everyone’s starting to clock on that it’s just what you need to do in todays game.
I wouldn’t think it’d be too long before the penny drops for Longmuire and then you guys are a top 8 team again, hate Freo to be honest but I hate the dees far more so hope you lads have a good year
Maybe someone like - oh I don't know, Jackson or Darcy? Might've plucked a mark in that last kick of the game and won it for us that way.
- Jul 5, 2011
- 3,708
- 4,182
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
How many people at AFL house do you think were involved in this cover up?
The problem with this and most other conspiracies is that you need to believe that people would not only risk their careers and reputation for something so meaningless but that none of the many people involved would accidentally leak it - I don't think the AFL are that good.
I still can't believe that Clarke chose to chip it to Ryan with 15 seconds to go and Walters decision to not try and bang it as long as possible to rush a point just before that. I wonder if they have drilled being down by 1 point in any match sims at training?
- Sep 27, 2013
- 3,307
- 5,367
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Philadelpia 76'ers
And Banfield right near the line in the last seconds, soccer anyone?
- Jul 2, 2013
- 3,338
- 11,689
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
What is your explanation for the 1 second difference in audio?
It's not a question of if there is a 1 second difference ... the AFL have already acknowledged there is, but now try to blame the official broadcast as being 1 second delayed (again, not true).
Sometimes, a conspiracy is actually the simplest answer/explanation, and you don't need a team of rocket scientists involved to simply advance the audio forward 1 second on a small video.
Did you not hear their first attempt to explain the non-Free Kick on their AFL show "The Round So Far", when Riley Beveridge tries to gaslight with some narrative about how the rules require the boundary umpire to signal before the siren ... total BS, that is not true and Riley even misquotes what the field umpire said to the boundary umpire to try to make that narrative (which they then changed the following day with the AFL ARC narrative that the siren had sounded).
I’m more annoyed about the Tabs decision at the beginning of the game.
But about the siren, dead ball issue.
If a player kicks for goal, the siren sounds and the ball dribbles in, it’s a goal right?
But about the siren, dead ball issue.
If a player kicks for goal, the siren sounds and the ball dribbles in, it’s a goal right?
Yeah that's correct
- Sep 20, 2010
- 1,676
- 4,420
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
The rules are actually ambiguous about if it matters if the ball crossed the boundary or not before the siren.
18.10.2(b) just requires insufficient intent to keep the in and for the ball to cross boundary line which it did.
10.5 (b) allows an umpire to pay a free kick after the siren if they were of the opinion one should have been paid before it went. Them yelling "pay it. Pay it" would indicate they were of the opinion a free kick should be paid.
10.5(b) then goes on to clarify that an out on the full free kick (an 18.10.2(a) free kick) won't be paid if the ball lands after the siren is heard. However, the rules are silent on how an insufficient intent (an 18.10.2(b) free kick) should be treated once kicked and then the siren goes.
The fact that it isn't singled out like an out on the full would indicate that it should be treated like a scoring kick - it's still live after the siren.
18.10.2(b) just requires insufficient intent to keep the in and for the ball to cross boundary line which it did.
10.5 (b) allows an umpire to pay a free kick after the siren if they were of the opinion one should have been paid before it went. Them yelling "pay it. Pay it" would indicate they were of the opinion a free kick should be paid.
10.5(b) then goes on to clarify that an out on the full free kick (an 18.10.2(a) free kick) won't be paid if the ball lands after the siren is heard. However, the rules are silent on how an insufficient intent (an 18.10.2(b) free kick) should be treated once kicked and then the siren goes.
The fact that it isn't singled out like an out on the full would indicate that it should be treated like a scoring kick - it's still live after the siren.
I liked the previous rule were only a direct kick was out of bound. Everything else just a ball in. Less interpretation always better...
Had to stop the Ross Lyon stoppage-fest
- Dec 26, 2010
- 5,987
- 7,948
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Matildas
I only just noticed that Simpkin has a 1 week ban for an off the ball strike on Serong.
Yep - with 30 odd secs left we had ample opp to score a behind. Even Cox could have tried handballing a point. Banfield should have tried harder etc.
Jordan Clark did a pointless dinky kick that achieved a loss of about 8secs. Ruckman didn’t get a fist on the ball. Then about 6 North players at the back of the pack and zero Freo.
We got beat. Time to move on from decision at the end, which for mine looked a reasonable decision. Much fairer than Carlton game we lost at the end a couple of years ago.
Darcy could probably have punched it through at that final ball up too
Similar threads
