No Oppo Supporters General AFL Discussion #10 - Carlton Posters ONLY!

[GordonBlue]

Kicked close to 50 goals last year. Pretty handy player.

I am not saying he isn't a good player, but he is not the best. Far from it.

Martin is the best player in the comp hand down.

 

[Lace_Out]

I am not saying he isn't a good player, but he is not the best. Far from it.

Martin is the best player in the comp hand down.

There is a reason he cleaned up last year.
How he can not be number 1 after all that is mind boggling.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[StandByyourMan]

leaving that limp wristed drunk who wrote the article aside...

Joe Daniher is a fantastic footballer mate - in fact for Carlton right now - he would be a PERFECT get ahead of the other three you quote.

Hope he gets osteo pubis. Did i just say that or only think it?

 

[Blue__Balls]

To wipe away your tears of joy?

Ummm....yeah...let's go with that...

 

[Lawrence Angwin]

He takes selfish options half the time
He butchers the ball half the time
He does flashy shit and people forget the shit kick he turned over few seconds earlier

Martin is a better footballer in every way except acceleration.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Dangerfield has been at the top of the tree for 4 years, Martin 1 year.
Yet in Martin's best ever year last season he had more clangers, more turnovers and a lower disposal efficiency than Danger despite Dangerfield averaging more possessions.
Both are great players, neither is overrated.
But Dangerfield is still number 1




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Blue Pulse]

All of this adds up to an AFL message to the umpires not to over umpire, to only pay the obvious ones. It was either last year or the year before that we began the season with an average of 25 free kicks per match across the first 4 rounds, and everyone was happy with it, saying it was good that the umps put away the whistle and let them play.

Put very simply, the AFL won't do it, because the perception is that while the players throw and drop the ball without repercussion - unless it's good theatre, ala a Cyril/Puopolo tackle - it's better than a 60-80 frees a match situation.

Totally agree with what you are saying, but here in lies the problem. The governing body (AFL) are trying to perfect the game from the outer. They say they are proactive and not reactive. (Hang on a minute, Lindsay Thomas sliding in and breaking Rohan's leg - rule change, centre bounce rule change after the North v someone game where the centre bounce came out of the circle and straight to North who ended up kicking a goal and winning.)

The interpretation of the rules changes every 6 weeks, not because of the umpires but because of the governing body trying to fix the game from the outer. Watch last years GF, the centre bounce was never recalled even though at least 4 ball ups went out of the centre circle, now why would you change a rule that has been in vogue all year in the final game?

 

[JustaBattler]

Hope he gets osteo pubis. Did i just say that or only think it?

You are a naughty boy even thinking wot you may or may not have typed

 

[ODNBlue]

Totally agree with what you are saying, but here in lies the problem. The governing body (AFL) are trying to perfect the game from the outer. They say they are proactive and not reactive. (Hang on a minute, Lindsay Thomas sliding in and breaking Rohan's leg - rule change, centre bounce rule change after the North v someone game where the centre bounce came out of the circle and straight to North who ended up kicking a goal and winning.)

The interpretation of the rules changes every 6 weeks, not because of the umpires but because of the governing body trying to fix the game from the outer. Watch last years GF, the centre bounce was never recalled even though at least 4 ball ups went out of the centre circle, now why would you change a rule that has been in vogue all year in the final game?

Agreed.

The centre bounce is interesting. I gather that they've decided in their wisdom to let it be play-on if the umpire doesn't feel one team is overly advantaged by the skewed bounce. So, basically, they've taken a rule that was adjudicated objectively(ish), i.e., the ball was outside the circle, to one in which the umpire's opinion is the deciding factor. That'll make things better.

 

[BLUEALLTHRU]

I wrote an article for The Roar, about half way through last year

I love The Roar and a poster called Macca, his passion for anything Carlton is incredible. Great stuff G !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[GordonBlue]

Dangerfield has been at the top of the tree for 4 years, Martin 1 year.
Yet in Martin's best ever year last season he had more clangers, more turnovers and a lower disposal efficiency than Danger despite Dangerfield averaging more possessions.
Both are great players, neither is overrated.
But Dangerfield is still number 1




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

I choose to watch the game.

Martin turns a "no options" situation into a goal scoring option
Dangerfield turns a "multiple options" situation into "go for glory"

Without Martin, Richmond had no chance of winning the flag

Without Dangerfield, Adelaide got closer to winning the flag
With Dangerfield, Geelong are no closer to winning the flag

Dangerfield is a gun, but I would take many player ahead of him... I see Martin as the best in the comp.

 

[gandaal]

Without Dangerfield, Adelaide got closer to winning the flag
With Dangerfield, Geelong are no closer to winning the flag

In 2015 Geelong finished 10th.

They recruited Dangerfield.

In 2016 they finished 2nd.

 

[WFGodot]

The sooner umpies get more respect the better the game will be. For the 40 Billionth time let me lay it out: our game is virtually un-umpirable now. The speed, the grey areas in the rules, the pressure, the cameras, the divers.....even people who adjudicate at kid's level say it ain't no walk in the park. Umpires love the game too - the game has to love em back.

Agree but there needs to be consistency in the rules application. Pagan was once asked about rules changes at the start of a season and he replied, I’m paraphrasing here, my rule would be, no new rules for 5 years.

 

[thylacine60]

that's what every supporter screams about, leave the rules alone - some rules are great - the oof for instance - but that's been around since the 70's - the kneejerk "let's cover our arses in case someone gets hurt" changes are another boiling receptacle with marine animals inside altogether

 

[CJMB]

In 2015 Geelong finished 10th.

They recruited Dangerfield.

In 2016 they finished 2nd.

and the Adelaide argument doesn't take into consideration the rise of Matt Crouch (and Brad actually getting onto the park with reasonable consistency), Rory Laird, Jake Lever, Mitch McGovern, Charlie Cameron, Hugh Greenwood, etc

 

[Gethelred]

Totally agree with what you are saying, but here in lies the problem. The governing body (AFL) are trying to perfect the game from the outer. They say they are proactive and not reactive. (Hang on a minute, Lindsay Thomas sliding in and breaking Rohan's leg - rule change, centre bounce rule change after the North v someone game where the centre bounce came out of the circle and straight to North who ended up kicking a goal and winning.)

The interpretation of the rules changes every 6 weeks, not because of the umpires but because of the governing body trying to fix the game from the outer. Watch last years GF, the centre bounce was never recalled even though at least 4 ball ups went out of the centre circle, now why would you change a rule that has been in vogue all year in the final game?

No offense intended here BP, but you're being part of the problem here.

This whole conversation began with comments about how the game is borderline in-umpirable these days, due to the combination of speed, congestion and limited perspective any individual umpire has over proceedings. The AFL are certainly trying to bring about better games via the vehicle of changing the rules, but the whole discussion around 'free of the week' is canted towards the perspective of 'leave the game alone, let the boys play'; all of it creating a climate in which, should the AFL/umpires try to change the game in such a way as discussed - paying incorrect disposal when a clear handpass/kick isn't obvious - they will immediately cop abuse along the lines of the above.

If the AFL wants to tinker, instead of the knee-jerk reaction force fed to us by the media - 'is this netball? tiggy-touchwood free kicks! Just let the boys play! Overumpiring, attention-seekers!' - let's instead just watch, and wait to see if measures succeed towards what they're trying to do. This creates a climate in which change - when it works - is possible, and will lead to a better spectacle.

 

[Lawrence Angwin]

He takes selfish options half the time
He butchers the ball half the time
He does flashy shit and people forget the shit kick he turned over few seconds earlier

Martin is a better footballer in every way except acceleration.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Dangerfield has been at the top of the tree for 4 years, Martin 1 year.
Yet in Martin's best ever year last season he had more clangers, more turnovers and a lower disposal efficiency than Danger despite Dangerfield averaging more possessions.
Both are great players, neither is overrated.
But Dangerfield is still number 1




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

I choose to watch the game.

Martin turns a "no options" situation into a goal scoring option
Dangerfield turns a "multiple options" situation into "go for glory"

Without Martin, Richmond had no chance of winning the flag

Without Dangerfield, Adelaide got closer to winning the flag
With Dangerfield, Geelong are no closer to winning the flag

Dangerfield is a gun, but I would take many player ahead of him... I see Martin as the best in the comp.

Are you insinuating that I don't watch the game?
I merely disputed your claims of Danger "butchering the ball half the time" but alerting you to the fact that Martin has more clangers & turnovers than he has.
Maybe if you chose to watch the game a little closer you would see that most contested players have a low disposal efficiency because they are often often under pressure from a close checking opponent.
Martin has had one elite year. He'll need more than that before I'm prepared to anoint him the best in the comp.



On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Blue Pulse]

No offense intended here BP, but you're being part of the problem here.

This whole conversation began with comments about how the game is borderline in-umpirable these days, due to the combination of speed, congestion and limited perspective any individual umpire has over proceedings. The AFL are certainly trying to bring about better games via the vehicle of changing the rules, but the whole discussion around 'free of the week' is canted towards the perspective of 'leave the game alone, let the boys play'; all of it creating a climate in which, should the AFL/umpires try to change the game in such a way as discussed - paying incorrect disposal when a clear handpass/kick isn't obvious - they will immediately cop abuse along the lines of the above.

If the AFL wants to tinker, instead of the knee-jerk reaction force fed to us by the media - 'is this netball? tiggy-touchwood free kicks! Just let the boys play! Overumpiring, attention-seekers!' - let's instead just watch, and wait to see if measures succeed towards what they're trying to do. This creates a climate in which change - when it works - is possible, and will lead to a better spectacle.

None taken, I'm not going by what the media or AFL feeds me, I'm going by what I see at the game on a weekly basis. The AFL have created a rod for their own back by opening up the rules for interpretation. Heck I don't care if an umpire misses a call, or is blindsided but the AFL govern the umpires who change the way they umpire over 6-7 weekly periods.

If the AFL was serious about the way the game is being umpired they would make the umpires professional, my beef isn't with the umpires, it's the governing body who in my opinion is ruining the spectacle.

I don't see the point of umpiring the game from rounds 1-23 one way and then the finals another. The rules should not change during a season, however interpretation allows them to bend.

 

[Gethelred]

Yep.

Professional umpires who train together full time and fly out for the weekend to matches would go a LONG way towards single, unambiguous interpretations of the rules across the entire season, rather than having multiple interpretations over a single round. And, in the event of the AFL tinkering with the rules, the umpires can be fully briefed on it and prepare for it during their training.

I'm as cynical as anyone about the AFL's desire to tinker with the rules and the game. I just think that sometimes Australians love a whinge, and they'll take any opportunity to do so, something the media in Melbourne is happy to provide.

 

[BLUEALLTHRU]

The standard of umpiring and consistency would improve if they were professional. End of Story

 

[Gethelred]

I am not saying he isn't a good player, but he is not the best. Far from it.

Martin is the best player in the comp hand down.

Is Buddy chopped liver?

 

[Iamcarlton]

And that, right there is the issue. I think this bloke could be a (Luke Livingston sized) bust. I've heard more than once that he has a healthy opinion of himself, he has not earned it yet - and to boot has Fevolaesque body language on the ground.

Bit harsh putting Mckay in Fevola territory re-body language . Doesnt come anywhere near Fevola on that topic . He's played 2 games of senior regular season footy . Looked quite good v brisbane then injury struck again . Probably need to give him some more time before making those kind of statements yeah ?

 

[DangerousD]

Agree but there needs to be consistency in the rules application. Pagan was once asked about rules changes at the start of a season and he replied, I’m paraphrasing here, my rule would be, no new rules for 5 years.

No new rules won't help anything when the AFL changes the interpretation of the existing rules every few rounds.

 

[WFGodot]

Bit harsh putting Mckay in Fevola territory re-body language . Doesnt come anywhere near Fevola on that topic . He's played 2 games of senior regular season footy . Looked quite good v brisbane then injury struck again . Probably need to give him some more time before making those kind of statements yeah ?

Yep, quite harsh. I hope I’m wrong and will happily eat humble pie. I stand by the fact that he never deserved a game and was gifted 2 on potential. You’d normally expect a ripping month in the 2nds but we wanted to give him a taste. I watched him at the NBs and he seemed disinterested at best unless the ball was nearby - hence the body language.
Anyway, I hope he proves me wrong...

 

[Metalcrusher]

Yep, quite harsh. I hope I’m wrong and will happily eat humble pie. I stand by the fact that he never deserved a game and was gifted 2 on potential. You’d normally expect a ripping month in the 2nds but we wanted to give him a taste. I watched him at the NBs and he seemed disinterested at best unless the ball was nearby - hence the body language.
Anyway, I hope he proves me wrong...

**** me ... I remember ... can't think what year it was ... Carlton V Collingwood at the G .... last round of the season .... Fev layed down at the point post ... then got up and moved to the goal square ... and lied down ..... FOR A FULL QUARTER.

Please don't lump Hmac with that crap.

 

[mediumsizered]

Oh no, don't mistake me at all; I've been saying what you're saying for years. I wrote an article for The Roar, about half way through last year, saying that the simplest, cleanest way to clear the congestion is to pay more incorrect disposal frees, which would have a twofold effect, re-legitimizing the handball as well.

The problem is very much that people are told that the game is overumpired, over sanitized. They're told that frees are awarded, earnt, deserved, drawn; meaning that you've done something to obtain the free, when a free kick is compensation for the opposition breaking the rules not any kind of reward. We're told, by those older than we are, that the best era for footy was the 80's, and we contrast that with tales of players belting other blokes behind the ball, of the best players being the hardest, of breaking the rules and getting away with it. We hear about 'tiggy touchwood' free kicks, on talkback radio and social media; we hear of 'free kick of the week' every single week.

All of this adds up to an AFL message to the umpires not to over umpire, to only pay the obvious ones. It was either last year or the year before that we began the season with an average of 25 free kicks per match across the first 4 rounds, and everyone was happy with it, saying it was good that the umps put away the whistle and let them play.

Put very simply, the AFL won't do it, because the perception is that while the players throw and drop the ball without repercussion - unless it's good theatre, ala a Cyril/Puopolo tackle - it's better than a 60-80 frees a match situation.

I wonder what is the optimal number of free kicks in a game.

If there are 60 infringements in a game, shouldn't 60 free kicks be paid? I don't think 'over umpiring' (I'd prefer to call it paying the free kicks which are there) should be a problem. The problem is created if umpires are encouraged to reduce the number of free kicks because of perceptions of over umpiring. This can only lead to inconsistencies as some infringements will be free-kicked & then if the number of free kicks is mounting up, the umpires will start using their own discretion, e.g. "that was high contact, but only marginally high so I will let it go". Yet in the 1st quarter a similar tackle is paid as a free kick. This just sets the umpires up for criticism, when the real issue lies with what directions are coming from the AFL.

History tells us that players will adjust their game accordingly if they are being consistently free-kicked for infringements, particularly if those free kicks are resulting in goals to the opposition.