-
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
News Hawk Franklin gets damned by free kicks
- Thread starter gohawkz1
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Roger Rogerson
Brownlow Medallist
He gets crucified by the umps.
But the 50m penalty stats are not acceptable.
But the 50m penalty stats are not acceptable.
- Oct 17, 2011
- 8,418
- 15,817
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Exactly, that's what i never understand. Always annoys me how Scarlett never gets pinged for anything EVER. The only reason he is so good as a defender is because he gets away with everything...and had Harley helping him out
Acutally Scarlett is quite fair comparing him to the worst offender in Glass. He literally gets away with murder every week.
What would happen if Franklin played for the Eagles? Would the umpires implode?
In general play I think he sometimes gets a raw deal. Carey did too. It's the swagger and it's the umpires bias.
But - every time he takes a set shot, moves onto this "natural arc" and doesn't get called to play on he's +1 with the umps. So he's probably still ahead.
But - every time he takes a set shot, moves onto this "natural arc" and doesn't get called to play on he's +1 with the umps. So he's probably still ahead.
- Oct 17, 2011
- 8,418
- 15,817
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
He hardly even runs out that wide, he usually runs to make the angle harder further strengthening the view that it is his natural arc and so many other players do it that its not funny.
OMG, there are still people crapping on about the "natural arc". Get over it.
As for frees conceded, I don't have a real problem there, he's a tall player who tries to apply tackling pressure and it's very difficult to do at that height, you will be forever giving away frees for high contact, etc.
It's the frees he doesn't get that bothers me. Each week he's practically molested and, like Carey, Hall, etc, gets stuff all protection. I've never understood how the likes of Riewoldt gets the soft frees he does, and Buddy gets stuff all.
The ONLY reason it is noticed for buddy is because he has so many shots at goal. Every player does it to a certain extent, particularly left footers. The actual rule is that he need kick over the mark which is what he does.
Roger Rogerson
Brownlow Medallist
AH he needs to address his tackling technique to deal with his height. The club needs to address this with him. You have to strive to improve every part of your game at this level. He has been in the system for a long time and continues to make the same mistake over and over again. He is brilliant at bending down to pick the ball up so why cant he bend down to tackle??
Seriously at the start of every game we should hand the ball to the opposition after the first 10 stoppages, get it over and done with and then play on even terms. Buddy should not contest the first 5 times it is kicked to him.
Small things like giving away frees kill our momentun and in turn our confidence. We have been absolutely terrible with our free kick count the last few years. I was happy to give the odd one away when we were playing unsociable footy as a sign of aggression but it seems the aggression has subsided but the infringements remain.
It is an area we need to address critically as we continually shoot ourselves in the foot.
What annoys me more than anything is the interpretation of the umpires. A tackle by Buddy will be deemed to rough, but for others it's play on.
Buddy isn't allowed to touch other players in the back, but it's OK for them to push him.
If he were treated equal to other players it would be a blessing for us.
We all know there are other players on the other end of the spectrum, Judd, Selwood, and Ablett are a few that come to mind. However we have to put up with the situation, and I for one will be happy if Buddy can reduce the 50 metre penalties, and straighten up his kicking.
Buddy isn't allowed to touch other players in the back, but it's OK for them to push him.
If he were treated equal to other players it would be a blessing for us.
We all know there are other players on the other end of the spectrum, Judd, Selwood, and Ablett are a few that come to mind. However we have to put up with the situation, and I for one will be happy if Buddy can reduce the 50 metre penalties, and straighten up his kicking.
'literally'? Are you sure?
When you put it that way... I thought long and hard about this: yes.
- Oct 5, 2008
- 9,171
- 22,345
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Franklin has a bad tackling style. He swings his arms aggressively making the tackles look clumsy. Umpires pay free kicks against that. That's all there is to it really. No conspiracy. His height and shape don't help. Gangly guys have always had free kicks paid against them more commonly then your average player.
Lord Mud of Glenferrie
Club Legend
Hawthorn Hawks - Lowden, Anderson, Woodward Player Sponsor 2013
Hawthorn Hawks - Smith and Savage 2011 Player Sponsor
Hawthorn Hawks - Smith and Savage 2012 Player Sponsor
- Dec 13, 2008
- 1,916
- 2,442
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Canetoads Bulls Gunners Packers
Well, after reading that "news flash" there is no doubt that we should immediately De-list this liability
Most of Buddy's frees against are his own fault. The amount of times he flattens a bloke way too late or in the back after they dispose of the ball is beyond ridiculous. Take those rose coloured glasses off people.
The frees for that he misses out on is another story...
The frees for that he misses out on is another story...
Roger, I don't know how tall you are, but I am 6'5" (today's 6'7"), used to be very mobile, but no matter how I tried to tackle a smaller player, no matter how low I went in the tackle, somehow they managed to go lower. Even back then we had smaller players playing for high tackles, it really isn't easy.
I doubt there would be another 6'7" tall player in the AFL who is expected to lay the number of tackles Buddy does, and I regard this as a tactical error in coaching.
Hungry Hawk
Club Legend
- Banned
- #19
I love watching Buddy tackle. He is aggressive and hurts people. Id prefer he gives away the odd free than watch a half arsed attemp by some of our soft and cuddly tacklers.
Tackling hard gives you an oppurtunity to be in the game when you are having difficulty making an impact.
Tackling hard gives you an oppurtunity to be in the game when you are having difficulty making an impact.
If that was the case it wouldn't even have been brought up.
Highest in the league by 50 is a little more than "the odd free".
Just like giving away silly free kicks gives your opponent an opportunity to be in the game when they are having difficulty making an impact.
Hungry Hawk
Club Legend
- Banned
- #21
It is frustrating Illnino but his free's against are not all for poor tackling.
Many of them - and this is instructive - come for pushes in the back, which number 68
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-free-kicks-20120529-1zhdq.html#ixzz1wLY7eps8
Malthouse bagged his workrate against the tigers. But I reckon Buddy worked hard and showed aggression through his tackling. Impose yourself anyway you can.
This not too say he cant improve his tackling technique. I would prefer he tries to keep tackling than stop for fear of giving away a free.
Many of them - and this is instructive - come for pushes in the back, which number 68
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-free-kicks-20120529-1zhdq.html#ixzz1wLY7eps8
Malthouse bagged his workrate against the tigers. But I reckon Buddy worked hard and showed aggression through his tackling. Impose yourself anyway you can.
This not too say he cant improve his tackling technique. I would prefer he tries to keep tackling than stop for fear of giving away a free.
Yeah, his tackling doesn't really bother me to be honest (and to your credit, I didn't really catch on that that's mainly what your original post was referring to).
It's after his opponent has disposed of the ball and Buddy is withing 5 meters of him that I just know I'm going to hear a whistle. And why on earth are we (apparently) instructing him to push his opponents in the back anyway? It's definitely not to slow the play down because 9 times out of 10 it results in a free kick down the field when it could have been a 50/50 contest, or advantage is called anyway.
If it was just that he was a bad tackler, then sure you can take the good with the bad while he works at it. But when it's something so simple to rectify, like silly pushes in the back, I just don't buy the "well he can kick 10 goals in a game so don't worry about anything he does wrong" argument (not that I'm saying that's what your preaching mate).
Just putting aside the free kicks he gives away, and I agree there's way too many, I'd been considering there were (are?) umpires who tend to think the worst of Buddy and are very quick on the whistle with anything he's involved in.
In 2008, we played a final against the Bulldogs and Lake was standing Buddy, the cameras caught this beautifully. Lake took possession and as he was kicking the ball, Buddy pushed him in the side. Lake was off balance, stumbled a few times, then fell to the ground.
The slow motion replay clearly shows the umpire looking downfield as Lake kicked the ball. Lake was stumbling, and you see the umpire look back to see him fall to the ground. Assuming Buddy had done something wrong, he blew his whistle and paid a free downfield.
The umpire clearly guessed, and got it wrong. Had he been looking, he would have seen Buddy did nothing wrong, but he elected to pay a free for something he didn't see.
That incident just indicated to me that some umpires really don't think all that well of Buddy, for some reason or another. And I still haven't forgotten the lack of interest shown by all 3 umpires when Buddy had his tooth punched out. If that had been certain other players, the puncher would have got matches for sure.
In 2008, we played a final against the Bulldogs and Lake was standing Buddy, the cameras caught this beautifully. Lake took possession and as he was kicking the ball, Buddy pushed him in the side. Lake was off balance, stumbled a few times, then fell to the ground.
The slow motion replay clearly shows the umpire looking downfield as Lake kicked the ball. Lake was stumbling, and you see the umpire look back to see him fall to the ground. Assuming Buddy had done something wrong, he blew his whistle and paid a free downfield.
The umpire clearly guessed, and got it wrong. Had he been looking, he would have seen Buddy did nothing wrong, but he elected to pay a free for something he didn't see.
That incident just indicated to me that some umpires really don't think all that well of Buddy, for some reason or another. And I still haven't forgotten the lack of interest shown by all 3 umpires when Buddy had his tooth punched out. If that had been certain other players, the puncher would have got matches for sure.
And can you believe there are some utter morons out there who think he's some sort of 'umpire's darling'? I had to correct a couple of Magpie ferals in round one who were sooking when he actually got a couple of miracle frees.
Is he the only player in the history of the game to get high contact in a marking contest so severe that it knocked a tooth clean out of his head, only to be called play on?
Is he the only player in the history of the game to get high contact in a marking contest so severe that it knocked a tooth clean out of his head, only to be called play on?
