Missed free kick after siren: changes result of tonight’s game

[Bunk Moreland]

 

[Dadda Dave]

Gold..

 

[Bunk Moreland]

To think Jake Stringer is the only one out there who knew the rule.

 

[Sentinel]

Glad someone was able to pinpoint the only reason why Essendon lost tonight.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Ahahahah lad.

 

[Mr_McBoogerBalls]

We're undeniably shit and shouldn't be relying on frees. But FMD the umpiring or lackthereof has hurt us there.

 

[Mick F]

Glad someone was able to pinpoint the only reason why Essendon lost tonight.

Agree. Hopeless. At least they weren’t booing the servicemen this week.

 

[Thebisc]

we were shit and deserved to lose...but for anyone who says this is a weird rule and shouldn’t be paid I’d argue that a bloke who gets a 50m pen then barrages into another bloke and gets a further 50m pen, well that is also a weird rule and shouldn’t be paid...good rules we have

 

[Bunk Moreland]

15.9 FREE KICKS – SHAKING GOAL POST OR BEHIND POST

15.9.1 Awarding Free Kick

Unless Law 15.9.3 applies, a Free Kick shall be awarded against a Player or Official who intentionally shakes a goal or behind post (either before or after a Player has disposed of the football):

15.9.2 Taking Free Kick

The following shall apply to a Free Kick awarded under Law 15.9.1:

(a) if a Free Kick is awarded against a Player or Official of the
defending Team and a Goal is not scored, the Player from the attacking Team who was about to or who has Kicked for Goal, shall take the Free Kick at the centre of the Goal Line;

https://aflvic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/AFL-Laws-of-the-Game-2018.pdf

 

[nylexbandit]

Lol that would’ve been disgusting if they paid that and it decided the game (bad rule). Then again they got a goal from that ridiculous double 50 rule so maybe it would’ve been a form of justice

 

[Rabman]

The umpire noticed it ran 20 meters just to tell him to get down.

 

[Pklz]

It was the correct decision not to pay a free kick. A free kick should be paid if he was deliberately shaking the post. Dane Rampe had no intention of shaking the post, his intention was to get higher in order to possible spoil a kick nearing that post at the goal line.

Essendon tears are delicious though.

 

[Jaeger]

So the umpire sees it and tells Rampe to get down...

 

[Bunk Moreland]

we were **** and deserved to lose...but for anyone who says this is a weird rule and shouldn’t be paid I’d argue that a bloke who gets a 50m pen then barrages into another bloke and gets a further 50m pen, well that is also a weird rule and shouldn’t be paid...good rules we have

Who cares about deserving to lose? That’s just a subjective measure. I’m happy to take a win we don’t deserve.

 

[Mootsy]

What's the context if the player doesn't make the distance?

 

[Freoforever86]

It was the correct decision not to pay a free kick. A free kick should be paid if he was deliberately shaking the post. Dane Rampe had no intention of shaking the post, his intention was to get higher in order to possible spoil a kick nearing that post at the goal line.

Essendon tears are delicious though.

Your reasoning there is ridiculously flawed. Didn’t intend to shake it but he did

 

[Jobe Watson]

Whether the rule is dumb or not, the fact is that it is a rule. You can't shake the goal post before a player takes their kick. Rampe clearly shakes the goal post. Free kick from the top of the square. Essendon win.

When Jake ****ing Stringer has a better handle on the rules than the umpires, we have a problem.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

That is atrocious. Wonder if the umpires will take to radio this weekend and apologise to Essendon.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[kaiserchief13]

So the umpire sees it and tells Rampe to get down...

Begs the question does the umpire know the rules?

 

[Great8]

Don’t want the win. Every loss brings us closer to a clean out of coach and players

 

[Coaster2012]

Lol at the posters saying it shouldn't be paid. Its the freaking rule. Should have been a free for the bombers in front of goal for a certain goal.

 

[Substance]

Your reasoning there is ridiculously flawed. Didn’t intend to shake it but he did

Actually the reasoning is sound. It needs to be deliberate for it to be a free.

 

[Coaster2012]

It was the correct decision not to pay a free kick. A free kick should be paid if he was deliberately shaking the post. Dane Rampe had no intention of shaking the post, his intention was to get higher in order to possible spoil a kick nearing that post at the goal line.

Essendon tears are delicious though.

Huh? Seriously? His intention was just to climb like a monkey up the goal post? Did you watch the footage? In what world is his pushing up movement not going to shake the post?

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Just saw the Rampe goalpost incident

Free kick every day of the week

Absolute lunacy

 

[Substance]

Lol at the posters saying it shouldn't be paid. Its the freaking rule. Should have been a free for the bombers in front of goal for a certain goal.

The rule involves intentions. If the umpire determines that Rampe was only trying to climb the post, not intentionally shake it, then they cannot award a free kick.