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

[Jobe Watson]

I feel like the longer this thread goes on, the more embarrassing it will be for essendon fans.

Nah. Most people, even opposition supporters who hate us, can see that this was a free kick. It's only morons who are trying to make excuses for the umpire's **** up.

 

[FrakturedHalo]

*wipes tears from eyes* this is too much, people trying to apply a LEGAL definition to the interpretation of this rule to determine whether or not intent was sufficient enough to warrant the prescribed penalty??!!

How about this then if we are going down that path...would a reasonable person consider that a bloke happened to appear halfway up a goalpost if he didn’t intend to climb up there?

 

[DirtySandman]

sidenote, but what is the actual point of shaking the post anyway? you're just as likely to widen the goals as narrow them

I don’t think pole shakers put that much thought into it, wouldn’t imagine they are the brightest bulbs on the Xmas tree.

 

[smeltitdeltit]

Change the words to “intentionally interferes with the goal post” to stop this scenario.

 

[ShadeyP]

Absolutely robbed.

I wish I could say I'm shocked the umpires have already cleared this but I'm not..

That is a goal line free kick to the letter of the law.

If the umpires dont know the rules dont let them officiate games again until they have it all down pat and understood.

It shows alot about the AFL when they refuse to admit glaring errors 98% of the time .
It catches up with you and tonight was a perfect example why ... it is not an isolated incident .

 

[ShadeyP]

This.

His intention isn't to shake the pole. But what else is the effect of a 85kg athlete launching himself at a metal pole and aggressively shimmying up it? Either it wasn't his intention, or he failed grade 7 physics.

or he just loves shimmying pole

 

[Captivating]

Watching the footage, its a clear free kick. AFL should woman up and award the 4 points to the Bombers, or at least, remove the points from the Swans.

Umpire warning him rather than paying a free should be banned from umpiring AFL. If the umpire didn't see him, I'd say OK, just bad luck. But to see it and not do anything, is cheating.

Imagine a umpire saying to a player..."don't tackle him high again" while not paying a free. That's cheating!!!

 

[Callums_Guns]

It’s 99.99% chance of a goal!

Seriously though, it’s not actually a certain goal. I appreciate that. Sydney have somebody on the mark, so he’d be kicking from a few metres out. It could go off the side of the boot, or into the man on the mark.

Shiel could kick for you, who knows what the result would be then

Serious note interested also in the AFL response

 

[Halftimehero]

I’ve spoken to an AFL field umpire (like a year back) who has told me that philosophically the AFL umpires don’t want to intervene in the game and have technical rules impose on the match.

That’s why after the siren goes you’ll have an umpire reminding players you can’t run off your line etc.

In this case is it fair to say the umpire “educated” Rampe in the moment and didn’t want the game decided that way?

Are fans philosophically okay with the umpires’ logic, or is it time we took a letter-of-the-law approach and stopped having umpires “coach” players?

There is a difference between the umpire yelling, “don’t” do something than “stop” doing something.

 

[Ron]

Oh great yet another week where we have to listen to every Bombers fan tell us all how they are constantly ****ed over by the AFL, and that if the AFL was fair they would win every premiership that ever was and ever will be.

 

[ConcreteWaters]

Missed free kick and should have been paid, but if the umpire doesn't see it, it has to be play on. Looked pretty ridiculous!

Going the other way, should the goal at the end of the first quarter have been counted? Reading the laws of the game, play comes to a close when the umpire blows his whistle and puts his hands up to acknowledge the siren.
10.4.1 The timekeepers shall sound the siren to signal the end of a quarter until a field Umpire or the emergency Umpire acknowledges the siren and brings play to an end, by blowing a whistle and holding both arms above their head.

The siren sounded, the kick was made and while the ball was in the air you can hear the whistle to end the quarter. Is it different on review (e.g. does the review count as the 'emergency umpire')?

 

[Thrawn]

Probably was a free in there. But...

 

[Aramis]

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.

Herein lies the problem with a lot of the AFL rules, they contain mental components that that the umpires are supposed to pick up on in the heat of battle. I do not envy the umpires job..... rules for a fast paced sport such as AFL need to be black and white. Instead of "intention to shake post before or after".... "players are not allowed to shake any goal post or point post ..." or "players are not allowed to climb up goal posts including padding.". I have no idea why intention comes into it, intention isn't required for a speeding fine, it shouldn't be required to adjudicate a game of footy..

This just speaks to the inadequacy of the law makers rather than the adjudicators.

 

[Jobe Watson]

Missed free kick and should have been paid, but if the umpire doesn't see it, it has to be play on. Looked pretty ridiculous!

The thing is, the umpire DID see it. He saw it and ran up to Rampe to tell him to get down but didn't pay the free. It's pretty obvious that umpire just doesn't know that the rule exists.

I look forward to hearing how the AFL spin their way out of this one. "The rule doesn't actually state that you can't climb the post and accidentally shake it" will be their excuse. Meanwhile, the rule will be quietly re-written to say that any deliberate interference with the post at all is illegal and this will never happen again.

 

[PiesUserName]

 

[ConcreteWaters]

The thing is, the umpire DID see it. He saw it and ran up to Rampe to tell him to get down but didn't pay the free. It's pretty obvious that umpire just doesn't know that the rule exists.

I look forward to hearing how the AFL spin their way out of this one. "The rule doesn't actually state that you can't climb the post and accidentally shake it" will be their excuse. Meanwhile, the rule will be quietly re-written to say that any deliberate interference with the post at all is illegal and this will never happen again.

Oh right, then bloody hell you'd be livid!

 

[JayJ20]

I am not disagreeing with you, but I also think that it is highly likely the umpires themselves were not as aware of the rule and the consequences of the action as they should have been since it has been so long since that free kick was paid. I mean I can't remember it ever being paid, so it must have been a very long time.

When Stringer knows the rules better than the umpires... Will look really good for the AFL

Why does a player have to tell the umpires how to do their job?

 

[Dixie Normous]

 

[ppoiter]

Cant believe anyone could read the rule, see the vision, and not think that's a free kick. Free kick on the goal line is a ludicrously harsh penalty though, retake with an empty goal square would fit the crime better

 

[JayJ20]

He doesn't intentionally shake it either so room for interpretation sadly. A rule that needs a re-write

I think intention is included because accidentally running into the goal post will make it shake. Not a free kick.

However, Rampe's intentional action made the goal post shake. That should be classed as intention and therefore a free kick. I don't think there is any room for interpretation here. That's a clear free kick.

I don't understand why Rampe would do such a stupid thing when the kicker is so far away from goal.

 

[drviccles]

It sure was innovative.

 

[JayJ20]

Do we still teach comprehension in school? The rule clearly states intentionally shaking the post, which clearly wasn't Rampes intent. If the rule was shaking the post you would have a fair point but it's not. The rule is there to address players bumping the post to simulate the wobble of the ball hitting the post not for players dry humping the post.

The intention part of the rule is there to prevent players who run into the post or other accidental actions from conceding a free kick. It was not their intention to shake the post. Rampe's deliberate action made the goal post shake. His intention was to deliberately make contact with the goal post. He climbed it, thus making the goal post shake by his deliberate action. Should be a free kick.

 

[Tap Tap Tapperoo]

Geez, imagine the scenes. Rampe would have gone down in history for one of the biggest brain snaps ever. I wish they paid it just for the lols.

 

[HairyO]

Im happy to join in the chorus if an Essendon supporter wants to admit there is something wrong with a game a couple of years ago where a team lays 100 tackles and only got 1 Holding the ball free kick.

Or even just a month ago when 2 players were pushing and shoving and grabbing an opposition player's jumper and when he pushed back he got pinged for a free kick in the goal square.

Umpires ignore free kicks literally all the time. The only difference here is this one is just a more interesting one.

 

[garlic munchers]

So come the GF with a kick after the siren, 2 players climb to the top of the goalposts and throw themselves at the ball causing themselves serious injury.

But hey they touch the ball and win the gf, the pinnacle of many footballers life.

Absolute bollocks this is not an immediate free kick.

Spirit of the game? (Bloods culture except when you have been losing).