Mooney and that FREE

[DarkPhoenix]

If the free HADN'T been paid we still would of ended up with a 30 odd page thread on why the F*** it wasnt paid.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Umpire clearly explained that Mooney landed in Gwilt's back and the free was there.

Pretty blatant really.

Mooney did his best not to exert downward pressure. His knee landed beside Gwilt and he did not fall on top of him. Short of releasing the tackle, you cannot expect a player in that situation to do better. I don't blame the umpire; they're not permitted to show discretion or have a feel for the game.

 

[Commando]

If the free HADN'T been paid we still would of ended up with a 30 odd page thread on why the F*** it wasnt paid.

not true

its not the frees the umps dont pay, its the ones they do that are controversial.

over umpiring is killing the game.

 

[didak04]

Mooney did his best not to exert downward pressure. His knee landed beside Gwilt and he did not fall on top of him. Short of releasing the tackle, you cannot expect a player in that situation to do better. I don't blame the umpire; they're not permitted to show discretion or have a feel for the game.

I'd suggest you watch the footage again if you think he didn't land in his back.

Your last sentence sums up the situation pretty well though.

 

[yaco55]

Re: Cam Mooney tells it how it is!!!

It was possibly there, but gee in a final, where it is so close and similar incidents have been let go all game, well i'd rather see that one let go.

I reckon the Cats can feel a little robbed.

Spot on

It was out of context with the way the umpires adjudicated that interpretation all night.

The umpires were red hot on high contact all night - If the Mooney free was for high contact - I could understand it.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

not true

its not the frees the umps dont pay, its the ones they do that are controversial.

over umpiring is killing the game.

Someone would of made a thread saying the saints were robbed. Cant deny it

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

Re: Cam Mooney tells it how it is!!!

My favourite part of this thread so far is the posters who have the knowledge as to what Mooney SHOULD have done.

Apparently he should have twisted to the side while tackling.

Yes, Mooney, who was obviously trained by acrobats from a young age, whose tackle was initially from the side but was unable to sustain that due to Gwilt's forward thrust in his dive, should have twisted mid-air and still had the strength to support Gwilt's weight... while being midair.

...in wet conditions.

It's all so simple!

 

[Hollow Knight]

over umpiring is killing the game.

Don't misconstrue the personal emotion of your team losing as "the death of the game".

I think most neutrals would agree that it was a cracking finish.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Re: Cam Mooney tells it how it is!!!

My favourite part of this thread so far is the posters who have the knowledge as to what Mooney SHOULD have done.

What he SHOULD have done is inconsequential really.

What he SHOULDN'T have done was ride Gwilt into the ground like a boogie board. Good umpiring.

 

[SA HAWK]

If that free was given in the first 3 quarters it wouldn't have even been mentioned.

 

[yaco55]

Context and weather doesn't come into it. A push in the back is a push in the back. That is not arguable. Read the rulebook.

Context is the most important part of umpiring.

Umpires set the standard for their interpretations in the first ten minutes of a game.

Players then get a feel for what is acceptable or unacceptable.

In the context of umpiring on the night it wasn't a free kick.

 

[cs61]

Not a great free kick, but I personally think Geelong get a pretty good ride with the umpires, and it is one decision over the course of a game, so suck it up.

 

[bulletproof]

Not a great free kick, but I personally think Geelong get a pretty good ride with the umpires, and it is one decision over the course of a game, so suck it up.

That’s a fair call, disappointing, but we got a good run and I thought St Kilda played the better football on the night.

 

[AllFooty4]

seemed to be a 50/50 call to me unlucky to geelong supporters lucky for saints

 

[FAIRANDBALANCED]

I think the best way to understand the free kick, is to ask yourself, would there have been an outcry if it wasn't paid? I think everyone would have been talking about the heartbreak for St.Kilda and not a missed free kick had the umpire called play on. Thats the way we want the game umpired. Ordinary umpring, but it did not cost Geelong the game. Geelong's inability to man up on Brendon Goddard in the first half did. Harry Taylor's disappearing act on Riewoldt did, even Joel Selwood's clanger fest did. There were some ordianry Cats tonight, and the worst of them all was Bomber Thompson. Chapman on Goddard???? WTF???

 

[The_Todd07]

Based on the current interpretation, it was a free and has been for the last 4-5 years. I just wish that kind of incident wasn't a free kick in the first place.
In my opinion the "in the back" rule should only be adjudicated on whether the action was dangerous (eg. driving tackles from behind) or result in an unfair advantage (eg. push out in marking contest).
Mooney didn't drive Qwilt into the ground, he just landed in his back due to Qwilt diving forward to give off the handball. Nor did he gain an unfair advangtage over Qwilt as both players went to ground anyway and were therefore out of the contest.

 

[seysearles]

This is a non discussion fueled by the frustration of a losing team. Free kick was blatant and wouldn't be looked at twice by anyone on this thread had it not happened when it did.

It's ridiculous to see how passionately people are arguing that it wasn't a free or that Gwilt threw himself to the ground. It's all there to see on the video. Cam Mooney collapses his weight directly into Gwilt's back. Had the free kick not been given it would have been utter theft.

To suggest otherwise is fantasy.

ps I was supporting the Cats

 

[The Chiefton]

It was right there in front of me! LOL

 

[KissStephanie]

Re: Cam Mooney tells it how it is!!!

Free kick was there.

Possibly technically, but definitely not consistently or in the spirit and context of this match. Gwilt handpassed the ball to Ling as soon as he felt Mooney grab him around the waist, and then he fell forward due to his momentum after he had disposed of the ball. Mooney tried not to land in his back it seemed to me, and in the conditions, the whistle should have been put away. The goal should have stood, and Gwilt should have paid the price for handpassing to Ling before the infringement had occurred. There were times during the match when a number of players fell into backs of opponents, due to the high number of stoppages, and weren't paid, but that one was plucked out.

Geelong got a few soft frees in the last with Selwood and Stokes so even if it was soft, they can't complain.

St.Kilda also got a couple of soft frees in the second and third quarters as well though.

St Kilda were the better side and I doubt many Geelong supporters would argue that.

St.Kilda were the better team for two and a half quarters, but Geelong were the much better team over one and a half quarters when they decided to get a bit more fair dinkum and the Saints stopped. Over the full four quarters, there was little between the performances of the two teams, but St.Kilda are a good team when their better players perform well because they rely so heavily on them. Their best players again were Riewoldt, Hayes, Montagna, Goddard, Dal Santo and Fisher.

This result is not a surprise at all though because the average age of the team that Geelong selected this week is a very, very old 27.34 years of age. They had four players that are over 30 years of age, and their two youngest players are both 22 years old, which isn't that young, and any team that is that old is vulnerable and beatable, even against St.Kilda who are not that much younger. They still had plenty of chances to win in the last quarter though, even though they were stiff with that last decision.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Under the current rules of the game the free was technically there. The current rules regarding this free MUST CHANGE, however. There is no other way about it.

Unless a player shoves an opponent in the back in an effort to force him out of a contest or deliberately throws him into the ground with an intent to hurt, such contact should be deemed incidental to the play and umpires be instructed to let play go on.

I would make this argument even if it had've been a St Kilda player being pinged for the same decision.

 

[Schism]

re: the thread title, shouldn't the emphasis be on that rather than free

yadda yadda yadda

 

[feathers]

what a load of tosh.it was a free kick.period.

 

[kosifantutti]

Under the current rules of the game the free was technically there. The current rules regarding this free MUST CHANGE, however. There is no other way about it.

Unless a player shoves an opponent in the back in an effort to force him out of a contest or deliberately throws him into the ground with an intent to hurt, such contact should be deemed incidental to the play and umpires be instructed to let play go on.

I would make this argument even if it had've been a St Kilda player being pinged for the same decision.

I'm sure you made this argument last week. You seem to feel very strongly about it.

 

[CarnThePiesfor09]

god umpiring must be a shit job. If they hadn't called it saints fans/others would be down their throats about it.

Lose/lose job umpiring.

Btw it was there

 

[Magnum27]

Give Matt Stevic the granny now, he had the courage to pay the correct decision when it mattered, didn't freeze up in the moment.