Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yep. Enough to buy a round for people on this board.Have you counted all your winnings yet
The quiet street corner tip is you have won a very respectable sum of money - courtesy of The Magpies
Just on the advantage rule, it's written as a pretty black & white rule, and maybe instead it does require an element of tweaking and where it's adjudicated in more similar manner to that of soccer/football or rugby, where if there's no clear advantage it's called back
As the rule reads, unless the all players immediately stop then it should be called advantage each time - though sometimes we do see umpires call it back after a player has taken a few steps & stopped, other times if you even look like giving a handball it's play on
Although in this case it seemed a poor advantage call ... its the players who control that situation. ..and most instances... speed and flow of play is more importnat than a free kick...unless its within the 50 range. What I disike is the regularity of a free kick almost disadvanatgeing a side...due to the way a player is held up while the other side fills the area in front of him. Its annoying the way players get held down etc..and watching players run back past him but whats the solution. a basketball ..foul shot sort of deal?
Why is the Sunday Footy Show starting at 11am? Or has my TV not changed time yet.
No extended morning show + extra NRL bullshit I believe is the reasonDay light savings ..probs
No extended morning show + extra NRL bullshit I believe is the reason
Yep. Enough to buy a round for people on this board.
They just have to thank Collingwood when accepting the beer
Sad indictment on AFL commentating if he's what we have to endure each year. Absolutely embarrassing.
Yeah, I agree.Personally, I think the advantage rule could be pretty easily remedied, like it has been in many other sports. The umpire should be able to wait it out and decide whether or not the resulting play actually advantages the team that picked up the free.
Example, let's say a player gets spoiled in a marking contest and cops one high. Ball spills over the back and is picked up by one of his teammates, who takes it and runs it forward. Umpire would normally call advantage here. But let's say the player who took the ball shanks it whilst being tackled and kicks it out of bounds. I think the umpire should just be able to take the play back to the original player and say the advantage is cancelled because no advantage was actually given to the team who took it.
In other words, when a player takes the ball instead of passing it back to the player who earned the free, the umpire should have discretion on whether the resulting advantage actually helps the team with the advantage or not. It eliminates the rubbish instances when a player takes advantage (sometimes without even realising a free was called in the first place), is instantly tackled and the ball spills free again, negating the original free kick. It would also give the advantaged team a short time horizon within which the play could be given the chance of being detrimental without risking a turnover.
This happens in the NHL. They call it a delayed penalty. An infringement occurs which would normally result in a 5-on-4 powerplay, but the puck spills free to open ice, so the refs wait to see who touches it first. If the opposition end up with the puck, they just immediately call it back and instigate the penalty. If the team with the penalty touches it first, they get to play with impunity within a short time because there's an implied penalty resting behind the play. There are obvious differences between the two sports but you get the idea.
I think it would result in a better gameflow with more play-ons and more scoring chances. It would also protect the guy picking up the spilled ball and would guarantee that he wouldn't be able to lose the ball, at least until a successful disposal is made, or he takes enough time running with the ball that the advantage is valid.
They have Jason Bennett, Nigel Carmody, and to a lesser extent Alastair Nicholson in their commentary ranks who are all better commentators, yet somehow choose to have JB and BT commentate the biggest match of the year. Only way it could've been worse is if they managed to squeeze Luke Darcy in there as well.
And Kolodjashnij / MOC etc with more than Bucks…
Damien Barret couldnt get into the Grand Final
It's a shame it wasn't BT.LoL that's .
It's a shame it wasn't BT.