Ovens and King Football League 2006-2010

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting final 3 weeks for Greta, Moyhu, Whorouly & Bright fighting for the final 2 spots in the 5. Not sure of the run home for the other sides, but we (Greta) have Tarra, Milawa & Glenrowan........

Any thoughts on who will get the final 2 spots??
 
Interesting final 3 weeks for Greta, Moyhu, Whorouly & Bright fighting for the final 2 spots in the 5. Not sure of the run home for the other sides, but we (Greta) have Tarra, Milawa & Glenrowan........

Any thoughts on who will get the final 2 spots??

Moyhu and Bright. Sorry EB and sorry to you to GUNS, Herculian man, Herculian effort. More bad luck than Staughnie.
 
I wish it was because at least he would have called it a goal in the first place and there would be no need for having 17 players for 15 minutes or a tribunral hearing , no wonder the blokes on the panel are getting a bit grumpy at all these reports. God help the umpire who takes someone to task for been to demonstrative (if thats the correct spelling)what a ****ing joke.
No offense virge, but from where I was standing it looked like a point. I thought his reaction was very over the top and there was swearing involved. Sesho has a shot in the first qtr at the same end that he and many others believed went through, but instead of whinging and carrying on like a baby that had his lollipop stolen, he kept his head up and got back to the task.

On a side note, it was great to see Sesho back to his dominant best on the weekend. I spoke to a few Whorouly blokes and they were just in awe of how good he was playing. It was one of those days where it was impossible to match up on him as he was holding everything that came his way.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Interesting final 3 weeks for Greta, Moyhu, Whorouly & Bright fighting for the final 2 spots in the 5. Not sure of the run home for the other sides, but we (Greta) have Tarra, Milawa & Glenrowan........

Any thoughts on who will get the final 2 spots??
I reckon Bright and Greta will end up on the same points fighting for fifth spot with percentage just seperating them. Top three will remain the same with Moyhu taking out fourth spot.
 
I wish it was because at least he would have called it a goal in the first place and there would be no need for having 17 players for 15 minutes or a tribunral hearing , no wonder the blokes on the panel are getting a bit grumpy at all these reports. God help the umpire who takes someone to task for been to demonstrative (if thats the correct spelling)what a ****ing joke.

Given the conjecture from BK and the fact that we have you guys in 2 weeks Virge, I reckon 2 games would be appropriate. :p:D:p:D
 
No offense virge, but from where I was standing it looked like a point. I thought his reaction was very over the top and there was swearing involved. Sesho has a shot in the first qtr at the same end that he and many others believed went through, but instead of whinging and carrying on like a baby that had his lollipop stolen, he kept his head up and got back to the task.

On a side note, it was great to see Sesho back to his dominant best on the weekend. I spoke to a few Whorouly blokes and they were just in awe of how good he was playing. It was one of those days where it was impossible to match up on him as he was holding everything that came his way.
On the subject of lollipops i doubt this as he gave up lollipops at a very young age and went staight on to the stubbies, such was the out of character reaction that it was a goal from where he was standing which is usually the best place see it id reckon. Goal or no goal the point is that reporting blokes for these type of reactions is BS surley a free kick or perhaps a fifty or even the 15 minutes off the ground in servere cases is plenty, going to the tribunral and possibly missing a match is over the top in my humble opinion.
 
On the subject of lollipops i doubt this as he gave up lollipops at a very young age and went staight on to the stubbies, such was the out of character reaction that it was a goal from where he was standing which is usually the best place see it id reckon. Goal or no goal the point is that reporting blokes for these type of reactions is BS surley a free kick or perhaps a fifty or even the 15 minutes off the ground in servere cases is plenty, going to the tribunral and possibly missing a match is over the top in my humble opinion.
Definately agree, but players should know these days not to go over the top in disputing decisions. Most umpires inform the captains before the match that they won't tolerate swearing or offensive attitudes towards them. There was a case last year where a player was reported for saying "bullshit" after missing a goal. As long as the umpires and tribunal are consistent week in, week out, I don't have an issue if they lay reports for these events.
 
Definately agree, but players should know these days not to go over the top in disputing decisions. Most umpires inform the captains before the match that they won't tolerate swearing or offensive attitudes towards them. There was a case last year where a player was reported for saying "bullshit" after missing a goal. As long as the umpires and tribunal are consistent week in, week out, I don't have an issue if they lay reports for these events.

One of our games recently, one of our guys had a free kick given against him all he did was walk straight to the mark, put his arms up then shook his head,said nothing and had 50mtrs imposed for disputing the decision. I reckon that's over the top
 
On the subject of lollipops i doubt this as he gave up lollipops at a very young age and went staight on to the stubbies, such was the out of character reaction that it was a goal from where he was standing which is usually the best place see it id reckon. Goal or no goal the point is that reporting blokes for these type of reactions is BS surley a free kick or perhaps a fifty or even the 15 minutes off the ground in servere cases is plenty, going to the tribunral and possibly missing a match is over the top in my humble opinion.

BK must have been the only person who thought it was a point as I've spoken to about 10-12 people who were at the game (both Moyhu & Tarra) and every one of them said it was a goal. Not having a go at your eyesight BK, but don't think that many people would get it wrong. And have it on very strong authority that he did not swear at the umpire. There was swearing but not from Schutt so I'd hope the umpire involved hasn't "guessed".
I totally agree with you Virge. Going to the tribunal is totally absured & a waste of everyone's time. If this is going to happen every week there will be at least 20 players up every week as everybody "disputes an umpires decision".
Talking of umpires, and I don't want to sound like a whinger here as there is a very big shortage of umpires...but when are they going to learn the rules?? If they don't know the correct ruling they should not give a free kick or make the incorrect decision! A Moyhu player was penalised 50metres on Saturday for running through the mark (which is fine if he did it & nobody was around him) however he was following his player everywhere & his opponent made a point of going through the mark purposely so that he was followed. A player is allowed to follow his opponent through the mark, the umpire should have called both of them away from the mark & made the player who had the mark go back and take his kick! All agreed on that???
 
BK must have been the only person who thought it was a point as I've spoken to about 10-12 people who were at the game (both Moyhu & Tarra) and every one of them said it was a goal. Not having a go at your eyesight BK, but don't think that many people would get it wrong.
Guess it depends who you have spoken too. My direct opponent on the day was saying to me that Schutty should stop carrying on because it missed. Someone from the crowd directly behind the goals said it went straight over the goal post but would have hit it had the post been higher. I do admit though that I wasn't directly on the line or directly behind Schutty so couldn't say 100%.

And have it on very strong authority that he did not swear at the umpire. There was swearing but not from Schutt so I'd hope the umpire involved hasn't "guessed".
Well is "shit" a swear word these days? There were a few f*cks thrown around as well but I'd say he only got reported because he kept going on and on about it. Again, my opponent even yelled out to Schutty to stop swearing but it may not have been Schutty that was using the offensive language.

A Moyhu player was penalised 50metres on Saturday for running through the mark (which is fine if he did it & nobody was around him) however he was following his player everywhere & his opponent made a point of going through the mark purposely so that he was followed. A player is allowed to follow his opponent through the mark, the umpire should have called both of them away from the mark & made the player who had the mark go back and take his kick! All agreed on that???
Incorrect mate. No player from the opposition is ever allow to go over/through the mark until play on is called. It is only during a set shot that players from both sides are told to move back five meters. I wouldn't say the situation you speak of happens regularly, but it's not a rarity either. Players do it to shake their tag.
 
Guess it depends who you have spoken too. My direct opponent on the day was saying to me that Schutty should stop carrying on because it missed. Someone from the crowd directly behind the goals said it went straight over the goal post but would have hit it had the post been higher. I do admit though that I wasn't directly on the line or directly behind Schutty so couldn't say 100%.

Well is "shit" a swear word these days? There were a few f*cks thrown around as well but I'd say he only got reported because he kept going on and on about it. Again, my opponent even yelled out to Schutty to stop swearing but it may not have been Schutty that was using the offensive language.

Incorrect mate. No player from the opposition is ever allow to go over/through the mark until play on is called. It is only during a set shot that players from both sides are told to move back five meters. I wouldn't say the situation you speak of happens regularly, but it's not a rarity either. Players do it to shake their tag.

Point taken on all of that BK...And like you say depends on where you were standing, however seems as though the whole situation has been taken too far & not handled properly.

So a player is just meant to let his opponent run through a mark and let him go and get a kick? Surely not. I know if I was coaching I would be terribly upset with my player if he let his player gain an easy possesion like that. Umpires should use "common sense" on some occasions & not take the rule literally then. Im sure Mick Wilson wouldn't be happy with you if you let your opponent run through a mark, gain an easy kick & have you have to go all the way around the player with the ball & be nowhere near him! I could be wrong, but am pretty certain a player is allowed to follow his opponent wherever he goes, including through a mark....otherwise everybody will be doing it! I'm happy to be wrong on this, however it would be good to know the official ruling...there have been some terrible decision made this year by umpires which have been very influential in end results!
 
Incorrect mate. No player from the opposition is ever allow to go over/through the mark until play on is called. It is only during a set shot that players from both sides are told to move back five meters. I wouldn't say the situation you speak of happens regularly, but it's not a rarity either. Players do it to shake their tag.[/quote]


Think you'll find you are wrong there BK. The rule was brought in a couple of years ago that if players are running with there opponent they are entitled to run and follow them through the mark. But like you said very rarely happens and the Moyhu player was unlucky to be penalised.
 
Incorrect mate. No player from the opposition is ever allow to go over/through the mark until play on is called. It is only during a set shot that players from both sides are told to move back five meters. I wouldn't say the situation you speak of happens regularly, but it's not a rarity either. Players do it to shake their tag.


Think you'll find you are wrong there BK. The rule was brought in a couple of years ago that if players are running with there opponent they are entitled to run and follow them through the mark. But like you said very rarely happens and the Moyhu player was unlucky to be penalised.[/quote]

That's what I thought also Flying. wasn't sure if I was right or wrong, but was of that understanding. He was very unlucky, and it came at a critical time in the final quarter of the game when it was still up for grabs.
Football can be a cruel game sometimes!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Think you'll find you are wrong there BK. The rule was brought in a couple of years ago that if players are running with there opponent they are entitled to run and follow them through the mark. But like you said very rarely happens and the Moyhu player was unlucky to be penalised.

That's what I thought also Flying. wasn't sure if I was right or wrong, but was of that understanding. He was very unlucky, and it came at a critical time in the final quarter of the game when it was still up for grabs.
Football can be a cruel game sometimes![/quote]

I was at the game Rumble and it did come at a critical time as it put the Tigers up by 3 goals. Still they were pretty impressive after halftime against Moyhu. The Hoppers really struggled for another target inside 50 apart from Thomson, who still managed 4 goals. Glenrowan look the real deal this season and weren't too far away from Tarra when they played earlier in the year so they along with Milawa look the Dogs main challengers.
 
:eek: Seems I'm not up to date on the rules. I have this bit of footage in my head from an AFL match where a player is chasing his opponent but when he cuts through the mark the tagger had to run around the bloke with the ball, therefore losing several meters on his opponent - could be from a few years ago though. Interesting, if it has been changed I'd agree that not all umpires are aware of it. One of our players received a 50 against Moyhu for the same thing. I'm sure I've seen it happen on more than one other occasion this year too.

Here is the ruling: Running through the mark; defensive players may not run across the imaginary line between the man standing the mark and the man taking the kick. Attacking players may run through the mark as often as they like, however defensive players may only do so if they are following their direct opponent. Otherwise, the 50-metre penalty must be levied.

Sorry for the confusion guys.
 
:eek: Seems I'm not up to date on the rules. I have this bit of footage in my head from an AFL match where a player is chasing his opponent but when he cuts through the mark the tagger had to run around the bloke with the ball, therefore losing several meters on his opponent - could be from a few years ago though. Interesting, if it has been changed I'd agree that not all umpires are aware of it. One of our players received a 50 against Moyhu for the same thing. I'm sure I've seen it happen on more than one other occasion this year too.

Here is the ruling: Running through the mark; defensive players may not run across the imaginary line between the man standing the mark and the man taking the kick. Attacking players may run through the mark as often as they like, however defensive players may only do so if they are following their direct opponent. Otherwise, the 50-metre penalty must be levied.

Sorry for the confusion guys.

Don't be sorry BK, it is a bit confusing...however an umpire should know the ruling before awarding the free/decision.
You're right Flying, Glenrowan did look good after half time. Moyhu struggled to penetrate the half-forward line. They are missing some very good players, however they can't use that excuse. Glenrowan cleared the ball too easily, and were winning a lot of the centre contests which is something Moyhu were good at for years!
I wouldn't rule Moyhu out as yet, however they have to start playing better, get some of these players back & start playing how they were in the 1st half of the year!
 
With the amount of rotations that take place [ try doing the interchange during a Tarra game ] how does an umpire know who a players DIRECT opponent is. Or can you just follow any opponent through the mark.
 
With the amount of rotations that take place [ try doing the interchange during a Tarra game ] how does an umpire know who a players DIRECT opponent is. Or can you just follow any opponent through the mark.
Yeah, not sure slim. Here's the exact wording from the AFL 50m Penalty Rule:

Where a field Umpire has awarded a Free Kick or a Mark to a Player,
the field Umpire shall also award a Fifty-Metre Penalty in favour of that
Player if he or she is of the opinion that any Player or Official from the
opposing side:
(e) enters the Protected Area, except when the Player is
accompanying or following within 5 metres of his or her
opponent;


This one doesn't say "direct" which makes it a little clearer, but I'd assume only one player is allowed to follow an opposition player through the mark. If two followed the same bloke through, I'd say a 50m penalty would be paid.
 
With the amount of rotations that take place [ try doing the interchange during a Tarra game ] how does an umpire know who a players DIRECT opponent is. Or can you just follow any opponent through the mark.

:D:DThat's a great point Slim, Tarra rotate so much & that's probably why they run games out so well. Is interesting to see the different attitude of clubs & how they rotate players!
 
Two cases at the tribunal tonight, coincidentally both charges laid by goal umpires. Schutty as has been discussed and a bloke from KV for striking ?
 
Two cases at the tribunal tonight, coincidentally both charges laid by goal umpires. Schutty as has been discussed and a bloke from KV for striking ?
how do you think the blacks have gone this year slim,they have improved but still short a couple good on ballers.
 
how do you think the blacks have gone this year slim,they have improved but still short a couple good on ballers.

Hard to judge Tige, I reckon the comp has also improved a fair bit, this side probably would have finished 5th or 6th last year, but I'm sure when Oliver and Nightingale sign their clearance to us we will improve a bit more.:D:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top