Paul Roos - not the messiah

[Sprout]

The Vince goal is a moot point - the umpire had blown the whistle, our players had stopped, it was not a valid play.

Jetta then passed it off to Vince, play on. Never been any different. Jetta was clearly not lining up for goal from 65 metres out, and the only explanation that the umpire could offer to Vince afterward was "it's Kennedy-Harris' kick". The fact he didn't even know what player it was just adds to the craziness of the decision. Did they "stop" when he handed it off to Dunn the second time? The players that you perceived to be "stopping" had absolutely no impact on the play.

On top of that was the 50 not paid to Dawes which would've all but guaranteed a goal. Umps didn't determine the result by any stretch, but those were two crucial decisions at crucial times that formed part of a trend for the entire match.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

As soon as he goes to handball it is play on.

Not if the umpire has stopped the clock.

 

[Lockyer24]

As soon as he goes to handball it is play on.

You can't play on off the line before an ump lines you up for goal during time on

 

[grimlock]

The Vince goal is a moot point - the umpire had blown the whistle, our players had stopped, it was not a valid play.

Roos' point was why was the umpire asking Jetta to come around on the line when he showed no indication of wanting a shot at goal. He should have called play on as he would have done if Jetta had marked on the wing or the defensive 50. The error happened before he blew the whistle, not after.

 

[Adam H]

Not if the umpire has stopped the clock.

As soon as you play on its the umpires duty to call play on. The umpire made a mistake.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

The gameplan makes Melbourne too reliant on the umpires. If they could score more freely on their own merits they wouldnt need to stress over some 50-50 umpiring decisions.

 

[d33my]

Roos' point was why was the umpire asking Jetta to come around on the line when he showed no indication of wanting a shot at goal. He should have called play on as he would have done if Jetta had marked on the wing or the defensive 50. The error happened before he blew the whistle, not after.

If you watch the replay though, Jetta actually does look (albeit briefly) like he might have a ping. The umpire can't assume/know how far each player can kick. It seriously happened over the space of about one or two seconds, just unlucky for us. But ump made right call.

Anyway, this is off topic.

 

[Adam H]

The gameplan makes Melbourne too reliant on the umpires. If they could score more freely on their own merits they wouldnt need to stress over some 50-50 umpiring decisions.

Given than somehow they only received 5 for an entire game yesterday which is amazing you may be onto something.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

As soon as you play on its the umpires duty to call play on. The umpire made a mistake.

That is patently untrue. The player cannot play on while the clock is stopped. Learn the rules. Its arguable whether he should have stopped the clock but he made a decision to do so to line Jetta up for goals, and that decision is final. He cant play on until the whistle is blown a second time to call time on.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Given than somehow they only received 5 for an entire game yesterday which is amazing you may be onto something.

Havent heard Melbourne supporters complain, except about the Vince non goal which wasnt an umpiring mistake so much as dumb luck.

 

[Sttew]

In 2010 the side that won the premiership kicked 3 goals in round three against StKilda at Ethiad. Didnt hurt them did it?

Not sure what you are implying? My point simply was that 3 goals in a game in perfect conditions is woeful.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Not sure what you are implying? My point simply was that 3 goals in a game in perfect conditions is woeful.

Hes implying that Melbourne are going to win the 2014 premiership I think

 

[Sprout]

Not sure what you are implying? My point simply was that 3 goals in a game in perfect conditions is woeful.

13 scoring shots sounds a little bit better.

Again, a free kick count of 13-5 doesn't help. Not blaming the result on that, but it doesn't mean it can't be acknowledged.

 

[Roo Lives Again]

Jetta then passed it off to Vince, play on. Never been any different. Jetta was clearly not lining up for goal from 65 metres out, and the only explanation that the umpire could offer to Vince afterward was "it's Kennedy-Harris' kick". The fact he didn't even know what player it was just adds to the craziness of the decision. Did they "stop" when he handed it off to Dunn the second time? The players that you perceived to be "stopping" had absolutely no impact on the play.

On top of that was the 50 not paid to Dawes which would've all but guaranteed a goal. Umps didn't determine the result by any stretch, but those were two crucial decisions at crucial times that formed part of a trend for the entire match.

Cost me money!!!!

 

[Hap Hapablap]

at least the dees look a lot more competitive now than last year.

hopefully by the time roos leaves theyll be competitng for a spot in the 8.

just unbelievable how much the club got ruined by poor decision making and such.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

13 scoring shots sounds a little bit better.

Again, a free kick count of 13-5 doesn't help. Not blaming the result on that, but it doesn't mean it can't be acknowledged.

Its only nine scoring shots, unless youre counting "rushed" as a scoring attempt.

As for the free kick count you can only pay them as you see them. I havent heard many complaints about the umpiring from the Vince non goal.

 

[Sttew]

at least the dees look a lot more competitive now than last year.

hopefully by the time roos leaves theyll be competitng for a spot in the 8.

just unbelievable how much the club got ruined by poor decision making and such.

Another team playing ugly football. Just what we need

 

[Hap Hapablap]

Another team playing ugly football. Just what we need

theyre playing ugly now because its the only way theyre going to keep being competitive.

once they gain confidence and a new coach things would change.

lets be real here though, as much as the basket case theyve been over the past few years their continuous shallackings were becoming cringeworthy and sad.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

It's a shame we can't go out and buy two of the best forwards in the league.

Nothing stopping you if you manage your list right, like the Swans do.

Inb4 ColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaCoalseamgasColtraneCloacaClokeCloister

 

[blaze036]

Nothing stopping you if you manage your list right, like the Swans do.

Inb4 ColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaColaCoalseamgasColtraneCloacaClokeCloister

Cola makes it a lot easier to manage a list just quietly.

 

[SuperSub17]

People whinging about the Vince decision seriously have no idea of the rules.

Check out the play here:
http://www.afl.com.au/video/smart-r...01&eventType=free&seek=4422&videoQuality=high

Here Keeffe gets a free but goes to play on not over the mark so it comes back. He's undoubtedly too far out.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

They both seem like decent enough people but I despise negative, flooding, defensive football - and haven't come across many people who don't share that view.

Then maybe you need to get out more.

The 05 Grand Final, a low-scoring affair, was one of the three highest-rating TV broadcasts in AFL history. You might say "fool me once..." but you know what? The 06 GF, another low-scoring affair, was another of those three highest-rating TV broadcasts in AFL history.

Clearly there are millions of people who love tough, defensive, accountable footy (me included) and it's time a few people started realising that and stop kidding themselves that their view represents the final word.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Then maybe you need to get out more.

The 05 Grand Final, a low-scoring affair, was one of the three highest-rating TV broadcasts in AFL history. You might say "fool me once..." but you know what? The 06 GF, another low-scoring affair, was another of those three highest-rating TV broadcasts in AFL history.

Clearly there are millions of people who love tough, defensive, accountable footy (me included) and it's time a few people started realising that and stop kidding themselves that their view represents the final word.

Or maybe its because the Sydney Swans were playing and four million people were watching their first game of the year.

Dont get me wrong IO'm not attacking the game style...it is what it is....but your ratings argument is terribly flawed.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Or maybe its because the Sydney Swans were playing and four million people were watching their first game of the year.

Dont get me wrong IO'm not attacking the game style...it is what it is....but your ratings argument is terribly flawed.

So what? They watched. And they watched again.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Cola makes it a lot easier to manage a list just quietly.

Keep telling yourself that, also just quietly.