Autopsy Rd 1 - We Flog Brisbane, But at What Cost

[Paracleet]

My calculations are minimum of 23 metres based on the 9m cuts of grass.

It certainly wasn't much less than this. He ran from just inside the outer centre circle to about 53 out. So lets say 25 metres - 4 metres plus the distance between the edge of the square and 53 out. 7.5 - 3 = 4.5. So at an absolute minimum he ran 25.5 metres.

 

[Alfonz]

My issue is would he have gotten away with this if we were only 5 points up at that point, or was it just very poor umpiring. Watching on the replay it appears the umpires were just not concentrating, as if they were expecting the final siren to go.

My guess is they still would have allowed it if the game was on the line. They very rarely ping anyone for running too far. Especially in a straight line at speed.

In 2019, with Sydney up by 3 points deep into the last quarter, Callum Brown ran 26.4 metres (Fox Lab calculation) and kicked a goal to put Collingwood in front. Play on. Pies won by 7 points in the end.

A large number of the kickouts should have a free kick paid against as well. You routinely see someone play on from the goalsquare and run 20-25 metres before kicking it.

 

[G Mus]

It was his best kicking game in some time. Those long bombs to packs are unavoidable at times but he looked for the other option/s and hit them multiple times yesterday.

He had eight score involvements from 33 disposals yesterday. Doesn't look high but at times last year him getting 3 score involvements from that many disposals looked borderline impossible.

Games like that are what have made me so annoyed at him in the past. He's a good kick (not elite, just good) but was wasting it on sh** long bombs. Not yesterday though.

The nature of our game style generally leads to higher score involvements across the team, as a score involvement is any disposal in a chain leading to a score, we recycle the ball a lot so more guys would get them per goal than other sides that typically are more vertical or score from turnover focused

 

[One_Wing]

Ironically if Hamling was still with us he'd probably play every game this year vs now stuck playing in the VFL in Sydney. Should fire his manager.

 

[freodog]

Who played on Charlie Cameron

23

Charlie Cameron

Age

30

Ht

180cm

Wt

76kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.1

3star

K

8.4

3star

HB

3.7

3star

M

3.0

3star

T

3.2

5star

G

1.5

5star

D

9.6

2star

K

7.9

3star

HB

1.7

1star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.7

3star

G

1.9

5star

D

9.6

3star

K

5.4

2star

HB

4.2

4star

M

1.4

2star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.2

4star

yesterday? I wasn't at the game yesterday and couldn't figure it out.

It was my major concern going into the game. Whoever it was kept him very quiet.

 

[Big Animal]

only fines for Walters and MJ. Fyfe no case

 

[apuchar]

Who played on Charlie Cameron yesterday? I wasn't at the game yesterday and couldn't figure it out.

It was my major concern going into the game. Whoever it was kept him very quiet.

Mainly Clark

 

[FreoGirl]

only fines for Walters and MJ. Fyfe no case

what about the guy who tried to injure Amiss? Pav must be pissed off

 

[freodog]

Mainly Clark

Wow that's a fair effort to lock him down and still create rebound out of defence

 

[Lach72]

Wow that's a fair effort to lock him down and still create rebound out of defence

Jordy slaughtered him

 

[FreoGirl]

Jordy slaughtered him

he's my boy

 

[FreoGirl]

I had a look at the All Australian week by week side on the main board and there was some love for Luke Ryan (and Caleb Serong)

It seems Ryan has admirers from other clubs.

it's his new natural blonde look

 

[Sully90]

Wow that's a fair effort to lock him down and still create rebound out of defence

Team defence was awesome yesterday. Clark was great, but midfield didn't allow any quick easy ball to come in.

 

[FreoGirl]

Love seeing newer recruits like Jackson and Clark (even Omeara) genuinely loving their teams

 

[Feathercap]

what about the guy who tried to injure Amiss? Pav must be pissed off

Pav is a legend of the club but that was gutter commentary. Just call the game…

 

[vidwhal]

I’ve been telling yas he is very good backup ruck with little fwd craft. Now obviously I got that last part wrong (at least last night)

That was his best game for freo yesterday. Loved his physicality, especially in the ruck.

He looked a determined player, just can’t drink the bath water and back it up v North.

Gotta stop telling and listen to the one's with the full stories ;p ;p ;p

Treacy's the full package.

 

[Wray27]

Maybe I didn't explain my question enough.

First how it usually works - In this example (freo kicking to left of screen) the ball is marked by freo player and the marker goes back along the red line and kicks over the mark. the man on the mark (lions) can stand on the x or anywhere on the green:

View attachment 1931655

And the defending player stands on the X and this is normal:

View attachment 1931656

But in the Hayden Young case (Lions kicking to right of screen) it was different. Zorko takes the mark:

View attachment 1931657

Then the the marker, Zorko, walks forward:
View attachment 1931658

So Hayden Young was penalised for standing in the green.

I guess my question is more "why in this case was the point of catching the ball no longer "the mark" and why could Young be penalised for being in an area normally allowable?" Shouldn't Young have been allowed to stand on the X and Zorko have to back up along the red line and kick over the X? What am I missing?

if a player is moving to the mark quickly the umpire calls for them to stand on the mark. You will see players point to the ground. If they aren’t moving and are inside 5m they are called to stand where they are. Once an umpire calls a player to stand they can’t move.
Others have pointed out in this situation Ryan stood the Mark and then rolled off and Young move into the protected zone. Automatically 50m

The mark is wherever the players is when the umpire calls stand. If they are quick enough they get to the actual mark great, if not the player with the ball can move through until the umpire calls play on.
A player who is outside the 5 metres can move to the mark until the umpire calls outside five. Once that call is made they have to stay outside 5 but can move away(backwards or laterally) from the player with ball.

 

[vidwhal]

Maybe I didn't explain my question enough.

First how it usually works - In this example (freo kicking to left of screen) the ball is marked by freo player and the marker goes back along the red line and kicks over the mark. the man on the mark (lions) can stand on the x or anywhere on the green:

View attachment 1931655

And the defending player stands on the X and this is normal:

View attachment 1931656

But in the Hayden Young

26

Hayden Young

Age

23

Ht

189cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.0

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

3.2

3star

T

1.4

3star

CL

0.2

2star

D

10.0

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.4

2star

M

3.2

3star

T

1.4

2star

CL

0.2

2star

D

10.0

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

3.2

4star

T

1.4

4star

CL

0.2

2star

case (Lions kicking to right of screen) it was different. Zorko takes the mark:

View attachment 1931657

Then the the marker, Zorko, walks forward:
View attachment 1931658

So Hayden Young

26

Hayden Young

Age

23

Ht

189cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.0

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

3.2

3star

T

1.4

3star

CL

0.2

2star

D

10.0

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.4

2star

M

3.2

3star

T

1.4

2star

CL

0.2

2star

D

10.0

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

3.2

4star

T

1.4

4star

CL

0.2

2star

was penalised for standing in the green.

I guess my question is more "why in this case was the point of catching the ball no longer "the mark" and why could Young be penalised for being in an area normally allowable?" Shouldn't Young have been allowed to stand on the X and Zorko have to back up along the red line and kick over the X? What am I missing?

I think umps are focused on allowing teams to move on quickly these days so they want to establish the mark quickly. Accurate marking in the middle of play slows things overall and probably doesn't change results anyways. Correct marking within goal range should be accurate, obviously.

This happens most of the time these days I reckon and I think players/coaches/afl accept it because I think teams are more preoccupied with covering and keeping structures up and down the lines. Things move on quickly and there's less time to stop and complain.

Considering how much it's changed the game to resemble something similar to yesteryear footy, I also accept it.
It does suck that he was called for it so ump should of just been more lenient.

 

[vidwhal]

but he comes across as not being very intelligent?

Is it the timbre of his voice?

 

[vidwhal]

1. He already has the body of an AFL player. I think he is bigger than Wagner? Could be the trencher-man type we need running in defence. Just needs more exposure at the top level.
2. Yes him rucking gets him more involved. You can see he loves the challenge. He could even become the big-body swingman we could throw anywhere when required.
3. The commentators just call him Fyfe With-Strength now. He was so important yesterday. Could be the difference in getting to and winning in September.
4. Pearce has his confidence back and he is showing everyone why he should be captain. A true leader on and off the field. He saved our asses in that diabolical first quarter and turned the game.

Pearce very Darren Glass-like in the capt./FB sense. If he goes on a tear this year, does he stay captain?

 

[ilikepotatoes]

Maybe I didn't explain my question enough.

First how it usually works - In this example (freo kicking to left of screen) the ball is marked by freo player and the marker goes back along the red line and kicks over the mark. the man on the mark (lions) can stand on the x or anywhere on the green:

View attachment 1931655

And the defending player stands on the X and this is normal:

View attachment 1931656

But in the Hayden Young case (Lions kicking to right of screen) it was different. Zorko takes the mark:

View attachment 1931657

Then the the marker, Zorko, walks forward:
View attachment 1931658

So Hayden Young was penalised for standing in the green.

I guess my question is more "why in this case was the point of catching the ball no longer "the mark" and why could Young be penalised for being in an area normally allowable?" Shouldn't Young have been allowed to stand on the X and Zorko have to back up along the red line and kick over the X? What am I missing?

This has been a massive issue in general since the stand rule was bought in.

However the 50 against Young was correctly paid because he cut across the protected area to get to the mark.

Of course the umpires then ignored every player who went on to do the same for the rest of the match however.

 

[FreoMatt]

Great to hear. By the way, where do you get these stats?

It’s on the AFL app. Just pick the match you want then click on “tracker”


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[TheMcManusNose]

30 goals if he's rucking regularly would be very, very good.
There seems to be a common thought that 30 or 40 goals is just an average season when really it's a very decent amount of goals.

From 2023 as a sample, the closest to forward rucks I could pick out with varying degrees of 'ruck';
Mason Cox (17)
Riley Thilthorpe (18)
Hayden McLean (21)
Luke Jackson (22)
Charlie Dickson (23)
Levi Casboult (24)
Rory Lobb (24)

I originally had Jeremy Finlayson (38), Tom Hawkins (49) and Joe Daniher too (61), but all had 60 or less hitouts.

Agreed it is a lofty goal, but he is probably only around 20% ruck, and he has a 3 goal head start now.

I think for us to have a genuinely potent forward line and him to keep his spot in light of our potential trade situation next off season that's probably what he needs to do.

Ultimately if you're a good team you really need multiple dangerous forwards.

Just also shows how good Lobb actually was for us in 2022 with 36 and a lot of ruck time.

 

[ubiquitous226]

Agreed it is a lofty goal, but he is probably only around 20% ruck, and he has a 3 goal head start now.

I think for us to have a genuinely potent forward line and him to keep his spot in light of our potential trade situation next off season that's probably what he needs to do.

Ultimately if you're a good team you really need multiple dangerous forwards.

Just also shows how good Lobb actually was for us in 2022 with 36 and a lot of ruck time.

I hate defending Lobb because the guy seems like such a shit bloke, but he was actually very decent at his role.

Football wise his main problem was he'd only occasionally play to his potential, and he had poor body language with his teammates.

 

[Taylor]

That Jackson mark down the line screwed Brisbane. They knew, KNEW, that if Jackson is doing that every single ball coming out of defense is going inside fifty.

The ball came to ground or they forced it out of bounds almost all the time, and they were terrible around the stoppages, so it played into our hands