Autopsy Round 13, 2024: St.Kilda v Gold Coast: #GrabGate2024

Remove this Banner Ad

phantom13 said:
I’ll say one more thing on it cause what else am I gonna do watching twins at midnight, then I’ll leave it cause we’re all just burning data at this point.

Which is more likely.

The umpires, who everyone has acknowledge we’re utterly deplorable all night, got overzealous on the whistle and ****ed up (again) in paying a holding free kick that just should never have been paid, the afl, acknowledging that because it was so late, in a close game, reviewed it and agreed with nearly all the experts, pundits and nuetrals that it was the wrong decision, and because 2 other games had similar contraversial calls late in close games released a statement acknowledging it was wrong.

OR

It’s all part of some elaborate conspiracy to legitimize a team that nobody gives a **** about by eating their own employees who they are at pains to tell us are excellent and should be respected and not abused to look at a correct decision an umpire made and come out publically and throw them under the bus by lying and saying it was incorrect.
Click to expand...
Or the umpire saw King being held by Andrew (arms around) which the AFL confirmed happened and the umpire paid the free :thumbsu:
 
This thread should be renamed GrabGate
Who grabbed who?
Personally, I think the CIA was somehow behind the awarding of the free kick.
Something to do with the alignment of the 5G towers in relation to the goal posts, leading to a negative reality inversion.
 
Plenty has been said about the result, but I will say that we deserved the four points and it would have been a travesty otherwise. Ross outcoached Dimma, and in the perfect world, we should have won by five goals.

We dominated every key statistical category, and should have put the game to bed early. Sadly, our connection going inside-50 was again poor. 56 entries for seven goals isn't great, clearly. Our efficiency going inside-50 was 33.9%, which is nearly 10 percent below our yearly average. Christ.

Plenty to work on still, but it would be silly not to see that this performance was a step in the right direction, despite it being a 'nearly game'. If we used the ball at league average, we would have kicked double the amount of goals on the night.

Unsurprisingly, it is hard to see us winning this Friday night against the Lions, but I hope for a competitive effort. It will be the first game this year that I won't be able to watch live, so here's hoping for a pleasant surprise. Regardless, I will be able to let you know whether Inside Out 2 is worth watching in cinemas after my date night with the misses.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

People still on about the free.

Any mention of the free near goals against Hill foe being kneed in the head?

Mistakes are made all the time. King was probably deserving of 10 frees for holding during the game but got one. Umpires make mistakes usually they go against us, this time not.
We dominated the game but couldn't convert. We deserved the win.
Some say we are bad for only 51 points. How bad must the AFL Golden boy parasites be if they score 3 points less?

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
BigPowerForward said:
This thread should be renamed GrabGate
Who grabbed who?
Personally, I think the CIA was somehow behind the awarding of the free kick.
Something to do with the alignment of the 5G towers in relation to the goal posts, leading to a negative reality inversion.
Click to expand...
And no mention of the second grabber. Very suspicious.
 
David Swallow got a goal from a free kick for holding the man when he had his hand on the ball. Max got what he deserved, and the team got what they deserved.

I said right at the start of the last quarter "Matt Rowell will be tackled this quarter, but he won't be penalised for holding the ball under any circumstances". I was right.

It was a midfield victory, again with Hunter Clark important at important times. Dow generally doesn't blaze. Windy seems to be permanent tag now - Lachie Neale is next. I think we're a forward line breakthrough from a good second half of the season.

And one more observation:

Max King runs around like the weight of the world is on his shoulders.

Ben King runs around like no one has ever watched him play football. (No weight)
 
stavro#4 said:
“He is getting maximum effort and development from less talented sides.

So ✅ for the coach.”

Are we losing games that we are the more talented side in? Do you think another coach has this side in the 8?

This is a side without a midfield. It should be stuck within the bottom 3.

That was my point. He is getting maximum effort and development from a side that had 1 stkilda top 10 pick in it.
Click to expand...


i know we are talking about the AFL team, but why is Hall who is a midfielder not playing in the midfield for Sandy. arnt we crying out for midfielders?
 
CursingFijian said:
The best thing about the Mac Andrew free kick is that if we get in to close games from here on, hopefully defenders get a bit hesitant to impede Mings run.

How good was the Higgins block to give Max a clear run at the ball, for a mark and goal. When Higgins was serving his suspension I’ll bet big Maxxy missed him the most.

I thought we butchered a few gimmes in this game. Butler early, Hill late.

And had a few moments go against us. Like Woods goal being recalled for the Henry block (which was softer than the Mac Andrew hold).

We may not be executing well, or finishing well but I thought we looked braver than the GC with our ball movement and run. And I thought it was the closest thing to a four quarter effort we’ve seen all year.

I’m tending to think that if we can keep the effort levels up, keep players like Dow and Clark injury free and playing together then there’s a chance we can start to string together some better transitions and play some more appealing football.
Click to expand...
Henry had eyes on the ball so that was just a player collision 😀
 
Joffaboy said:
People still on about the free.

Any mention of the free near goals against Hill foe being kneed in the head?

Mistakes are made all the time. King was probably deserving of 10 frees for holding during the game but got one. Umpires make mistakes usually they go against us, this time not.
We dominated the game but couldn't convert. We deserved the win.
Some say we are bad for only 51 points. How bad must the AFL Golden boy parasites be if they score 3 points less?

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...
There has been plenty of discussion on how woefully shit they were all game.

Hills knee to the head, Butlers bullshit high contact, Swallows free, Henrys no 15.

Nobody at any point has said it was the one bad decision in the game.
 
CursingFijian said:
The best thing about the Mac Andrew free kick is that if we get in to close games from here on, hopefully defenders get a bit hesitant to impede Mings run.

How good was the Higgins block to give Max a clear run at the ball, for a mark and goal. When Higgins was serving his suspension I’ll bet big Maxxy missed him the most.

I thought we butchered a few gimmes in this game. Butler early, Hill late.

And had a few moments go against us. Like Woods goal being recalled for the Henry block (which was softer than the Mac Andrew hold).

We may not be executing well, or finishing well but I thought we looked braver than the GC with our ball movement and run. And I thought it was the closest thing to a four quarter effort we’ve seen all year.

I’m tending to think that if we can keep the effort levels up, keep players like Dow and Clark injury free and playing together then there’s a chance we can start to string together some better transitions and play some more appealing football.
Click to expand...
Great call on the Henry block, i forgot about that, was horrendous.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

phantom13 said:
There has been plenty of discussion on how woefully shit they were all game.

Hills knee to the head, Butlers bullshit high contact, Swallows free, Henrys no 15.

Nobody at any point has said it was the one bad decision in the game.
Click to expand...
Realise that. Mentioned it before. Can't see why people are defending it is all. Was a dodgey as free. AFL doesn't like it, so what, doesn't change the result.
Hardwick sooked so that was a huge plus. Didn't he once tell us to put our big boy pants on? Maybe learn to counter a coach and score more than 48 points champ before whinging.


On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Joffaboy said:
Realise that. Mentioned it before. Can't see why people are defending it is all. Was a dodgey as free. AFL doesn't like it, so what, doesn't change the result.
Hardwick sooked so that was a huge plus. Didn't he once tell us to put our big boy pants on? Maybe learn to counter a coach and score more than 48 points champ before whinging.


On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but I'd like to hear Mrs Harwick's opinion about it all before we stop arguing anonymously about the response to what was most likely an incorrect or at least dodgey decision of an umpire from almost 3 days ago.
 
cowboy18 said:
Fair enough, but I'd like to hear Mrs Harwick's opinion about it all before we stop arguing anonymously about the response to what was most likely an incorrect or at least dodgey decision of an umpire from almost 3 days ago.
Click to expand...
Which Mrs Hardwick, the one that stuck by him during his playing and coaching career and raising his kids or the new version 20 years younger than him that he ran off with?

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Nutsngum said:
This is the very first frame/bit of footage possible of that passage where King running towards goal. Andrew stands in his way, grabs him and eventually turns him entirely around. There is no wrestling, this is a defender blocking his opponent in every way he could have at the time.
View attachment 2016562
View attachment 2016561

You seem to be under the misunderstanding that King and Andrew were just standing there and King decides to just start wrestling him out the way when he began his run BEFORE Andrew started impeding him.
Click to expand...
I have a different view. Maybe its biased, but i was sitting on level 2 in the pocket where this happened, and i was watching the contest between King and Andrew.

What i saw was King running back toward goal to get his space, pushed Andrew and tried to run round the back of him. As soon as King tried to lead at the ball carrier Andrew wrapped both arms around King and prevented him from leading.

Was it soft? possibly, but as soon as you wrap both arms around you open yourself up to getting pinged
 
Bit late to the party on this one; watched the game and the thing that I found interesting about the (apparently incorrect) call is the context of the the free and I haven't heard any of the talking heads comment on.

Membrey has the ball and kicks (to Henry) at that point it's just Higgins and King (with their oppos) in the f50, there are some GC defenders flooding back but are high up on the 50. Hig has a little separation from his man; the bit that struck me though is almost the entire right hand half of the f50 is empty.

After they tussle, Andrew is behind King and slightly to King's left. If King gets just the tiniest bit of separation he is going be be able to lead right across the F50 close to goal with no defender around, it's just an ocean of space available to him and is probably an uncontested mark very close to goal.

Andrew is out of position to defend; and in that context I can see why even somewhat innocuous contact gets paid as the emptiness of the 50 means there's few other variables; a decent kick from Henry almost certainly gets Max a high % shot very close to goal.
 
TheNewEnsign said:
Bit late to the party on this one; watched the game and the thing that I found interesting about the (apparently incorrect) call is the context of the the free and I haven't heard any of the talking heads comment on.

Membrey has the ball and kicks (to Henry) at that point it's just Higgins and King (with their oppos) in the f50, there are some GC defenders flooding back but are high up on the 50. Hig has a little separation from his man; the bit that struck me though is almost the entire right hand half of the f50 is empty.

After they tussle, Andrew is behind King and slightly to King's left. If King gets just the tiniest bit of separation he is going be be able to lead right across the F50 close to goal with no defender around, it's just an ocean of space available to him and is probably an uncontested mark very close to goal.

Andrew is out of position to defend; and in that context I can see why even somewhat innocuous contact gets paid as the emptiness of the 50 means there's few other variables; a decent kick from Henry almost certainly gets Max a high % shot very close to goal.
Click to expand...
That looks about right to me.
Andrew is trying to obstruct and block King and disable his upper limbs. King is just trying to untangle Andrew. It looks totally unfair tactics to me. I don’t blame the ump from paying King, but a little part of me wonders whether the Saints had not had a word to the umps in the previous days or weeks, and asked them about King getting this kind of treatment.

Oh, and what happened to umpire dissent?
 
TheNewEnsign said:
Bit late to the party on this one; watched the game and the thing that I found interesting about the (apparently incorrect) call is the context of the the free and I haven't heard any of the talking heads comment on.

Membrey has the ball and kicks (to Henry) at that point it's just Higgins and King (with their oppos) in the f50, there are some GC defenders flooding back but are high up on the 50. Hig has a little separation from his man; the bit that struck me though is almost the entire right hand half of the f50 is empty.

After they tussle, Andrew is behind King and slightly to King's left. If King gets just the tiniest bit of separation he is going be be able to lead right across the F50 close to goal with no defender around, it's just an ocean of space available to him and is probably an uncontested mark very close to goal.

Andrew is out of position to defend; and in that context I can see why even somewhat innocuous contact gets paid as the emptiness of the 50 means there's few other variables; a decent kick from Henry almost certainly gets Max a high % shot very close to goal.
Click to expand...
I made essentially the same point about what happens if there is no whistle.
 
SG34 said:
That looks about right to me.
Andrew is trying to obstruct and block King and disable his upper limbs. King is just trying to untangle Andrew. It looks totally unfair tactics to me. I don’t blame the ump from paying King, but a little part of me wonders whether the Saints had not had a word to the umps in the previous days or weeks, and asked them about King getting this kind of treatment.

Oh, and what happened to umpire dissent?
Click to expand...
Yeah threw the arms out while carrying on, teammate grabs him and tries to settle, throws the arms out again and carries on again. Early in the rule change that was a 50 every time.
 
The Punter said:
I've watched the footage of the King/Andrew incident a few times now at normal speed. It looks like they are grappling until the point where King wants to break free and at that stage Andrew puts both arms around him. I can see why the free kick was paid.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Easy to see why the ump paid it.

The AFL's statement the next day said they reviewed alternative angles which showed it was wrong but the ump on the field has 1 view. If his view shows 2 arms wrapped around King and his ability to move hindered, it's their right to call a free kick.
 
CursingFijian said:
The best thing about the Mac Andrew free kick is that if we get in to close games from here on, hopefully defenders get a bit hesitant to impede Mings run.

How good was the Higgins block to give Max a clear run at the ball, for a mark and goal. When Higgins was serving his suspension I’ll bet big Maxxy missed him the most.

I thought we butchered a few gimmes in this game. Butler early, Hill late.

And had a few moments go against us. Like Woods goal being recalled for the Henry block (which was softer than the Mac Andrew hold).

We may not be executing well, or finishing well but I thought we looked braver than the GC with our ball movement and run. And I thought it was the closest thing to a four quarter effort we’ve seen all year.

I’m tending to think that if we can keep the effort levels up, keep players like Dow and Clark injury free and playing together then there’s a chance we can start to string together some better transitions and play some more appealing football.
Click to expand...


It was soft and possibly not even a free but Andrews made it easy to get himself pinged. He turned his back and impeded. Defenders need to impede without looking obvious about it. Like fumbling a ball over the boundary, defence is the art of looking clumsily while making life hard for forwards ... like they just happened to stumble into the path of a guy trying to get into space.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy Round 13, 2024: St.Kilda v Gold Coast: #GrabGate2024

Similar threads

Hubnester
  • Locked
Votes Round 13, 2024: St.Kilda v Gold Coast
Replies
6
Views
558
The Punter
The Punter
Hubnester
  • Locked
Game Day Round 13, 2024: St.Kilda v Gold Coast - Marvel Stadium - Saturday 8th June, 7:30pm AEST
19 20 21 22 23
Replies
550
Views
11K
Hubnester
Hubnester
StFly
  • Locked
Preview Round 13 2024 AFL Season: St.Kilda Saints v Gold Coast Suns, Saturday 8th of June 7:30pm, Marvel Stadium
11 12 13 14 15
Replies
371
Views
16K
Hubnester
Hubnester
StFly
  • Locked
Votes Round 12, 2024, West Coast v St.Kilda
Replies
13
Views
648
SaintKing23
S
Hubnester
Votes Round 20, 2024 - St.Kilda v Essendon
Replies
8
Views
634
Kildonan
Kildonan
Hubnester
  • Locked
Votes Round 14, 2024: Brisbane v St.Kilda
Replies
7
Views
725
Brains Trust66
Brains Trust66
S
Autopsy Round 14, 2024: Brisbane v St.Kilda
16 17 18 19 20
Replies
487
Views
18K
tomjoad
tomjoad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top