[youtube]eI03HuNvZmc[/youtube]
50/50 i reckon. Mooney dove, and then Gwilt fell at the same time. Nothing Mooney could do ...
50/50 i reckon. Mooney dove, and then Gwilt fell at the same time. Nothing Mooney could do ...
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
The Video of THAT tackle
- Thread starter wikipediaAFLproject
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Which is why Mooney should not have dived on his back. He hould have gone to the knees.
I think more like an 80/20.
But in some games umpires ping these all the time or none of the time.
I think it was the correct decision.
I think more like an 80/20.
But in some games umpires ping these all the time or none of the time.
I think it was the correct decision.
Didak2Dawes
Team Captain
- Sep 15, 2008
- 448
- 0
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
First time ive seen the incident.
mooney's very stiff, not as bad as people are making out.
mooney's very stiff, not as bad as people are making out.
It wasn't a traditional in the back decision. Usually the free kick is paid if the tackler carries him forward and then falls into his back but I think that in this instance Mooney did not carry him forward and didn't really land in this back but on his butt. He can consider himself hard done by.
However it was very contentious and I understand if some see it differently to me.
However it was very contentious and I understand if some see it differently to me.
It doesn't matter if there's nothing Mooney can do, in the back is in the back.
Can we get some video of the Johnson, Stokes and Selwood frees? Those were some vintage finals free kicks. Video of Johnson's goal from the stoppage would be interesting too.
I must say... I hate these types of push in the back free kicks, in AFL or playing local footy, the tackler contributes nothing to the forward momentum at all.
These shouldn't be a free.
These shouldn't be a free.
Nothing in it.
The goal should have stood. Another maggot big-noting himself on the big stage.
That said, Geelong should have avoided the issue by kicking straighter.
Its just a pity that the game gets ruined by a stupid controversy over umpiring decisions...again!
The goal should have stood. Another maggot big-noting himself on the big stage.
That said, Geelong should have avoided the issue by kicking straighter.
Its just a pity that the game gets ruined by a stupid controversy over umpiring decisions...again!
- May 6, 2009
- 10,619
- 25,573
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
any chance we can add the footage of Big Bad Cam's "goal" in the third?
- Jun 14, 2010
- 16,000
- 12,310
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Denver, Liverpool
Why make ANOTHER thread about this?
Whinging isn't going to change the result...Geelong got the rub of the green all night and 1 decision goes against you & you all crack the sh*ts?
Hilarious
Whinging isn't going to change the result...Geelong got the rub of the green all night and 1 decision goes against you & you all crack the sh*ts?
Hilarious
why is everyone talking about this incident? what about the the dubious ones that went against the Saints earlier? Is it all about when it happens, if so why?
The goal that was touched would have rendered the mooney in the back decision academic. Wake up people.
The goal that was touched would have rendered the mooney in the back decision academic. Wake up people.
Gwilt, falling face first with arms pinged from behind dragged Mooney with him?
What was he holding onto Mooney with? His big toe?
Put it this way, if Rutten's "push" on Anthony was a free in last years semi, then Mooney's was a free too.
Personally, I dont think either of them should have been paid.
PS Am I the only one that thinks Geelong's second goal of the game by Varcoe actually shaved the post on the way through?
PPS. Just watching the first few minutes of the replay to have another look at Varcoe's goal, and I notice that Schneider got a free against Ottens, that was exactly the same as Gwilt's. So I guess the umps were consistent?
Personally, I dont think either of them should have been paid.
PS Am I the only one that thinks Geelong's second goal of the game by Varcoe actually shaved the post on the way through?
PPS. Just watching the first few minutes of the replay to have another look at Varcoe's goal, and I notice that Schneider got a free against Ottens, that was exactly the same as Gwilt's. So I guess the umps were consistent?
He was dragging Mooney with his body weight. That said, the man with the ball should always be protected. 50/50 call, the trouble is some are let go and some are paid, so we're all confused. It didn't cost Geelong the game as much as 1.7 from 17 inside 50s did. Maybe Cam should have tried playing in front just once in the last quarter.
Rutten's wasn't a push, it was a hold, and those should be paid all day every day.
Rutten's wasn't a push, it was a hold, and those should be paid all day every day.
What about all those times Geelong players duck their heads into stationary St Kilda players?
Rubbish decision.
Tas
Premium Platinum
Veteran
10k Posts
30k Posts
North Melbourne - 2022 Kaitlyn Ashmore and Aileen Gilroy Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2022 Aaron Hall and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
North Melbourne AFLW - 2021 Aileen Gilroy and Kaitlyn Ashmore Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2021 Taylor Garner and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
TheBrownDog
- Dec 23, 2002
- 62,676
- 62,323
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- There can be only one...
Umpire should have given the first in the back against Cam for shoving Dawson in the back a split second before. He should have also given 50m penalties for him back talking until he shut his gob.
It's borderline on the way they have been umpiring similar incidents this year.
I don't like it but plenty of similar ones have been paid this year and I don't think the umpire himself is so much at fault as the rules committee or the umpires department for the interpretation.
I don't really think Geelong can label that individual moment for losing the game.
I don't like it but plenty of similar ones have been paid this year and I don't think the umpire himself is so much at fault as the rules committee or the umpires department for the interpretation.
I don't really think Geelong can label that individual moment for losing the game.
What a pack of whinging sooks you cat fans are.
Why don't you put a video clip up of all the soft frees that geelong got, and goals from them too?
Why don't you put a clip of hawkins point that was given a goal in last yr's gf?
fair dinkum!
You LOST, you were beaten by the better team on the night, your sooking only makes you more pathetic....
Hope the hawks get through and beat you by a point in controversial circumstances next week....geez I will laugh!
Why don't you put a video clip up of all the soft frees that geelong got, and goals from them too?
Why don't you put a clip of hawkins point that was given a goal in last yr's gf?
fair dinkum!
You LOST, you were beaten by the better team on the night, your sooking only makes you more pathetic....
Hope the hawks get through and beat you by a point in controversial circumstances next week....geez I will laugh!
