You make some good points, and I guess I would have to agree with you, I just get annoyed when people say Ablett gets a free ride when that is far from the truth.
On the bold - the Abletts sure do fire up for the yellow and black.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
The who is the most protected player in the competition thread?
- Thread starter Kooley
- Start date
- Tagged users None
On the bold - the Abletts sure do fire up for the yellow and black.
Cheers & well said.
I guess thats the crux of it isn't it!
The umpires (I feel) assume that certain players will slip the tackle and actually allow them this time. They shouldn't think that Judd or whoever will most likely break the tackle or that it won't stick. It should be adjudicated on it's merits, regardless of who it is.
They are human & prone to have judgements of their own. This is why I mentioned these 2 players, they seem to stick out with favourable decisions.
Both greats of the current game, who occasionally get looked after, probably because of their standing & previous efforts in their careers.
Moo
Premium Platinum
Fom the games I have seen over the last couple of seasons Adam Goodes gets a lot of 50/50 calls.
- Feb 9, 2009
- 1,337
- 3
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I'd have to agree with that. I've seen him get off lightly on several occasions where any other player would be pinged.
- Feb 9, 2009
- 1,337
- 3
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Yes. Taking on the tackler constitutes prior opportunity.
If he breaks the tackle before being pinged, then it's play on.
- Banned
- #57
It's ridiculous for some people in here chose Lloyd as the most protected player. Lloyd goes hard for the footy and keeps his eyes on the ball, unlike the full backs that play on him. Also, he has more frees against than frees for throughout his career so how can he be the most protected, am I missing something.
Judd, Ablett and Riewolt are the most protected players in the competition.
Judd, Ablett and Riewolt are the most protected players in the competition.
I agree with that. I think if you break free of one tackle and into another you should automatically be pinged unless you get the ball away immediately.
Just one example from Judd, doing a 360 to shake a tackle:
[YOUTUBE]Pa3aUqPky74[/YOUTUBE]
I don't see any problem with that. According to the letter of the law, he was correctly tackled and needed to get the ball away immediately, but if the tackle doesn't properly impede the run of the player I don't think it should be HTB.
Similar tackles occur on Ablett in a lot of games, but their strength through the hips means few players actually get a decent hold on them, which is why they seem to get away with more time to dispose of it.
Judd. He goes hard and is obviously a great player, but he gets abit of a ride from the umps sometimes.
1 - Adam Goodes
2 - Simon Black
3 - Brad Johnson
2 - Simon Black
3 - Brad Johnson
Well see the laws only state a 'correct tackle', by definition one that is between the hips and shoulders (including the jumper).
But I think the umpires see that a lot of weak tackles don't deserve a free kick, and let play continue. It's really their call on the effectiveness of a tackle, which is as it should be. It allows players who are making the play and attempting to carry the ball become effective.
7th in frees against last season, and most frees against of any midfielder.
Thanks for the stats Mark, I was just going for the:
"LOL, no", or "Don't watch football?"
Hawks don't have many - in general we play a style that isn't suited to umpire assistance. Mitchell, Sewell, Lewis all get harsh treatment, though the first two definitely have it better than 2 seasons ago. Tuck gets treated terribly, if he gets hands to it, it's HTB (he doesn't help his case with his suicidal dives on the ball though).
In general players who fight on in tackles and hold their ground are the ones that get pinged more often - as it's an integral part of our gameplan, we get pinged more than anyone else.
A few of our players do get a good run:
McGlynn (high tackle) - I know he's only 4ft 2, but every contact he throws the head back. The umpires woke up to him last year, and then he didn't get one for quite a while, but in the game v Melbourne he got 3-4 again, so perhaps slipped off the radar.
Young (HTB) - has a tendency to just 'go to ground' when tackled, and since becoming 'known' gets away with it quite a bit. Considering he's often in space or 1on1 when he takes possession, I don't know how he does it.
Bateman (High, In the back) - Plays it up far too much for my liking - though now with the hair gone it's a little less obvious. Umpires tightened up on him mid season last year, and by end of season he'd "stopped" it.
...
What does frustrate me is the super-quick whistle when the player with the ball does dispose effectively. It's often younger players who might not have the peripheral vision/adjusted to the pace of AFL, that get caught more often - but are still able to get the handball away, where a more well-known player gets more leeway and wouldn't be pinged for the same indescretion.
In the Carlton game alone, there were 7 HTB I can remember where the ball was released correctly. 5 of them were clear handballs, and should have been play-on (The umpire was blindsided and called a 'throw' on 3), 1 the player was ******ed 'sufficient' time, and the other I'm pretty sure was a throw.
I can't understand how an umpire can 'guess' whether a throw or handball has been made from behind the play, especially when they later let clear throws go when in an ideal position to adjudicate.
"LOL, no", or "Don't watch football?"
Hawks don't have many - in general we play a style that isn't suited to umpire assistance. Mitchell, Sewell, Lewis all get harsh treatment, though the first two definitely have it better than 2 seasons ago. Tuck gets treated terribly, if he gets hands to it, it's HTB (he doesn't help his case with his suicidal dives on the ball though).
In general players who fight on in tackles and hold their ground are the ones that get pinged more often - as it's an integral part of our gameplan, we get pinged more than anyone else.
A few of our players do get a good run:
McGlynn (high tackle) - I know he's only 4ft 2, but every contact he throws the head back. The umpires woke up to him last year, and then he didn't get one for quite a while, but in the game v Melbourne he got 3-4 again, so perhaps slipped off the radar.
Young (HTB) - has a tendency to just 'go to ground' when tackled, and since becoming 'known' gets away with it quite a bit. Considering he's often in space or 1on1 when he takes possession, I don't know how he does it.
Bateman (High, In the back) - Plays it up far too much for my liking - though now with the hair gone it's a little less obvious. Umpires tightened up on him mid season last year, and by end of season he'd "stopped" it.
...
What does frustrate me is the super-quick whistle when the player with the ball does dispose effectively. It's often younger players who might not have the peripheral vision/adjusted to the pace of AFL, that get caught more often - but are still able to get the handball away, where a more well-known player gets more leeway and wouldn't be pinged for the same indescretion.
In the Carlton game alone, there were 7 HTB I can remember where the ball was released correctly. 5 of them were clear handballs, and should have been play-on (The umpire was blindsided and called a 'throw' on 3), 1 the player was ******ed 'sufficient' time, and the other I'm pretty sure was a throw.
I can't understand how an umpire can 'guess' whether a throw or handball has been made from behind the play, especially when they later let clear throws go when in an ideal position to adjudicate.
- Feb 9, 2009
- 1,337
- 3
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Lloyd used to play for a lot of free kicks. Dermie once pointed this out a few years ago when he was commentating. When he had an opponent right behind him when going for a mark, he used to bend his knees is such a way that it would put him off balance and draw a push in the back decision. But he only did it when the opponent was there, which is what Dermie said was an indication he was deliberately attempting to draw a free.
That doesn't really mean a whole lot. When a FF gives away a free, it's not nearly as costly as when they get one. It may very well be the case that he give away a lot more free kicks than he receives. I have seen him get some pretty soft ones in the past, and when you compare they way he gets treated by the umps against they way they treats players like Tarrant
or Rocca, he does see to get looked after a lot more. When the hands in the back rule came in, it was almost like they didn't apply to Rocca. And Tarrant, well he used to get crucified by the umps. When you see this happen week in week out, then see Lloyd get a soft one, it's only natural to think that he's a bit of a cotton wool boy.
Let's not let facts get in the way of a good myth:
Adam Goodes - Career
For: 213 Against: 291
Adam Goodes - 2006-2008
For: 70 Against: 88
Adam Goodes - Career
For: 213 Against: 291
Adam Goodes - 2006-2008
For: 70 Against: 88
Mr Sparkle
Debutant
Goodes
B Johnson
CJudd
B Johnson
CJudd
crazywildhorse
Brownlow Medallist
Judd, Ablett, Lloyd. And whoever is flavour of the month.
Let's not let facts get in the way of a good myth:
Adam Goodes - Career
For: 213 Against: 291
Adam Goodes - 2006-2008
For: 70 Against: 88
They may not protect him on the field but they give him Brownlow votes just for turning up.
And the Sri Lankan cricketers would be wishing they could have had the level of protection that Goodes gets from the tribunal.
Forgive me, but I think the discussion is in reference to 'in play' protection on-field by umpires, not brownlow medal count or tribunal.
BlueDW
Club Legend
I dont necessarily disagree with this, one thing that is forgotten in this argument however is how many frees these two players DONT get when they should get them. Best example of this I can remember from last year is Ablett against Freo in Perth. Will be interesting how effective taggers are against players of this calibre this year with the new rule change. My guess is that tagging players this good will be rendered useless in the future.
- Aug 7, 2008
- 8,949
- 39
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- When they're not belting us, NZ
That's because the freo defenders are suspect.
Let's not let facts get in the way of a good myth:
Adam Goodes - Career
For: 213 Against: 291
Adam Goodes - 2006-2008
For: 70 Against: 88
What do you think youre doing? dont bamboozle us with facts, this is Big Footy FFS.
