Roast Things that Irk and Pet Peeves

[goyoucatters]

Here's one, drawn from material offered so far in this thread.

The ongoing discussion (by commentators and fans of the game) around the 'deliberate out of bounds' rule, despite the fact that a rule with this name does not exist. The rule now relates to 'insufficient intent to keep the ball in play'. On that basis, I believe many of the free kicks currently paid according to this adjudication are actually correct.

 

[allrighty]

Any examples of this? Personally I think it's a complete myth.

Close this year for one.

 

[iameviljez]

Here's one, drawn from material offered so far in this thread.

The ongoing discussion (by commentators and fans of the game) around the 'deliberate out of bounds' rule, despite the fact that a rule with this name does not exist. The rule now relates to 'insufficient intent to keep the ball in play'. On that basis, I believe many of the free kicks currently paid according to this adjudication are actually correct.

I agree with this. I think that the moment a commentator is able to say, "he disguised that well" or similar, is the moment that it should have absolutely been penalised for insufficient intent.

 

[cats_09]

Any examples of this? Personally I think it's a complete myth.

Hawkins jumper punch is one I can think of when it happened at the time - I don't recall too many other suspensions for that action

 

[Cataholic]

Here's one, drawn from material offered so far in this thread.

The ongoing discussion (by commentators and fans of the game) around the 'deliberate out of bounds' rule, despite the fact that a rule with this name does not exist. The rule now relates to 'insufficient intent to keep the ball in play'. On that basis, I believe many of the free kicks currently paid according to this adjudication are actually correct.

Ok. We'll go with the 'insufficient intent to keep the ball in play' mouthful then.......

Some are indeed correct, but some are purely idiotic, and influenced without question by the crowd, when a player mis-kicks, the ball does a Warnie, or a player blindly kicks away from a severely contested pack situation and has the misfortune to see the ball roll out of bounds.

 

[Cataholic]

This could win the internet.

You've already mentioned some of mine but with no thought and one sip of coffee I'll add.........

1. The absolutely appalling standard of commentary that will now never get better. It's simply too late. (Honourable mention to Adam Papalia who is actually pretty decent).
2. Every premiership player who now gets described as having "won" a premiership. They didn't. It's a team game you imbeciles. You play in a premiership, no single player has ever won one.
3. The deliberate out of bounds rule (mentioned above), and especially the brain dead simpletons at the ground who now cheer for it to be paid. Congratulations. Your village has clearly lost a complete fecking idiot.
4. Umpires who look at each other, then listen to the crowd before paying decisions that aren't there.
5. Umpires who talk to the players like they are 8 year olds. For example the stand rule and nominating ruckmen. It's not the under-10s. If a team isn't ready tough s**t, just ball it in anyway.
6. General softening up of the game (again, as touched on above). It's a physical game. You cannot have a contact sport without contact, and therefore there will be injuries. Alongside this are fans who think anyone in favour of a player not being suspended because he touched an opponent in a tackle automatically wants to see players knocked out every week. They must be from the same village as point 3.
7. Letting players who take kick-ins have a disposal added. It artificially pumps up the stats in a game where stats have far too much prominence already, and makes it look like defenders who were so-so to crap were actually decent.

8. How easily the 'star' and 'superstar' tags are applied to players

 

[Cataholic]

Yes clearly, maybe Dermie talking up Smith was the go.

Come to think of it, the love affair Dermie is having with himself is pretty irksome too.......

 

[Warhorse]

Posters on this board who blame our defenders for a loss when bruhn, Atkins etc get flogged in the middle. The same posters then proceed to give the same midfielders votes when their direct opponents were best on ground.

 

[Warhorse]

BT
The quality of tv commentary.
BT
Americanisms creeping in.
BT
The adjudication of the DOOB rule.
BT
Goal reviews based on blurred vision.
BT
The tribunal being hung up on outcome and disregarding intent.
BT

.......oh yeah, and BT.

Complete lack of depth or analysis from the commentary. All these old boys who haven't played footy for a few decades who still think they know the game. Much prefer when recent retired players are providing analysis

 

[Mattttty]

Two words: Dermott Brereton.

 

[iameviljez]

Hawkins jumper punch is one I can think of when it happened at the time - I don't recall too many other suspensions for that action

Remember how the week before, the AFL came out and said "no more jumper punches!"?

Hawkins was a moron.

 

[goyoucatters]

I agree with this. I think that the moment a commentator is able to say, "he disguised that well" or similar, is the moment that it should have absolutely been penalised for insufficient intent.

What's even funnier is that the use of this language by the commentator suggests that he really, really didn't.

 

[Cataholic]

Complete lack of depth or analysis from the commentary. All these old boys who haven't played footy for a few decades who still think they know the game. Much prefer when recent retired players are providing analysis

Spot on.

Compare the commentary of Hodge v BT.

Not saying Hodge is the best, but he's light years ahead of BT in his understanding of the game, strategies, ploys and nuances.

 

[iameviljez]

Spot on.

Compare the commentary of Hodge v BT.

Not saying Hodge is the best, but he's light years ahead of BT in his understanding of the game, strategies, ploys and nuances.

In the same vein as morons who complain about "guarding grass" and "get on your man!".

Yeah, but if you play man-on-man defence in 2023, you get absolutely slaughtered. That's been the case since Clarkson pretty much single-handedly won the flag for Hawthorn in 2008*.

*with a little help from Mooney, Ottens et al...

 

[Cataholic]

In the same vein as morons who complain about "guarding grass" and "get on your man!".

Yeah, but if you play man-on-man defence in 2023, you get absolutely slaughtered. That's been the case since Clarkson pretty much single-handedly won the flag for Hawthorn in 2008*.

*with a little help from Mooney, Ottens et al...

He retired 33 years ago for crying out loud.

He's out of touch, and he doesn't come across as very perceptive. The game passed him by decades ago.

 

[Cataholic]

In the same vein as morons who complain about "guarding grass" and "get on your man!".

Yeah, but if you play man-on-man defence in 2023, you get absolutely slaughtered. That's been the case since Clarkson pretty much single-handedly won the flag for Hawthorn in 2008*.

*with a little help from Mooney, Ottens et al...

Ps: Brain v Brian

One comes from the other being scrambled.

 

[cats_09]

Remember how the week before, the AFL came out and said "no more jumper punches!"?

Hawkins was a moron.

I never said he wasn't an idiot

But also wasn't the only player to throw a jumper punch

 

[Partridge]

Close this year for one.

Really? And no other player gets suspended? You said "crickets for everyone else".

Sicily got 3 weeks for something just as innocuous if anything even more minor. That was after Close too.

Actually, Close got 1 week after the Adelaide one earlier in the year (which everyone I'm sure agrees was ridiculous as most are), but then he got the Sydney suspension overturned. Strange outcome if there's a conspiracy against Geelong players.

 

[iameviljez]

I never said he wasn't an idiot

But also wasn't the only player to throw a jumper punch

That I agree with, but I don't think his club identity changed how it was viewed. Any player who threw a jumper punch that week would have been screwed.

 

[Vdubs]

These are NOT popular, but...

1.Longstanding gripe of mine is that the competition is inherently unfair until each team plays each team twice, home and away, each season. If this is unpalatable, not feasible, or impossible, then we should have a 2 year system, playing each team only once, then swapping venues the following year.

2. The stupid touched rule. I still don't get why a fingernail touch, or a fist punch, on a ball heading towards goal, is so revered. If defenders can not actually stop the ball going through the goals, it's a goal, as in every other game and code. The ball that is dubiously touched off the boot should be irrelevant if the ball sails through the goals, and I think defending on the goal line should involve marking or pushing the ball back into play. Punching the ball through the goals, or even rushing the ball through opposition goals as a behind is flawed, IMHO.

 

[cats_09]

Really? And no other player gets suspended? You said "crickets for everyone else".

Sicily got 3 weeks for something just as innocuous if anything even more minor. That was after Close too.

Actually, Close got 1 week after the Adelaide one earlier in the year (which everyone I'm sure agrees was ridiculous as most are), but then he got the Sydney suspension overturned. Strange outcome if there's a conspiracy against Geelong players.

Except Close was never reported for the tackle against Francis in our clash with Sydney - so nothing to be overturned

 

[catnutter]

The stupid Lore's Provisional 2023 AFL Draft Picks at the top of every page of the Rumours GFC 2023 Player Trading posts.
We know Geelong have bugger all picks, put this in the trade thread after the season not on every page of the trading article during the season
.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Here's one, drawn from material offered so far in this thread.

The ongoing discussion (by commentators and fans of the game) around the 'deliberate out of bounds' rule, despite the fact that a rule with this name does not exist. The rule now relates to 'insufficient intent to keep the ball in play'. On that basis, I believe many of the free kicks currently paid according to this adjudication are actually correct.

They are correct, true, but the bigger problem is the rule sucks. There's too much interpretation for the umpires to take on already.

The better rule by far is the last disposal rule in SANFL. It's just clear as day a better rule and it's about as simple and self-enforcing as the oob on the full rule.

Fumbled, spoiled, rushed across the line is a throw in. If the last touch of the ball though was a handpass or kick of the kind that records a stat then free kick against.

So simple you don't need to look at the umpire to know it's paid and achieves the same aim as the current rule

 

[iameviljez]

Here's one....

The AFL completely incentivises tanking. The more inept you are, the better the draft hand you receive, and the better a case for compo picks.
Then the AFL punishes tanking and wants to crack down on doing the very thing they incentivised.
Then, when clearly tanking was present, they refuse to do anything about it.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

The stupid Lore's Provisional 2023 AFL Draft Picks at the top of every page of the Rumours GFC 2023 Player Trading posts.
We know Geelong have bugger all picks, put this in the trade thread after the season not on every page of the trading article during the season
.

Strong disagree. Adds a quick reference for anyone wanting to see what other clubs have to offer in years being discussed.