It seems that the Indian bookmakers have started betting on AFL now.
And excuse if I am mistaken, but wasn't that Hansie Cronje running around dressed in white with a whistle today.
Seriously, there should be a Royal Commission into today's umpiring. We were fair dinkum crucified, particularly in that crucial second quarter.
And it just kept up all day. Inconsistent, incompetent. The Kangaroos' best 3 players were the three umpires. Even though the final margin would seem fairly convincing, today's umpiring was so bad that I felt it was the difference between the two sides.
I guess losing today brings us back down to earth a bit, but I liked the way our guys fought it out to the bitter end. And that spirited third quarter comeback was only snuffed out by more bad umpiring.
------------------
**floreat pica**
Hansie Cronje - best on ground
Moderator: bbmods
-
^*Cl|T*^
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 1999 6:01 pm
I agree umpiring was shocking right from the first minute when Carey got a free kick on point of square for in the back where it should have bin holding the ball and then 2 minutes later Buckley getting pinged for holding when it should have been bounced or in the back in the same position. However we were outclassed today, the strength of Carey, the tagging of John Blakey and Adam Simpson, and the dash of Brent Harvey and David King. I think however if we had of kicked straighter in the first 20mins of the game we may have broken them but that didnt happen. Still these crock decisions stick in my mind "Freeborn getting asked to play on when he was kicking from outside the boundary line, Watson's goal that was touched by Archer after it went over the line, and the questionable mark of Wayne Carey which almost no doubtedly broke our run.
-
Joel
- Posts: 21158
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 1999 7:01 pm
- Location: Mornington Peninsula
I know we say it every week, but I agree with the previous posts. The Umpiring was absoloutley SHOCKING. At Half Time, I heard a Roos supporter sitting near me say to someone (he was talking on a mobile phone) that the umpiring was rediculous, and couldn't believe how many free kicks that Collingwood hadn't got". I heard the exact words from him that "Collingwood were being crucified by the umps".
I know someone mentioned it, but how in hell can a player "play on" when they are outside the boundry? The Roos player didn't know what to do, he ran close to the boundry and thought, what do I do next? Tackle him or what?
However, if we had been kicking to targets and choosing the correct options (as in previous weeks) we would have beaten them. The kicking yesterday was atrocious and the overuse of the ball was pathetic. Oh well, let's take on the Dons next week and WIN!!!
------------------
CARN THE PIES!!!!!
Collingwood is all about togetherness. "We live or die as a side," Buckley said. "Everything we do now is as a team."
I know someone mentioned it, but how in hell can a player "play on" when they are outside the boundry? The Roos player didn't know what to do, he ran close to the boundry and thought, what do I do next? Tackle him or what?
However, if we had been kicking to targets and choosing the correct options (as in previous weeks) we would have beaten them. The kicking yesterday was atrocious and the overuse of the ball was pathetic. Oh well, let's take on the Dons next week and WIN!!!
------------------
CARN THE PIES!!!!!
Collingwood is all about togetherness. "We live or die as a side," Buckley said. "Everything we do now is as a team."
-
Joel
- Posts: 21158
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 1999 7:01 pm
- Location: Mornington Peninsula
Also, did anyone else notice Carey kick Presti when he took a mark near the point post? What a dog! I also noticed that after a tackle he got up and tried to "accidently" kick one of our players (can't remember who) in the head.
------------------
CARN THE PIES!!!!!
Collingwood is all about togetherness. "We live or die as a side," Buckley said. "Everything we do now is as a team."
------------------
CARN THE PIES!!!!!
Collingwood is all about togetherness. "We live or die as a side," Buckley said. "Everything we do now is as a team."
-
foxy
- Posts: 1301
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 1999 6:01 pm
- Location: melbourne
i reckon presti was responsible for our mini-revival in the 3rd quarter. about 10 minutes into that quarter, carey marked directly in front after a one-on-one contest and it looked as though carey would go on to dominate. instead, about 3 minutes later presti made the spoil and rebounded the ball out of defence, resulting in a goal to us. a few minutes later he did exactly the same thing, again resulting in a goal (i think). you have to remember we were 21 points down during the 3rd quarter and both tazza and orchy missed set hots. that seriously dented our momentum. and tazza was REALLY disappointed about it too - when the roos kicked away at the end of the 3rd, tazza was crouching down at the other end, and he looked like he was going to cry.
by the way, did anyone see wazza's BRILLIANT bit of play in the first quarter? i think it was him against two roos forwards, and he outclassed them both, somehow grabbed the ball and shot out a handpass. i tell you, that show of class drew some big cheers from the southern stand.
by the way, did anyone see wazza's BRILLIANT bit of play in the first quarter? i think it was him against two roos forwards, and he outclassed them both, somehow grabbed the ball and shot out a handpass. i tell you, that show of class drew some big cheers from the southern stand.
-
Neil Appleby
From where i stood in the bowels of The Great S.S. the writing was on the wall at the 15 minute mark of the second quarter.
When North could lower the game to arm wrestling standard they were always going to win it as we then were playing their game.
Even so, there were plenty of positives to take from our first loss.
We were down and out early in the last quarter and a 60-70 point thrashing looked likely but the boys fought back to make it respectable.
We really should have been well in front at quarter time...at least 3-4 goals up.
Very poor shooting for goal really cost.
Sav really let them off the hook in this quarter....one dead easy miss from straight in front and then a dropped sitter.
Tarrant showed that he's ready to fulfil the early promise....he was one of our best...and against the league's best....a very good sign.
Bucks wasn't fit; Pebbles didn't play and Brownie and Mal to come back.
Yep, we can improve on that performance but so can North of course.
We have a pretty good idea now of where we stand.....and it's a surprise to me.
I hoped for 8 wins this year and thought that was a reasonable expectation. We will definitely do better than that and probably will be knocking on the door of the eight....by any measure that's a darn good improvement.
Some of the young guys got lost today in the big league but we all knew that would happen.
Let's hope Adkins can learn a lot from his experience out there getting towelled up.
Sure we lost but it wasn't a thumping and we have 10 days to get Bucks and Brownie right.
Will mal be fit for next week i wonder???
By the way, why anyone stands under the Great Southern Stand is a great mystery to me.
It must be the very worst spot to watch footy from in the whole place.....no atmosphere, dark and very noisy...I got there late so had little choice until half time....never again.
Bring on the Bombers....i think they are due to drop one...hope it's this week.
When North could lower the game to arm wrestling standard they were always going to win it as we then were playing their game.
Even so, there were plenty of positives to take from our first loss.
We were down and out early in the last quarter and a 60-70 point thrashing looked likely but the boys fought back to make it respectable.
We really should have been well in front at quarter time...at least 3-4 goals up.
Very poor shooting for goal really cost.
Sav really let them off the hook in this quarter....one dead easy miss from straight in front and then a dropped sitter.
Tarrant showed that he's ready to fulfil the early promise....he was one of our best...and against the league's best....a very good sign.
Bucks wasn't fit; Pebbles didn't play and Brownie and Mal to come back.
Yep, we can improve on that performance but so can North of course.
We have a pretty good idea now of where we stand.....and it's a surprise to me.
I hoped for 8 wins this year and thought that was a reasonable expectation. We will definitely do better than that and probably will be knocking on the door of the eight....by any measure that's a darn good improvement.
Some of the young guys got lost today in the big league but we all knew that would happen.
Let's hope Adkins can learn a lot from his experience out there getting towelled up.
Sure we lost but it wasn't a thumping and we have 10 days to get Bucks and Brownie right.
Will mal be fit for next week i wonder???
By the way, why anyone stands under the Great Southern Stand is a great mystery to me.
It must be the very worst spot to watch footy from in the whole place.....no atmosphere, dark and very noisy...I got there late so had little choice until half time....never again.
Bring on the Bombers....i think they are due to drop one...hope it's this week.
-
Broadie
- Posts: 710
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 1999 7:01 pm
- Location: VIC
I'm too dejected to wtite much about the game. How could we miss so many shots? AT least Pagan and all the scribes think we are still the real deal. Boy did we miss our best contested marks (Pebbles, Rowdy, Big Mal).
I@n S (& everyone else):
I agree with the whinge about the Carey "mark", but just a minor clarification. There is NO such thing as a "man in front" rule in the AFL book of rules. This is an almost universal misconception that I also believed until attending a coaching course run 2 years ago. The-then umpires advisor was there to clarify rules fo all coaches present, and one that was raised was the fact that the only rule to do with contested marks is that the player has to have "controlled" the ball and had first touch (Carey didn't have first touch). Otherwise, it is up to the umpire to determine who gets the mark. It has become accepted by most that in the case of 2 players getting the same ball you either pay the man in front or have a ball-up, but it is NOT a rule of our game.
I@n S (& everyone else):
I agree with the whinge about the Carey "mark", but just a minor clarification. There is NO such thing as a "man in front" rule in the AFL book of rules. This is an almost universal misconception that I also believed until attending a coaching course run 2 years ago. The-then umpires advisor was there to clarify rules fo all coaches present, and one that was raised was the fact that the only rule to do with contested marks is that the player has to have "controlled" the ball and had first touch (Carey didn't have first touch). Otherwise, it is up to the umpire to determine who gets the mark. It has become accepted by most that in the case of 2 players getting the same ball you either pay the man in front or have a ball-up, but it is NOT a rule of our game.
