One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on April 13, 2019, 09:58:49 PM
-
Fans up in arms over controversial Tigers’ double goal
Jesper Fjeldstad,
adelaidenow
April 13, 2019 7:47pm
It was in the 10th minute of the third quarter when Port Adelaide defender Ryan Burton followed key Richmond forward Tom Lynch into an open goal, but was too far behind to do anything about the inevitable major.
Lynch kicked the easiest of goals and slowed down and, as Burton caught up, he gave him a shove in the back, most likely out of frustration.
Tom Lynch was gifted a double goal after a controversial free kick.
It can be argued that it was the lightest of pushes, and that Lynch was clever enough to take a dive.
He got the result: another shot at goal from an unmissable range, and all of a sudden a wave of energy swept over the Tigers.
The lively Liam Baker kicked the next for Richmond, then Lynch, the club’s star recruit, kicked another one and Richmond was up by 15 points after trailing for the whole first half.
One of the things people talked about after the match was whether it was a free kick or not, with most people thinking it was there even though it seemed harsh.
It’s not the question that matters.
It’s what it did to the game.
Momentum can grow, and it can be switched on in an instant. This was the latter.
Port fought back, and had a smaller momentum shift, triggered by former captain Travis Boak — who is having an outstanding start to the season — who stole a bouncing ball from Tiger defender Nathan Broad, gathered, and managed to get the ball to Sam Gray for an easy goal.
In Port’s swing, which never seemed to have the same energy, Burton had some joy in kicking a goal from around the 50m mark on the boundary to make up for the major he gifted.
But it’s not that simple, a goal for a goal.
Port Adelaide cashed in on a sloppy kick out of bounds from second-gamer Sydney Stack in the last quarter and set Ollie Wines up for an easy goal and the ground came alive again.
Then, with less than five minutes to go, Dan Houston intercepted a Dylan Grimes kick out of the backline and sent it back over his head for the Power to take a four-point lead.
It wasn’t a momentum swinger, because there wasn’t enough time for either team to go on a long streak. There wasn’t enough time left for either team to tire.
But it was the sort of act that turned the final minutes into a frenzy.
Richmond played its best game of the season — despite missing its four best players — because the pressure and the tackling was back.
Nobody will know which swing of momentum was the most important in setting it up.
(https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/87539dbb-6bc7-46c2-923e-a288952625a5.png)
(https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/b58f7773-bc8a-4756-a1c9-031c530afc12.png)
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/port-adelaide-v-richmond-fan-up-in-arms-over-controversial-tigers-double-goal/news-story/a8e18b18cdcf203adb8dbff77c0571be
-
Those Port fans whinging need to learn the rules ::).
12.4 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FREE KICKS AND ‘ALL CLEAR’
12.4.1 Free Kick Awarded Before ‘All Clear’
Where a Free Kick is awarded to a Player immediately after the football passes the Goal or Behind Line but before the field Umpire signals ‘All Clear’ or ‘Touched All Clear’, the following shall apply:
(a) Where the Player is in attack the field Umpire shall signal ‘All Clear’ or ‘Touched All Clear’, after which the goal Umpire shall signal and record the score. The Free Kick shall then be taken where the infringement occurred, or the position at which the football is brought back into play, whichever is the greater penalty against the offending Team.
http://websites.sportstg.com/get_file.cgi?id=36381723
-
Seems like mightytiges and myself are the only two footy fans who know the Laws of the Game actually exist
You might want to look up Chapter 19 and then watch the Cox report . How he got it from one week to a fine is staggering 😉
-
The law was changed over 10 years ago, before that if an infringement occurred after the ball crossed the goal line the resulting free kick was taken back at the center circle.
At some stage the AFL decided that the penalty should be taken where it occurred or the greatest advantage to the team receiving the free kick.
We received another double goal last season when Dunn from Collingwood bumped Higgins over about 3 seconds after he had scored a goal
-
I feel sorry for South Australians.
Their football journalists make them look like the biggest bunch of whingeing idiots.
-
Was evened up with the non reversal of the shot on goal where Grimes was flattened by poo pepper
-
Was evened up with the non reversal of the shot on goal where Grimes was flattened by poo pepper
Yep. Unbelievable they feel robbed.
Balta lays an awesome tackle in the goal square and the player who drops it like a hot Dutch Cream gets payed a free for holding too long. They took it down the other end and scored.
Let the Gerald Wheatley’s start their whinging too. Makes it all the better.
.... and we will always tear them apart 🎼
-
Seems like mightytiges and myself are the only two footy fans who know the Laws of the Game actually exist
Not true, while watching the replay last night I was asked by non AFL following significant other why it was another kick after the gosl. Explained it, response that makes sense ;D
-
Seems like mightytiges and myself are the only two footy fans who know the Laws of the Game actually exist
Not true, while watching the replay last night I was asked by non AFL following significant other why it was another kick after the gosl. Explained it, response that makes sense ;D
I was referring to the trolls on Twitter and in particular the Cox case , where the footy journalist and ex players commenting on something they hadn’t read
First time anywhere that anyone has quoted an actual law
Well done to MightyTiges
Rules are there for a reason
-
Think the collective attitudes would be a bit different if Port got two goals for the same
That said, as mentioned, SPP non decision evened it up
-
Agree with you there Damo
-
Was evened up with the non reversal of the shot on goal where Grimes was flattened by poo pepper
And right in front of the umpire. Hope he enjoys his U/18 game this week.
-
yeah how the actual stuff does that umpire explain that? He literally was running right to where it was taking place and ignored it, but they tripped over themselves to pay bs frees for breathing on someone too heavily going the other way, I can't figure out what the stuff is going on from one minute to the next with this game, its gone to poo, and I hate it. The new rules poo me and I want to throw hot chip fat on all the arseholes who keep meddling with them.
-
Seems like mightytiges and myself are the only two footy fans who know the Laws of the Game actually exist
Not true, while watching the replay last night I was asked by non AFL following significant other why it was another kick after the gosl. Explained it, response that makes sense ;D
I was referring to the trolls on Twitter and in particular the Cox case , where the footy journalist and ex players commenting on something they hadn’t read
First time anywhere that anyone has quoted an actual law
Well done to MightyTiges
Rules are there for a reason
Thanks for the compliment Jack but you've still got me blocked on twitter :angel:.
-
:lol
-
:lol
:lol :lol