Reece Conca [merged]

[Stalin]

Conca is an undisciplined princess.

It is not the first time he has been penalised for this kind of crap,
in fact he has done it his whole career.

I don't understand why anyone is defending him.

The little idiot always tries to waste time giving the ball over and this time he
got pinged.

Long live the iceberg!

It's a good tatic as it allows people to get back

[Penelope]

AFL umpires boss Hayden Kennedy has ticked off the Reece Conca decision and raised concerns some fans and commentators don’t fully understand the prior opportunity rule.

Conca was pinged in the tense final quarter on Saturday night for making no attempt to dispose of the ball, which prompted discussion by Channel Seven commentators and widespread condemnation on social media.

The critics of the decision said Conca had no prior opportunity before he was pinged for holding the ball.

But AFL rules state that if there’s no prior opportunity, the player must “genuinely attempt” to dispose of the ball, which Conca didn’t.

AFL rule 15.2.3 (b) states: “Where the field umpire is satisfied that a player in possession of the football ... has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field umpire shall award a free kick against that player if, upon being correctly tackled, the player does not correctly dispose or genuinely attempt to correctly dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.”



still the umps fault or perhaps dimwit and cunca dont understand the game, which wouldnt be a surprise.

The question remains though, without prior opportunity, how can a player correctly dispose of a ball which is held to him by another player. A correct disposal is a kick or a handball. Neither can be done when the ball is held to your chest by another player..........

They dont have to correctly dispose of the ball when there is no prior opportunity, they have to make a genuine attempt.

I'm not real sure what the umps expect when both arms are pinned though.

I have asked umpires coaches and senior umpires about this and they are not instructed to do so, but they generally give more leeway if you try to drop the ball to your boot rather than attempt a half arsed handball.

There are also times when you are better off just to hang onto the ball and give away a free, in particular if you are outnumbered at the contest.

[(•))(©™]

Conca is an undisciplined princess.

It is not the first time he has been penalised for this kind of crap,
in fact he has done it his whole career.

I don't understand why anyone is defending him.

The little idiot always tries to waste time giving the ball over and this time he
got pinged.

Long live the iceberg!

It's a good tatic as it allows people to get back

When done properly and without ego, it's a good tactic.

[Stalin]

AFL umpires boss Hayden Kennedy has ticked off the Reece Conca decision and raised concerns some fans and commentators don’t fully understand the prior opportunity rule.

Conca was pinged in the tense final quarter on Saturday night for making no attempt to dispose of the ball, which prompted discussion by Channel Seven commentators and widespread condemnation on social media.

The critics of the decision said Conca had no prior opportunity before he was pinged for holding the ball.

But AFL rules state that if there’s no prior opportunity, the player must “genuinely attempt” to dispose of the ball, which Conca didn’t.

AFL rule 15.2.3 (b) states: “Where the field umpire is satisfied that a player in possession of the football ... has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field umpire shall award a free kick against that player if, upon being correctly tackled, the player does not correctly dispose or genuinely attempt to correctly dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.”



still the umps fault or perhaps dimwit and cunca dont understand the game, which wouldnt be a surprise.

The question remains though, without prior opportunity, how can a player correctly dispose of a ball which is held to him by another player. A correct disposal is a kick or a handball. Neither can be done when the ball is held to your chest by another player..........

They dont have to correctly dispose of the ball when there is no prior opportunity, they have to make a genuine attempt.

I'm not real sure what the umps expect when both arms are pinned though.

It's bollocks 

[🏅Dooks]

Conca is an undisciplined princess.

It is not the first time he has been penalised for this kind of crap,
in fact he has done it his whole career.

I don't understand why anyone is defending him.

The little idiot always tries to waste time giving the ball over and this time he
got pinged.

Long live the iceberg!

It's a good tatic as it allows people to get back

When done properly and without ego, it's a good tactic.

Without ego or without intelligence?

This guy is a dumb little sniper on the field. Maybe has an egotistical eating disorder off the field.

[big tone]

Apologies if this has already been said-

But what I don't get, especially in our last couple of games is, if a player gets the footy, gets tackled without prior opportunity, the umpire runs in and within a second blows his whistle for a ball up.
Then on other occasions the same thing happens but the umpire doesn't come sprinting in, he waits, one second, two second, three seconds, then says holding the ball. No legitimate attempt to dispose of the footy.

Why do they blow their whistle straight away sometimes and wait on others??

The player making the play should be looked after IMO. If the tackle has legitimately held the ball in, then it's a ball up.

The other one that poos me at the moment is if a player picks up the footy and is tackled without having prior opportunity and the tackle jars the ball free, why is that a free kick?? I know it's not a legal disposal but the fact you haven't had prior opportunity, and the tackle is the result the ball jars free should make it play on.  It happened a lot against Port the week before and we got pinged.

[Stalin]

Apologies if this has already been said-

But what I don't get, especially in our last couple of games is, if a player gets the footy, gets tackled without prior opportunity, the umpire runs in and within a second blows his whistle for a ball up.
Then on other occasions the same thing happens but the umpire doesn't come sprinting in, he waits, one second, two second, three seconds, then says holding the ball. No legitimate attempt to dispose of the footy.

Why do they blow their whistle straight away sometimes and wait on others??

The player making the play should be looked after IMO. If the tackle has legitimately held the ball in, then it's a ball up.

The other one that poos me at the moment is if a player picks up the footy and is tackled without having prior opportunity and the tackle jars the ball free, why is that a free kick?? I know it's not a legal disposal but the fact you haven't had prior opportunity, and the tackle is the result the ball jars free should make it play on.  It happened a lot against Port the week before and we got pinged.

Happens all the time with almost every rule

Most identical incidents with opposite results

Stupid idea to use multiple umpires

[Penelope]

AFL umpires boss Hayden Kennedy has ticked off the Reece Conca decision and raised concerns some fans and commentators don’t fully understand the prior opportunity rule.

Conca was pinged in the tense final quarter on Saturday night for making no attempt to dispose of the ball, which prompted discussion by Channel Seven commentators and widespread condemnation on social media.

The critics of the decision said Conca had no prior opportunity before he was pinged for holding the ball.

But AFL rules state that if there’s no prior opportunity, the player must “genuinely attempt” to dispose of the ball, which Conca didn’t.

AFL rule 15.2.3 (b) states: “Where the field umpire is satisfied that a player in possession of the football ... has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field umpire shall award a free kick against that player if, upon being correctly tackled, the player does not correctly dispose or genuinely attempt to correctly dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.”



still the umps fault or perhaps dimwit and cunca dont understand the game, which wouldnt be a surprise.

The question remains though, without prior opportunity, how can a player correctly dispose of a ball which is held to him by another player. A correct disposal is a kick or a handball. Neither can be done when the ball is held to your chest by another player..........

They dont have to correctly dispose of the ball when there is no prior opportunity, they have to make a genuine attempt.

I'm not real sure what the umps expect when both arms are pinned though.

It's bollocks

first or second part?

[YellowandBlackBlood]

But what I don't get, especially in our last couple of games is, if a player gets the footy, gets tackled without prior opportunity, the umpire runs in and within a second blows his whistle for a ball up.

This is exactly what I was alluding to. This happens regularly. The ump blows the whistle immediately saying that there was no prior opportunity and calls  for a ball up. That is the correct interpretation. You must be given some chance to dispose of it by a handball or a kick - the only two legitimate disposal techniques (that is why these are the only disposal stats). The only time this isn't supposed to be applied is when a player drags a ball in underneath him.
Conca did not have even a split second to handball or kick. He was grabbed immediately and Bontipelli held the ball to his chest. With his hand on the ball, theoretically he also had possession of the ball.

It was a very poor decision by people that don't actually understand the game or its rules and how they apply. When the ball is being held to you, you should not need to try to punch it away if you had no previous chance to dispose of it.

[Penelope]

why shouldnt you have to attempt to dispose of the ball if it is being held to you in the tackle?

Isnt the purpose of tackling someone to prevent them disposing of the ball?

[big tone]

why shouldnt you have to attempt to dispose of the ball if it is being held to you in the tackle?

Isnt the purpose of tackling someone to prevent them disposing of the ball?

Yes it is. And he did stop Conca from getting rid of the footy. The Bont did his job.
But if the player with the footy haven't had ample time to dispose of it before the ball is held to him, why should he be penalised? It should be a ball up.
Fair enough if the player has had time to dispose of it and gets caught and doesn't dispose of it correctly, then it's a free to the tackler. No one disputes that.
But the number 1 rule in footy at the moment is to protect the guy making the play, and that just doesn't mean protect him from getting hurt, it's to protect him because he has made the play first.
I recon the umps have got this wrong of late.

[Stalin]

AFL umpires boss Hayden Kennedy has ticked off the Reece Conca decision and raised concerns some fans and commentators don’t fully understand the prior opportunity rule.

Conca was pinged in the tense final quarter on Saturday night for making no attempt to dispose of the ball, which prompted discussion by Channel Seven commentators and widespread condemnation on social media.

The critics of the decision said Conca had no prior opportunity before he was pinged for holding the ball.

But AFL rules state that if there’s no prior opportunity, the player must “genuinely attempt” to dispose of the ball, which Conca didn’t.

AFL rule 15.2.3 (b) states: “Where the field umpire is satisfied that a player in possession of the football ... has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field umpire shall award a free kick against that player if, upon being correctly tackled, the player does not correctly dispose or genuinely attempt to correctly dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.”



still the umps fault or perhaps dimwit and cunca dont understand the game, which wouldnt be a surprise.

The question remains though, without prior opportunity, how can a player correctly dispose of a ball which is held to him by another player. A correct disposal is a kick or a handball. Neither can be done when the ball is held to your chest by another player..........

They dont have to correctly dispose of the ball when there is no prior opportunity, they have to make a genuine attempt.

I'm not real sure what the umps expect when both arms are pinned though.

It's bollocks

first or second part?

The two parts together

[The Machine]

Conca is an undisciplined princess.

It is not the first time he has been penalised for this kind of crap,
in fact he has done it his whole career.

I don't understand why anyone is defending him.

The little idiot always tries to waste time giving the ball over and this time he
got pinged.

Long live the iceberg!

It's a good tatic as it allows people to get back

When done properly and without ego, it's a good tactic.

Without ego or without intelligence?

This guy is a dumb little sniper on the field. Maybe has an egotistical eating disorder off the field.

So what is Rance on the field?

[(•))(©™]

A leader 

[Penelope]

why shouldnt you have to attempt to dispose of the ball if it is being held to you in the tackle?

Isnt the purpose of tackling someone to prevent them disposing of the ball?

Yes it is. And he did stop Conca from getting rid of the footy. The Bont did his job.
But if the player with the footy haven't had ample time to dispose of it before the ball is held to him, why should he be penalised? It should be a ball up.
Fair enough if the player has had time to dispose of it and gets caught and doesn't dispose of it correctly, then it's a free to the tackler. No one disputes that.
But the number 1 rule in footy at the moment is to protect the guy making the play, and that just doesn't mean protect him from getting hurt, it's to protect him because he has made the play first.
I recon the umps have got this wrong of late.

so you think there are times when you shouldnt have to make an attempt to get of the ball when tackled?