Footy Classified

[WilliamPowell]

Reminder the 4 Stooges are due for their weekly talk fest around 9.40pm

As always the big issues will be tackled

What will Caro be wearing?
Will Matchew Llllllooooyd put a negative opinion forward regaridng his beloved Bummers?
Will Glary say anything remotely positive about Richmond
Will Hutchy continue to look like he's just consumed 4 tonnes of KFC, Maccas & Hungey Jacks just prior to going on air?

Can harldy wait to see what they have to say about the goal that wasn't

[Phil Mrakov]

Reminder the 4 Stooges are due for their weekly talk fest around 9.40pm

As always the big issues will be tackled

What will Caro be wearing?

Will Matchew Llllllooooyd put a negative opinion forward regaridng his beloved Bummers?
Will Glary say anything remotely positive about Richmond
Will Hutchy continue to look like he's just consumed 4 tonnes of KFC, Maccas & Hungey Jacks just prior to going on air?

Can harldy wait to see what they have to say about the goal that wasn't

[Eat_em_Alive]

Reminder the 4 Stooges are due for their weekly talk fest around 9.40pm

As always the big issues will be tackled

What will Caro be wearing?
Will Matchew Llllllooooyd put a negative opinion forward regaridng his beloved Bummers?
Will Glary say anything remotely positive about Richmond
Will Hutchy continue to look like he's just consumed 4 tonnes of KFC, Maccas & Hungey Jacks just prior to going on air?

Can harldy wait to see what they have to say about the goal that wasn't

Yesssss 
Gary's getting tense as lloyd is asking about the melbourne coaching position hahahhaha love watching him sweat 

[one-eyed]

Predictably they talked about the final two minutes of the Freo game as another example of us losing a close game. Lloyd said it's an indictment on the players if they need the bench to be yelling out to get back. They showed Houli being on the wrong side of Ballantyne at the throw-in and how if Freo had asked how they wanted the set-up for that throw-in then they couldn't have asked for a bigger space that was left by Richmond in front of goal.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2013-04-29/tigers-of-old

The show didn't mention this but just as an aside re-looking at the vision, Nahas was in that space initially on his own in front of the ruck contest (everyone else was manned up expect for Hannath who was 2m behind Maric and Griffin). Nahas then runs past the ruck contest to outside the pack (as Hannath runs in to double team Maric) leaving the space open for Ballantyne to run into and kick the winning goal.


Anyway the only other Richmond item was a good call/bad call question - "Should Richmond re-sign Dusty at the end of the season?". Caro said Dusty has been good this year and that he is now linked closely to Richmond and will stay.

[georgies31]

 Put all of that aside.Yet they failed to mention how we were robbed 4 points and a win because of stupid umpiring.

[yellowandback]

Put all of that aside.Yet they failed to mention how we were robbed 4 points and a win because of stupid umpiring.

Whichever way you look at it, 4 points gone which we could've avoided.
Why crave their approval?

[gerkin greg]

Footy Crappified

4 slimey turds rubbing together for warmth

Waste of time

[RollsRoyce]

The show didn't mention this but just as an aside re-looking at the vision, Nahas was in that space initially on his own in front of the ruck contest (everyone else was manned up expect for Hannath who was 2m behind Maric and Griffin). Nahas then runs past the ruck contest to outside the pack (as Hannath runs in to double team Maric) leaving the space open for Ballantyne to run into and kick the winning goal.

Just on this point about Hannath and Griffin double-teaming Maric, One-Eyed: There was some speculation on another forum that they were doing this for much of the game, with Hannath basically blocking Maric's run at the ball, which is apparently illegal, but the umpire's ignored it. I must admit, I can't put myself through the agony of watching the game again to verify these claims. I just wonder what your thoughts are: Do you recall any incidents of this happening? And can you clarify what the actual rule is regarding what ruckmen can do to negate each other at centre bounces/stoppages??   

[dwaino]

The show didn't mention this but just as an aside re-looking at the vision, Nahas was in that space initially on his own in front of the ruck contest (everyone else was manned up expect for Hannath who was 2m behind Maric and Griffin). Nahas then runs past the ruck contest to outside the pack (as Hannath runs in to double team Maric) leaving the space open for Ballantyne to run into and kick the winning goal.

Just on this point about Hannath and Griffin double-teaming Maric, One-Eyed: There was some speculation on another forum that they were doing this for much of the game, with Hannath basically blocking Maric's run at the ball, which is apparently illegal, but the umpire's ignored it. I must admit, I can't put myself through the agony of watching the game again to verify these claims. I just wonder what your thoughts are: Do you recall any incidents of this happening? And can you clarify what the actual rule is regarding what ruckmen can do to negate each other at centre bounces/stoppages??

They were doing it all night, and even shepherding our forwards out of marking contests for the third man to intercept mark uncontested. .

The ruck rule is so cloudy. The third man up is allowed to be blocked but cannot block himself. So they would nominate the ruckman, in this case Hannath, who is allowed to lock in with Maric to 'contest' once the ball is thrown and allowing a third man to go up. We could have used somebody to block the third man but unless a ruck was nominated that third man could claim he was the designated ruck and blocked or illegally contacted. Teams like Sydney are using both Mumford and Pyke around the ground and not nominating who the ruckman is and milking blocking and illegal ruck contact frees, abusing the new rule. That's why this new rule is so crap. You have a bunch of blokes standing around a stoppage and unless the umpire asks or nominates rucks like in Auskick then it's going to keep getting abused.

[RollsRoyce]

I see. Thanks Dwaino. It's amazing isn't it? Every time these instances come up of teams exploiting grey areas in the rules to negate players and gain an unfair advantage, how often it's either Fremantle or Sydney doing the infringing. And people wonder why I have no respect for Ross Lyon. If it was up to me there'd be a ban on anyone other the two competing ruckmen flying or grappling at any contest, and anybody who tried to block the competing ruckmen's run at the ball would be automatically pinged.

[Stripes]

The 'ruckman' from each duel should be made to just raise their hand to the umpire before a ball is thrown in or balled up as a silent affirmation that they are the ruck. Then again I'm probably just creating more rules to fix a rule that should never be changed. Sounds like the Cane Toad theory 

[tigs2011]

Yep we now need a rule change to fix this years rule change. Then that will get exploited so we will need a new rule for 2015.  FFS just go back to the 1897 rules and start again. Let the game evolve itself. 

[RollsRoyce]

Further to this, and what you were saying about our forwards being shepherded out for the third man up to mark, this explains why Jack had such a quiet night. Also, Scott Watters made some complaints about Sydney players illegally shepherding his forwards out of the contest in Wellington. But he backpedalled at a million miles an hour On The Couch last night when Longmire laughed it off, and Healy, Sheahan and Roos (surprise, surprise) acted all aggrieved that anyone should question the AFL's Golden Geese.

[RollsRoyce]

Yep we now need a rule change to fix this years rule change. Then that will get exploited so we will need a new rule for 2015.  FFS just go back to the 1897 rules and start again. Let the game evolve itself. 

Nope! What I'm saying is they shouldn't have changed the fricken rule in the first place. One ruck contest, two ruckmen jumping at each other from opposite points of the square. What could be more simple or perfect than that? They've just gone and created another grey area for scumbags like Lyon to exploit in his never ending quest to drag the game down into the mire. But if you think that's "evolution" then so be it.

[dwaino]

Further to this, and what you were saying about our forwards being shepherded out for the third man up to mark, this explains why Jack had such a quiet night. Also, Scott Watters made some complaints about Sydney players illegally shepherding his forwards out of the contest in Wellington. But he backpedalled at a million miles an hour On The Couch last night when Longmire laughed it off, and Healy, Sheahan and Roos (surprise, surprise) acted all aggrieved that anyone should question the AFL's Golden Geese.

It's illegal to shepherd someone out of a marking contest, so they're getting in front, guarding the drop zone and then the third man gets it at the highest point. The intention is still shepherding because the blocker doesn't even look like they are trying to contest the ball, they just dig in and hold their arms out (watch the Freo defenders against our marking forwards). Just abusing another grey area.

Yep we now need a rule change to fix this years rule change. Then that will get exploited so we will need a new rule for 2015.  FFS just go back to the 1897 rules and start again. Let the game evolve itself. 

This is my peeve. Let the game evolve naturally. Eade said himself last year teams were now finding ways out of the ugly press for example and it was catching on. But the AFL just knee jerks and leaves their dirty skid marks on the game instead.