- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Rookie
Joined June 2017
0
Views
0
Published
10
Comments
Published
Comments
I see, you assumed every sport excludes set based sports. Probably best not to assume anything, much less that the team I support can’t win games. I follow the Crows and yep, they do it too, although when you’re 10 goals up you seldom need to consider the clock. Still I would prefer it if they played games out to the end rather than chipping it around the back half, I don’t know of anyone who enjoys that part of the game.
The Blues have mastered the honourable loss
Every sport uses time or clock management? Sure they do… Tennis, bowling, darts, snooker, volleyball etc etc. You’re absolutely right about Carlton being accountable for allowing that pass, they certainly played their part in it and of those sports where the clock does matter, yes – their is strategic management of time, but the shot clock in AFL is an opportunity to kill game time. We’ve seen it exploited many times this year, often blatantly and as a supporter I’d prefer not to pay exorbitant entry fees to a match for the privilege of watching a player manipulating his clock.
The Blues have mastered the honourable loss
Well switching doesn’t waste time because any pausing defeats the purpose of it, but you know that so I’ll just take that as the sarcasm you intended it to be. Neal-Bullen and Lewis exploited the shot clock and killed off a tight game well within the rules of the game and Col queried if our game should be going down that path. I agree with him, I’d much rather see a physical contest played out to the end, otherwise I’ll just go watch chess. NFL epitomizes what a stupid idea game clock visibility is and Saad would bounce it on the way in, he bounces a footy eating his weeties that bloke.
The Blues have mastered the honourable loss
The shot clock irks me about as much as the keepings-off teams to to burn time at the end of games. I agree Col, once a player indicates they are having a shot they should be obligated to shoot at goal. So many sports have close contests killed off by time management and timer visibility, in AFL particularly its boring and it is not in the spirit of the game. At the very least shot clock time shouldn’t consume game time, should be time on – if there are 10 shots per quarter that’s 5 mins of wasted time. Ben Brown should be given 5-10 seconds max to set himself, because starting a run-up from center-wing to kick from the top of the goal square takes a good 20 seconds, he should probably be made to bounce it every 15 yards on the way in too.
The Blues have mastered the honourable loss
Fair observation about GWS being content with hanging around for 3 quarters and winning the game in the last and they would have done it again except Langford’s goal had divine intervention written all over it. I thought the blues had their chances but they were stiff losing Cripps and White and Silvagni was stiff not to be paid a mark for a shot on goal, but up the other end McDonald was paid a mark that bobbled around and bounced off about 1300 players before it fell into his hands, umpiring consistency is desirable always but pertinent in a tight game. …anyone seen Roger?
The Blues have mastered the honourable loss
@Aransan every tribunal charge should be judged on its merits, not with consideration to how many games left in a season for the offender. Bugg is an extremely average footballer with a knack for getting under the opponents skin and inciting scuffles – the modern day hit-man. IMHO he should have got 6 weeks for acting after the coward-punch on Easton Wood followed by a dive in the goal square that Greg Louganis would have been envious of.
Tom Bugg cops six-week ban for "dog act"
Great use of statistics Gordon. My long standing, recurring pet peeve is Bruce McAvaney telling me how I feel. “You just feel like the next goal wins”, “You just feel they’ll come out on top”, “You just feel time might beat them”, no Bruce I just feel like you are stating the obvious in the run of play. If a team is down by 3 goals with 2 minutes to go, yes the clock will probably beat them, unless it’s Essendon defending that lead.
My current pet peeve: The weekly must-win match
Would never have expected a devout Muslim to do that to a Lamb.
AFL tribunal copping criticism after Bachar Houli sentence
Is Melbourne the new Hawthorn? NEWSFLASH: Trump says something stupid – – FREE KICK Melbourne! The consistency in a 4-umpire system failed dismally, the score review system failed AGAIN, the goal gifted after Bugg/Wood incident is a slight on the game and Jack Watts contender for MARK OF THE YEAR – I’ve seen the ball stick to a defenders clenched fist longer than Watts held that “mark”. The old adage you can’t beat the opponents and the umpires rings especially true when there is 4 of them playing for the other team – be prepared for somethings less than 5 star treatment this week over in the West.
No I’m not a bulldogs supporter so it is not a case of sour grapes, merely an observation after watching the demons have the rub of the green two weeks in a row. I’m not sure why bulldogs supporters aren’t talking about it though, they were brutalized by the umpires yesterday, Melbourne had very little to do with the victory, let alone a “10 goal dismantling” as it is being called.
Developing Dees can't afford to get ahead of themselves
Couldn’t agree more Tim – Rugby League, Union, Soccer, Hockey and almost every other decent sport operate under a penalty card system – even Cricket has one now. It is used in Austrlian rules football leagues below the AFL so why is not good enough for the AFL? Penalty card systems are an insurance policy for gamesmanship, the AFL has no such guarantee. As soon as this incident happened, in fact while Harris Andrews was unconscious in mid-air it was clear he wouldn’t play any further part in the game, it was also clear under the rules, the contact was high, it was late, it was high impact, it was reckless – Cameron will be cited and he will be suspended. If the rules state it, then why can’t a game umpire or even a match committee official be given the same power to issue a red card on review of the evidence available during the 5-10 minutes it took to get Andews carted off? The AFL’s tribunal system doesn’t support the eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth principle. Instead of GWS being penalised in the game for at least equivalent of Brisbane’s loss of Andrews – key position and one interchange rotation, Cameron plays the entire game, boots 3 goals and the AFL official stats credit him with one goal assist. In a game that yielded a result of less than 5 goal margin, one could argue Cameron’s influence was significant. Brisbane could also be without Andrews in upcoming matches until he his medically cleared and as always the major beneficiaries are the clubs sheduled to play GWS during Cameron’s suspension period. How long before we get a repeat of Alastair Lynch in his last game of football, throwing countless haymakers at Darryl Wakelin in 1st quarter the 2004 GF – probably one of most blatant exploitations of the absence of a penalty card system in sporting history. Have to wonder how many punches Lynch would have thrown that day if a red card actually penalised the team?
Cameron elbow overshadows Giants AFL win