(04-10-2022, 10:54 PM)tonyo date Wrote:* one very frustrating thing, after the umpires were red-hot on incorrect disposal in the first 3 weeks, they seemed to go ultra-soft in this game. I lost count of the number of times Anderson/Rowell/Miller did not dispose correctly and play on was the call. It contributed significantly to their clearance numbers.Yep, the impact of the way the AFL directs umpires to interpret or focus on certain rules has a huge impact. In the first few weeks we would have won lots of frees for effective tackles, yesterday it was play on and I don't get why we see such a change. It's like the umpires wound back the clock, maybe that new interpretation has been given the kybosh!
But this is the fundamental problem with those rules, they don't fix anything, they just change the interpretation which will forever remain variable. Scott(AFL) will claim the interpretation of the rule is being "refined" as players and umpires gain more "experience" under the current playing conditions. But it looked to me like it was back to the future. Should we be surprised, Scott(Geelong) has been one of the major critics which I find bizarre, because if he was prepared to change his game plan the rule actually suits Dad's Army just like it suited our own slower midfield! Just shows how fixed in their ways AFL coaches can be.
Another bizarre one was there were several occasions when GC player's basically tossed the ball in the air when tackled and then punched it, that's incorrect disposal and not one of them got pinged for doing it!
I felt we were too focussed on Levi, and I warned pre-match we didn't have a good match up for Chol which was dismissed by many, and along with Witts he's probably ends up amongst the BoG. For me the ideal player to take on Chol would have been Kemp, and Kemp would have also added some extra run. Fogarty for Pitto was a huge mistake, maybe we were hoping or expecting the rain.
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"