"Bad look" - Giesch gives Hudson free the thumbs up

[AndrewP6]

Just when you thought they couldn't get any dumber. Fair dinkum, if asking "What?" is demonstrative or aggressive, I'll bloody well go "he".
He goes on to say that the Bryce Gibbs kick should've been disallowed, as he 'didn't kick directly over his mark' - Gibbs just needs to claim it is his "natural arc":rolleyes: Oh, that's right, that call belongs to Franklin.:mad:

He also gives the OK to the dive taken by Davey. Apparently giving someone a mouthful after you goal is fine, but don't dare be 'demonstrative' to an ump. I almost laughed when the host (name?) asked if we're getting 'a bit precious'. Giesch accompanied the Wood/Davey footage with a "BANG" sound effect, possibly to make it appear worse than it actually was.

Utter tripe.

From the AFL website:
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/121160/default.aspx

[bornadog]

Just when you thought they couldn't get any dumber. Fair dinkum, if asking "What?" is demonstrative or aggressive, I'll bloody well go "he".
He goes on to say that the Bryce Gibbs kick should've been disallowed, as he 'didn't kick directly over his mark' - Gibbs just needs to claim it is his "natural arc":rolleyes: Oh, that's right, that call belongs to Franklin.:mad:

He also gives the OK to the dive taken by Davey. Apparently giving someone a mouthful after you goal is fine, but don't dare be 'demonstrative' to an ump. I almost laughed when the host (name?) asked if we're getting 'a bit precious'. Giesch accompanied the Wood/Davey footage with a "BANG" sound effect, possibly to make it appear worse than it actually was.

Utter tripe.

From the AFL website:
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/121160/default.aspx

Giesch is a bigger fool than I thought. All Huddo said was What. It should have been Huddo's free anyway.

[AndrewP6]

Giesch is a bigger fool than I thought. All Huddo said was What. It should have been Huddo's free anyway.

Yep, but he was 'demonstrative' and 'aggressive' in the way he said it. And we can't have that, can we?:rolleyes:

[LostDoggy]

Yep, but he was 'demonstrative' and 'aggressive' in the way he said it. And we can't have that, can we?:rolleyes:

I've been watching Giesch's umpire review on AFL.com since round 17 and it seems to be purely a self-justification forum. He's so scared of admitting that they interpret some of the rules three different ways in the same game that I'm giving up on it. I'll just have to go back to yelling at the more ridiculous calls over the fence. Lucky I've got level 1 reserved seating as I'm still fooling myself that one day they'll actually absorb what I'm trying to instruct. If not; hell - it's kind of cathartic to lose my voice once a week....... :D

[OLD SCRAGGer]

Come on now!! Did ANYONE really expect Geisch to say umps got a free against Dogs was wrong ????? :rolleyes:

[Mantis]

Giesch is a bigger fool than I thought. All Huddo said was What. It should have been Huddo's free anyway.

From where the umpire was standing you could clearly see Hudson's arm over Ryder's shoulder so the correct decision was made.

If the umpire was on the boundary side the free-kick would have been reversed.

As far the 50m goes the umps have been paying these all year so Hudson should have just zipped it.... It was stupid to put himself in a position where the umpire could make this call.

[bornadog]

From where the umpire was standing you could clearly see Hudson's arm over Ryder's shoulder so the correct decision was made.

If the umpire was on the boundary side the free-kick would have been reversed.

As far the 50m goes the umps have been paying these all year so Hudson should have just zipped it.... It was stupid to put himself in a position where the umpire could make this call.

A very harsh penalty that cost a goal for saying "What". Ben actually thought it was his free.

What the hell is going on with Footy, it is becoming a joke watching matches with decisions like this.

[Mantis]

A very harsh penalty that cost a goal for saying "What". Ben actually thought it was his free.

What the hell is going on with Footy, it is becoming a joke watching matches with decisions like this.

He didn't say 'What', he screamed 'WHAT!!!'.

[bornadog]

He didn't say 'What', he screamed 'WHAT!!!'.

so that is worth a 50 metre penalty.

[Mantis]

so that is worth a 50 metre penalty.

It's been paid all year. Look I don't agree that it should be a 50m penalty, but the precedence was set along time ago and our players should no better, especially the more experienced ones.

On the subject it would be interesting to know how many 50m penalties we have given away this year... It would be many more than in previous seasons.

[bornadog]

It's been paid all year. Look I don't agree that it should be a 50m penalty, but the precedence was set along time ago and our players should no better, especially the more experienced ones.

On the subject it would be interesting to know how many 50m penalties we have given away this year... It would be many more than in previous seasons.

Since the Carlton match we have been giving away at least 2 a game and they have all cost goals. Some of them for the most trivial reasons like stepping over the mark. The other 50 metre penalty vs Essendon was also ridiculous.

The original reason why the penalty was increased from 15m to 50m was due to Kevin Sheedy instructing his players to hold up play by grabbing players. Now the penalty has gone to the most technical of technical interpretations and lost the reason why it was introduced. Now you touch a player and your gone. The whole thing needs to be reigned in, but it won't as the AFL never admit mistakes.

[Ozza]

Since the Carlton match we have been giving away at least 2 a game and they have all cost goals. Some of them for the most trivial reasons like stepping over the mark. The other 50 metre penalty vs Essendon was also ridiculous.

The original reason why the penalty was increased from 15m to 50m was due to Kevin Sheedy instructing his players to hold up play by grabbing players. Now the penalty has gone to the most technical of technical interpretations and lost the reason why it was introduced. Now you touch a player and your gone. The whole thing needs to be reigned in, but it won't as the AFL never admit mistakes.

Completely agree. Its beyond a joke.
The absolute worst is when a player marks on a lead, and his opponent is trailing him at pace, obviously trying to make the spoil. The player with the footy turns and the defender is pinged instantly - when he has barely had time to stop.
There's zero common sense applied - surely umpires are entitled to clearly call the player back 1 or 2 metres of whatever it is.

[bornadog]

Completely agree. Its beyond a joke.
The absolute worst is when a player marks on a lead, and his opponent is trailing him at pace, obviously trying to make the spoil. The player with the footy turns and the defender is pinged instantly - when he has barely had time to stop.
There's zero common sense applied - surely umpires are entitled to clearly call the player back 1 or 2 metres of whatever it is.

At least a warning to come back on the mark, but as you say no common sense.

[1eyedog]

Frankly, I am about a bee's dick away from turning my back on this game.

[LostDoggy]

Common sense?

The umps love the theatre of the 50. It lets them be the centre of attention for a few seconds, they get to massively influence a game that was otherwise just unfolding normally without them, they get to show everyone who's boss, they get to wave their arms like an air traffic controller and sprint for 50 metres at a million miles an hour.

Who wouldn't love that?

[Sockeye Salmon]

It's been paid all year.

To who?

I haven't seen one.

[Mantis]

To who?

I haven't seen one.

One was paid against Dustin Fletcher early on for a 'demonsterative' action.

[bornadog]

One was paid against Dustin Fletcher early on for a 'demonsterative' action.

The trouble is the interpretation of what can be regarded as demonstrative action. Sorry Mantis my opinion is the decision was crap.

[Mantis]

The trouble is the interpretation of what can be regarded as demonstrative action. Sorry Mantis my opinion is the decision was crap.

I agree the decision was crap, but our players shouldn't be putting themselves in a position where like decisions, which have been given in the past can be paid.

[bornadog]

I agree the decision was crap, but our players shouldn't be putting themselves in a position where like decisions, which have been given in the past can be paid.

Whilst I agree with you, its an emotional game and things happen, during a game. Demtriou and Anderson have turned this game into a bunch of robots playing and if you step out of line your penalised.

[AndrewP6]

At least a warning to come back on the mark, but as you say no common sense.

Agree, in the same game, at least two times they could be heard telling players to "come back"...

[mjp]

Agree, in the same game, at least two times they could be heard telling players to "come back"...

There is a difference between 'cribbing' and running at the player though. The 50's are generally paid (and I agree, they are harsh) when the player with the ball is 'playing on' yet 'Play On' has not been called. The player on the mark identifies what is going to happy, jumps the umpires 'starting gun' to close down space and is penalised...the one where the player on the mark cribs 2-3m (Collingwood are the masters) generally leads to the 'get back' call.

I didn't like the Huddo one and I would bet the umpire in question regrets paying the 50m penalty.

[Mantis]

I didn't like the Huddo one and I would bet the umpire in question regrets paying the 50m penalty.

He regretted paying the deliberate OOB call he made just 10secs earlier as he reversed that decision quick smart.

Perhaps he was flustered and wanted to stamp his authority after making a monumental mistake just seconds earlier??

[Maddog37]

Has anyone else noticed the art of running next to the man with the ball after a free kick and pretending to not know you are in his space so he can't play on.

The Pies get away with this trick over and over.