3:40 As much as i think Pickett is a flog, the umpire definitely made the right decision. Dunkley was in the motion of handballing the ball when Pickett knocked the ball out of his hand.
Agreed about that, if Dunkley chooses to play on that close to the man on the mark then having the handball knocked is fair play - but Pickett was still two steps over the mark and didn't move when the umpire had already called for him to come back. The ump was even standing back where the mark actually was. For that reason it should have been 50 against him IMO.
@@colinhunwick That’s not relevant because pickett was over the mark. A bloke can’t impede just because the ball carrier is about to release the footy…
I wish most of these observations were for acts of skill, but the majority just show - for the money these guys are paid and time they devote to training, how much better they SHOULD be. Thanks for the vid HTB.
Anyone else notice how weird the clock was in the last couple minutes of the lions vs dees game? It didnt go down at all for clugs set shot but when he kicked it, it went down like 5 seconds
@@jarvis3291 yeah and it was in their forward fifty at the time. There was basically an extra 30 seconds to the game, doubt they'll say anything about it though. The umpires and afl seem to have no idea whats going on atm
BRI vs MEL non50m INCORRECT. Pickett goes over mark and hits ball out of hands before the Brisbane player has left their line. This should be 50m ADE vs GWS CORRECT. 100% holding the ball , no genuine attempt. This is exactly why the rule was brought in, so players aren't taken to ground dangerously. He clearly can handball and chooses not to quick enough, it is irrelevant how strong the tackle is. BRI vs MEL Block not shown on video, don't critique decisions if you do not show them SYD vs FRE Gulden non HTB CORRECT. Gulden handballs the ball immediately and breaks tackle anyway Brayshaw non HTB CORRECT. No prior oppurtunity (brace not a fend), ball spills out in tackle Rowtbottom HTB CORRECT but very borderline but HTB balanced and steady. At any level other than afl it is not prior oppurtunity. BRI vs MEL non HTB on Bailey CORRECT. This is NOT a fend, it is a brace as it occurs after the tackle begins . It happens after the tackle begins so it cannot be prior oppurtunity. ran too far CORRECT SYD vs FRE ran to far CORRECT ADE vs GWS Inssuficient intent INCORRECT. It should not be insufficient intent when knocked out SYD vs FRE High contact Correct
ANB was definitely heading towards the boundary line, but to me, it does look like Daniher clips ANB's foot and then he tumbles over the line. I don't think the call is wrong as that's the risk with him choosing to go towards the boundary. I am a Dees fan so call out my bias if you want. I do think Melbourne already got lucky to only lose by 3.
There was a mark that Sam Darcy didn't get paid for. It was just a regular mark too and just not paid. Definitely oddity of the round. - dogs supporter
UM, what about with 30 or so seconds to go, Banfield of Freo walks the ball over the boundary line: how is this different to Neale-Bullen'. And HOW COME nobody has mentioned the great Maynard stage - acting dead after being nudged in the chest with an open hand???????????????
Although there is no way the umpire could have seen it but Neal-bullen is actually tripped by the Brisbane player. Neal-bullen was definitely looking for the boundary but I don’t think it would have looked so obvious without the trip. Like I said though, no way and umpire would be able to pick it out in real time, it’s only obvious in Alo-Mo
its quite obvious but neal-bullen made zero attempt to get rid of it, he had both hands free and instead of opting to handpass he dove to the boundary line to get it out. easily deliberate
Damn, I forget to let you know about the Gold Coast player rearranging his wedding tackle right in the middle of the screen just before the bounce to start Q3.
Showing the whole dozen or so wrong calls that went Geelong’s way would take up too much of the video so I’m fine with now showing any. Best case scenario the umpire association sent over some $$$ to keep them out of the video!
No, it's just funnier to see essendon fans whinge and just ignore all the favourable calls they get week in week out. The druggies fans and their salty tears is a remedy.
@@chadchadderton considering a lot of people are talking about the unfairness in the third quarter it seems reasonable to complain against the constant cats bias. essendon aren't even that favoured anyway
The call of running too far on Sturt was rubbish. He took 12 steps - I'm pretty sure the ump just didn't notice the bounce. And I'll bet that Blakey ran a lot further.
@@RogerRocks No, that’s quite rarely done at the top level. It’s common sense that athletes stride more than 1m… so AFL umpires aren’t directed to use 15 step guidelines when a players in full sprint. Regardless, you said the decision was “rubbish” because he only took 12 steps, but he still likely ran more than 15m anyways so it wasn’t rubbish.
@@RogerRocks It is almost impossible to count steps for a player running at pace when you are running down the field as an official. I've tried it and it is actually really hard to do beyond the first couple, particularly if there are other things happening at the same time. If possible, I'll use cues, such as the edge the centre circle, goal square or the 50m arc. Most players kick the ball after 5 or 6 steps, so if they start running more than that without trying the get rid of it, I start to think about when would I bounce the ball as a player. if they run past that point, I get hyper vigilant. After that point, players usually get a few more "benefit of the doubt" steps before they get pinged. I usually explain to players that 15m is hard to judge on the fly, so usually you get 15m + up to 5m "benefit of the doubt". After that point, you are getting pinged every time
he made no attempt to get rid of the ball, he had both hands free and instead of opting to handpass he clearly dove to the boundary line to get it out, easily deliberate
i was waiting to hear about the goal on the siren of the richmond game that was waived off and then the touched kick miss call in the same game that changed all the momentum
The siren had gone lol you sound as silly as the tigers players looked. As for the touched mark that would happen many times in a game, same as a pack mark when others have touched the ball, it's always paid a mark. Tigers supporters are just salty
4:11, ok with this being holding the ball. if keays had a little bit more of a grab on him, that sort of motion generally results in players getting dumped into the ground. Think that situation is why the rule was changed in the first place, a lot of caution around the potential to cause injury
@@chadchadderton I agree, but with the way AFL is handling holding the ball at the moment, I’m just happy with it being consistent with their protecting the player mindset
I nearly pissed myself laughing when Neil-Bullen bounced himself towards the boundary like he was a pogo stick whose only goal in life was to take the ball out of bounds in that moment. It was the least sufficient intent to keep the ball in that I have ever seen.
A Gold Coast player had a set shot and it hit both of the posts
Jack lukosius?
@@hawthornfanclubyeah
Should count for 2 points lol
@@toby4235true
Similar to Tom Lynch against Brisbane lions in 2020. At the same stadium too!! Bizarre!
Your videos are so good I can’t believe you don’t have more subscribers. Love your vids keep it up!
You forgot when Rowan Marshall kicked a goal they showed Todd Marshall on the graphic afterwards
From what I’m seeing in the last quarter with Brisbane and Melbourne my dees could have definitely lost by over 5 goals
What about the 3rd quarter of bombers cats?
That should be his next videos “oddities from Essendon v cats 3rd qtr
Rankine mark behind the head and also all the controversial frees and not paids against Essendon
3:40 As much as i think Pickett is a flog, the umpire definitely made the right decision. Dunkley was in the motion of handballing the ball when Pickett knocked the ball out of his hand.
Agreed about that, if Dunkley chooses to play on that close to the man on the mark then having the handball knocked is fair play - but Pickett was still two steps over the mark and didn't move when the umpire had already called for him to come back. The ump was even standing back where the mark actually was. For that reason it should have been 50 against him IMO.
@@indyspud agree with that as well. Could quite easily have been 50 or play on
Should have been 50m... there's no way Pickett is allowed to affect the play while standing 2 metres over the mark.
@@chadchadderton if you watch in slow motion Dunkley was about to release the ball from his hand
@@colinhunwick That’s not relevant because pickett was over the mark. A bloke can’t impede just because the ball carrier is about to release the footy…
1:23, Watching it live and as a Geelong supporter, what an assist for Shannon Neale it was so funny
I wish most of these observations were for acts of skill, but the majority just show - for the money these guys are paid and time they devote to training, how much better they SHOULD be. Thanks for the vid HTB.
Anyone else notice how weird the clock was in the last couple minutes of the lions vs dees game? It didnt go down at all for clugs set shot but when he kicked it, it went down like 5 seconds
Yes I noticed that
could have been the most controversial game ever if dee’s kicked a goal w 10 seconds left to win
Yeah
@@jarvis3291 yeah and it was in their forward fifty at the time. There was basically an extra 30 seconds to the game, doubt they'll say anything about it though. The umpires and afl seem to have no idea whats going on atm
You do realise that the clock on the tv screen isnt the actual game time clock right?
BRI vs MEL non50m
INCORRECT. Pickett goes over mark and hits ball out of hands before the Brisbane player has left their line. This should be 50m
ADE vs GWS
CORRECT. 100% holding the ball , no genuine attempt. This is exactly why the rule was brought in, so players aren't taken to ground dangerously. He clearly can handball and chooses not to quick enough, it is irrelevant how strong the tackle is.
BRI vs MEL
Block not shown on video, don't critique decisions if you do not show them
SYD vs FRE
Gulden non HTB
CORRECT. Gulden handballs the ball immediately and breaks tackle anyway
Brayshaw non HTB
CORRECT. No prior oppurtunity (brace not a fend), ball spills out in tackle
Rowtbottom HTB
CORRECT but very borderline but HTB balanced and steady. At any level other than afl it is not prior oppurtunity.
BRI vs MEL
non HTB on Bailey
CORRECT. This is NOT a fend, it is a brace as it occurs after the tackle begins . It happens after the tackle begins so it cannot be prior oppurtunity.
ran too far
CORRECT
SYD vs FRE
ran to far
CORRECT
ADE vs GWS
Inssuficient intent
INCORRECT. It should not be insufficient intent when knocked out
SYD vs FRE
High contact
Correct
ANB was definitely heading towards the boundary line, but to me, it does look like Daniher clips ANB's foot and then he tumbles over the line. I don't think the call is wrong as that's the risk with him choosing to go towards the boundary.
I am a Dees fan so call out my bias if you want. I do think Melbourne already got lucky to only lose by 3.
There was a mark that Sam Darcy didn't get paid for. It was just a regular mark too and just not paid. Definitely oddity of the round. - dogs supporter
As a Brissy supporter i wouldnt give Mckenna the ball when Bailey missed it because Mckenna shanks every bloody kick
UM, what about with 30 or so seconds to go, Banfield of Freo walks the ball over the boundary line: how is this different to Neale-Bullen'. And HOW COME nobody has mentioned the great Maynard stage - acting dead after being nudged in the chest with an open hand???????????????
He was acting like he was trying to keep it in tho so that’s probably why, he sold the candie well.
Another oddity you missed was when Rowan Marshall kicked a goal and they showed Todd Marshall’s animation on the screen
You are amazing youtuber
just put the dees lions game up next time. clearly the only game you watched....
What about Maynard flopping after getting a slight touch
The umps in the eagles game was shiiii gave a free for a normal tackle and they said it was high me and my dad where angry ash
Shows how boring Bulldogs vs North was that not a single moment made the video.
21 from port is playing the wrong sports looks like he should be in soccer
The deliberate from jye menzies was an oddity
5:30 was called a goal not a point lol
If it went in for a point Fagan would have been furious
You missed the entire 3rd quarter of Essendon vs Geelong
what about when bailey dale bounced the ball to himself
18 seconds ago🙏
Was a bit embarrassing watching the Cunningham one, what were the swans doing in the lead up to that??
I feel with the running too far.. if you run past a white line.. or mowing strip. It's easier for the umpire to work out how far you have run...
That’s not Alex Davies, it’s Will Powell
Holding the ball of the year 8:04
That's Wil Powell not Davies
Horne francis and finlayson crashing into each other for the mark was my biggest oddity of the week
I don't know if this was a joke because they look similar but it was Miles Bergman not Horne Francis.
essendon clearly tackels a geelong player for holding the ball
Will Bailey banfield be suspended
Although there is no way the umpire could have seen it but Neal-bullen is actually tripped by the Brisbane player. Neal-bullen was definitely looking for the boundary but I don’t think it would have looked so obvious without the trip. Like I said though, no way and umpire would be able to pick it out in real time, it’s only obvious in Alo-Mo
its quite obvious but neal-bullen made zero attempt to get rid of it, he had both hands free and instead of opting to handpass he dove to the boundary line to get it out. easily deliberate
Damn, I forget to let you know about the Gold Coast player rearranging his wedding tackle right in the middle of the screen just before the bounce to start Q3.
it’s Powell not Davies
A bit harsh on Rachele mate! Not sure why so many Crows fans are against him!
serial offender, most selfish player in the league
Watching the friday night game as an avid lions fan, i was hyped for the amount of odd occurrences knowing a banger oddities was coming
He should of shower bobby hills point where he hit the top of he goal post
You missed Macintoshs non-score of the century, after the siren
Just show the entire 3rd quarter
Showing the whole dozen or so wrong calls that went Geelong’s way would take up too much of the video so I’m fine with now showing any.
Best case scenario the umpire association sent over some $$$ to keep them out of the video!
No, it's just funnier to see essendon fans whinge and just ignore all the favourable calls they get week in week out. The druggies fans and their salty tears is a remedy.
@@chadchadderton considering a lot of people are talking about the unfairness in the third quarter it seems reasonable to complain against the constant cats bias. essendon aren't even that favoured anyway
jack ginnivan getting sprayed and pushed around by his team mate after a goal was funny to watch
3:04 i don’t think his teamates knew he could kick that far
That Sydney one got me laughing so much it was so funny
The call of running too far on Sturt was rubbish. He took 12 steps - I'm pretty sure the ump just didn't notice the bounce. And I'll bet that Blakey ran a lot further.
It doesn't matter how many steps he takes, you realise that right? There's no limit on steps.
@@chadchadderton I know that, but the umps count steps. Fifteen is what they usually use.
@@RogerRocks No, that’s quite rarely done at the top level. It’s common sense that athletes stride more than 1m… so AFL umpires aren’t directed to use 15 step guidelines when a players in full sprint. Regardless, you said the decision was “rubbish” because he only took 12 steps, but he still likely ran more than 15m anyways so it wasn’t rubbish.
@@RogerRocks It is almost impossible to count steps for a player running at pace when you are running down the field as an official. I've tried it and it is actually really hard to do beyond the first couple, particularly if there are other things happening at the same time. If possible, I'll use cues, such as the edge the centre circle, goal square or the 50m arc. Most players kick the ball after 5 or 6 steps, so if they start running more than that without trying the get rid of it, I start to think about when would I bounce the ball as a player. if they run past that point, I get hyper vigilant. After that point, players usually get a few more "benefit of the doubt" steps before they get pinged.
I usually explain to players that 15m is hard to judge on the fly, so usually you get 15m + up to 5m "benefit of the doubt". After that point, you are getting pinged every time
5:15 that call changed the momentum of the game.
ANB WAS TRIPPED
he made no attempt to get rid of the ball, he had both hands free and instead of opting to handpass he clearly dove to the boundary line to get it out, easily deliberate
@@sad_eagles_supporter7186 WHILE HIS ANKLES GOT GRABBED IDIOT HOPE YOUR HEADING TO SPECSAVERS
i was waiting to hear about the goal on the siren of the richmond game that was waived off and then the touched kick miss call in the same game that changed all the momentum
The siren had gone lol you sound as silly as the tigers players looked. As for the touched mark that would happen many times in a game, same as a pack mark when others have touched the ball, it's always paid a mark. Tigers supporters are just salty
🎣
Different rules for Pickett.
Love your vids mate keep it up i cant belive logan mcdonald shanked that kick i got my tip wrong😢
Everyone did, don't worry.
4:11, ok with this being holding the ball. if keays had a little bit more of a grab on him, that sort of motion generally results in players getting dumped into the ground. Think that situation is why the rule was changed in the first place, a lot of caution around the potential to cause injury
Shouldn't reward a bloke for slipping in a tackle.
@@chadchadderton I agree, but with the way AFL is handling holding the ball at the moment, I’m just happy with it being consistent with their protecting the player mindset
missed all of the umpiring clangers in the norf dogs game
The coniglio one was definitely the correct call, he was being tackled, you obviously don't know the rule
It's technically the correct call yes, but isn't the best look. Shouldn't be rewarding a tackle that slips.
I nearly pissed myself laughing when Neil-Bullen bounced himself towards the boundary like he was a pogo stick whose only goal in life was to take the ball out of bounds in that moment. It was the least sufficient intent to keep the ball in that I have ever seen.
Dunkley played on
Pickett was over the mark regardless.
1 step
@@bmanbb Which is over the mark.
Cause everyone stays perfectly still on the mark every time?
@@bmanbbdoesnt matter still over the mark
first