Autopsy AFL 2024 Round 3 - Hawks v Cats Mon April 1st 3:20pm AEDT (MCG)

[PhatBoy]

How dare a rebuilding team have fun

It looked a bit stupid. Nothing wrong with enjoying yourself and celebrating but that looked a bit much given the game situation at the time.

 

[The Casey Cat]

He was a ducking cheat, don't try to rewrite history. He got away with it because he was a great player, and that's the only difference between him and Ginnivin

The difference has been shown and explained time and time again here actually. How they go about it is not the same at all, regardless of how ignorant clowns like yourself want to pretend it is.

 

[HairyO]

There were at least 2 free kicks Ginnevan should have received

I would say 3 which had nothing to do with raising his arm. One of the high ones should also have been but ignoring that, 3 times he deserved a free despite all the fuss about his method of looking for frees.

Those are the ones which really matter.

That said, over the weekend, there would have easily been 20 free kicks paid where the player with the ball caused the tackle to go high or created the scenario where the tackler ended in their back. But noone cares.

When he was at Collingwood I said he needes to focus on disposing the ball and not looking for a free, though there were often times where he was taken high and the umpires ignored it. Its no different to now. They are trained to tell the difference. They have been trained for many years now. But still play favourites in how they call.

Next week will be fun. will Pies supporters be booing if he gets a free for high contact ?

 

[HairyO]

The difference has been shown and explained time and time again here actually. How they go about it is not the same at all, regardless of how ignorant clowns like yourself want to pretend it is.

Find a non Geelong supporter who agrees that Selwood deserved his frees and I will believe it.

No different to Tigers supporters calling Dusty the GOAT. Noone else does.

You should consider that. But wont.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

I would say 3 which had nothing to do with raising his arm. One of the high ones should also have been but ignoring that, 3 times he deserved a free despite all the fuss about his method of looking for frees.

Those are the ones which really matter.

That said, over the weekend, there would have easily been 20 free kicks paid where the player with the ball caused the tackle to go high or created the scenario where the tackler ended in their back. But noone cares.

When he was at Collingwood I said he needes to focus on disposing the ball and not looking for a free, though there were often times where he was taken high and the umpires ignored it. Its no different to now. They are trained to tell the difference. They have been trained for many years now. But still play favourites in how they call.

Next week will be fun. will Pies supporters be booing if he gets a free for high contact ?

yes?

just like hawks supporters were booing him when he did it for collingwood.

we are all biased to our own players.

Ginnivan needs to get that s**t out of his game. Mitchell if he is any good will be telling the germ to cut it out. If you cry wolf as often as he does, he will not get calls that are there because it is rightly so assumed he is ducking. He and Hawthorn have nothing to whinge about.

I am glad umps are holding the whistle. its a s**t way to play footy and if the AFL isn't going to suspend players playing for free kicks i am 100% ok for the umps to take control of it.

 

[joe444]

Simple question:
With Ginnivan's "high" tackles (e.g. Holmes), why is the ball on the ground?
Answer: because Ginnivan drops it in order to raise his arm so the tackle slips high.

1. Selwood never did that.
2. To Sam Mitchell's credit, he said on "Footy Classified" last night: "If you raise the arm, the umpires are pretty aware of that".

No other player, literally, in the competition would rather drop the ball as the tackler approaches than play it.

 

[HairyO]

yes?

just like hawks supporters were booing him when he did it for collingwood.

The times when he caused it yes. But that is no different to any player at any club doing it.

The difference is when the umpires decide you are fair game and wont give you a free no matter what. That is pathetic.

Last time I remember it happening was a few years ago when Razor Ray was called a campaigner (cant remember the specific game though) and for the rest of the game he didnt give that team a free kick.

Its petty and they should grow the heck up.

 

[joe444]

1. What's your left arm doing, Jack?
2. Why'd you drop the ball, Jack?
/ end debate.

 

[kickazz]

Ginnivan frees / non frees get attention because that is his endgame - he is going to ground and will either get the free kick, cause a ball up, or leave his team with one fewer player able to have an impact on the play for the next few seconds.

Even if he added a fourth scenario - try to offload the ball to a teammate whilst going to ground - he'd be a 50% better player. There were plenty of occasions too where he had early opportunity to handpass to a teammate in a better position but chose to be tackled.

There is nothing wrong with, indeed it is a good skill to have, being difficult to tackle. I just think his coaches need to encourage him to shift his mindset more toward making the play rather than drawing it to a stop.

 

[kickazz]

1. What's your left arm doing, Jack?
2. Why'd you drop the ball, Jack?
/ end debate.

Recon Holes does not try hard enough to tackle low there so could still be a justifiable free kick.

The thing wrong with that picture though is Ginnivan has stopped all forward/lateral momentum, and and no point looks like wanting to dispose of the footy. Not trying to make the play, it is 100% trying to draw a free.

Good players will still try to make the play, whilst making themselves hard to tackle. It gets much better results.

 

[The Casey Cat]

Find a non Geelong supporter who agrees that Selwood deserved his frees and I will believe it.

No different to Tigers supporters calling Dusty the GOAT. Noone else does.

You should consider that. But wont.

Not saying he deserved all his frees. I've specifically said here he didn't as he was initiating the contact. What has become the argument is who is playing for them and what the response is when the free doesn't come (it didn't for Selwood a lot of the time despite what people like to pretend).

The difference is initiating contact to try evade a tackle and continuing to play and initiating contact and going down like a pathetic bag of sh!t.

 

[joe444]

I dunno. I reckon Holmes' left arm is aimed at his lower chest - not bad when Ginnivan is already low.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

The times when he caused it yes. But that is no different to any player at any club doing it.

The difference is when the umpires decide you are fair game and wont give you a free no matter what. That is pathetic.

Last time I remember it happening was a few years ago when Razor Ray was called a campaigner (cant remember the specific game though) and for the rest of the game he didnt give that team a free kick.

Its petty and they should grow the * up.

Ginnivan cultivated it for himself. Blame him.

No difference to the end of Lindsay Thomas's career. he started ducking alot and then missed free kicks for it.

 

[joe444]

But the fact is, HTW, that he's still lifting the arm and flopping to the ground. On every replay it's almost impossible to tell what the contact was.

But if he stops putting his left arm on his right shoulder when he is touched, he may be a more effective player anyway.

 

[PhatBoy]

Find a non Geelong supporter who agrees that Selwood deserved his frees and I will believe it.

No different to Tigers supporters calling Dusty the GOAT. Noone else does.

You should consider that. But wont.

I don’t think he deserved a lot of them. I know that wasn’t what you posed but all the same that was my interpretation. What I disagreed with was the idea that he was cheating by doing it or that somehow all he was trying to do was to play his way through his career by relying on free kicks.

I hate the AFL high tackle rule full stop I think it is a joke, but it is what it is, and he forced dozens upon dozens of players to tackle him high in getting his arms free while trying to get rid of the ball or get through the tackle so they paid them.

 

[HairyO]

I don’t think he deserved a lot of them. I know that wasn’t what you posed but all the same that was my interpretation. What I disagreed with was the idea that he was cheating by doing it or that somehow all he was trying to do was to play his way through his career by relying on free kicks.

I hate the AFL high tackle rule full stop I think it is a joke, but it is what it is, and he forced dozens upon dozens of players to tackle him high in getting his arms free while trying to get rid of the ball or get through the tackle so they paid them.

I dont think Selwood cheated either.

He said a number of times he is playing by the rules and the AFL can change the rules. Even when the AFL finally changed the rules the umpires didnt enforce the rules. Its 100% on the AFL and the umpires to properly enforce the rule, not arbitrarily enforce it, while also ignoring other free kicks simply because they dont like a player.

They are meant to be professional. There are now 4 of them and they still miss obvious stuff.

 

[PhatBoy]

I dont think Selwood cheated either.

He said a number of times he is playing by the rules and the AFL can change the rules. Even when the AFL finally changed the rules the umpires didnt enforce the rules. Its 100% on the AFL and the umpires to properly enforce the rule, not arbitrarily enforce it, while also ignoring other free kicks simply because they dont like a player.

They are meant to be professional. There are now 4 of them and they still miss obvious stuff.

There is a picture of Jack doing the rounds on Fox Sports today from one of the tackles yesterday where he has his arm across his chest and it’s pretty obvious he has tried to force the tackle high, which he’s managed, but hasn’t tried to get his shoulder up and shrug it Selwood style. That’s the difference. If he wants to be taken more seriously and get a little more sympathy that is literally all he has to add to what he’s doing. And again I’m not saying that by the letter of the law he shouldn’t be awarded those free kicks anyway, but he has to show intent to break the tackle and get rid of the ball

 

[Footy Smarts]

Lots of dismissing the high tackles vs hinnivan, but how do you ignore the punch to the back of the head he received when on a lead?

Lol on replay there was almost no contact. 50/50 whether it's a free but hardly a terrible decision worthy of analysis.

And this was 30 seconds after Duncan was almost decapitated without getting a free. But I guess that doesn't fit the Ginnivan is a victim narrative so wasn't replayed 25 times. And Duncan didn't try to stage for another 10 free kicks or throw his arms out in protest either.

 

[joe444]

I've been really impressed with Sam Mitchell in all this.
"If you raise the arm the umpires are pretty aware of that one." (post-match)
[of the umpires] "If you play for them, you don't deserve them." (on Footy Classified last night)

 

[Mitchell Madness]

I've been really impressed with Sam Mitchell in all this.
"If you raise the arm the umpires are pretty aware of that one." (post-match)
[of the umpires] "If you play for them, you don't deserve them." (on Footy Classified last night)

He's smart enough to know the media goes for soundbites, and he says anything they will twist it to create a story.

This makes it a non-issue. It also means that when he does eventually complain (and he will, given he's a regular on SEN), it will get more traction

 

[hawkman]

Interesting carry on from Watson after slotting a goal and his team is 6 goals behind

Watson's goal brought it back to 20 points with all the momentum. Most would be getting excited at that point

Unfortunately Geelong kicked a goal out of the centre to kill the game

 

[Saab NLAW]

The difference has been shown and explained time and time again here actually. How they go about it is not the same at all, regardless of how ignorant clowns like yourself want to pretend it is.

You see what you want to see, he was a great player but he was also a ducking cheater.

Not sorry that this triggers you, cats fans are the most precious in the AFL

 

[Dewyyyyy]

Think it’s pretty clear.

Umpiring cannot ever be blamed for a reason you lose.

Sam Mitchell and co have said they’ll bring up to the AFL upon game review if they feel any mistreatment or difference in adjudication to Ginnivan. Which is entirely fair since it’s important to pay frees off merit and what they actually are rather than name, or history.

Hawthorn and Geelong yet another decent game, could have been a closer result but the class of Geelong prevailed.

What was the big notice was how easy Geelong scored in comparison to all the hard work the hawks needed to score, how good the cats kicked despite the level of difficulty in shots.

Lots of green shoots and plenty to take away from both sides and both sides would be optimistic in a way.

 

[STPer18]

You see what you want to see, he was a great player but he was also a ducking cheater.

Not sorry that this triggers you, cats fans are the most precious in the AFL

Bit rich coming from the mob that goes feral when you point out the only bit of success their dreary Dee's have seen in an age or two was a joke of a Covid Cup.

 

[The Casey Cat]

You see what you want to see, he was a great player but he was also a ducking cheater.

Not sorry that this triggers you, cats fans are the most precious in the AFL

And you see what you want to see. There's been specific vision supplied in this topic that shows the difference.If anyone is triggered it's deluded, salty opposition fans.