The Jolly Decision

[Amber Guzzler]

I watch the game at a pub, and the noise was so loud, it was almost impossible to hear the commentators or umpires at times. One thing has puzzled me ever since it happened. The free kick against Jolly for a ruck infringement in the last qtr. He was standing alone, under the ball, waiting for it to come down to tap it out, without an opponent. A saints player (Kozi?) Jumped on him, was all over him, and the whistle blew. We all thought it was Jolly's free, but it went the other way.

Does anyone know what this free was for?

 

[Jimpson]

Havent seen it since watching it live but it was definitely called for shepherding, the umpire telling Jolly that he took his eye off the ball and looked at Kozi and deliberately blocked him from the tap.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

Havent seen it since watching it live but it was definitely called for shepherding, the umpire telling Jolly that he took his eye off the ball and looked at Kozi and deliberately blocked him from the tap.

It didn't really look like a shepherd to me. If that's what it was paid for, it was pretty poor IMO. I don't believe taking your eyes off the ball in itself constitutes an infringement. He was probably wondering where the opposition ruckman was. As for a shepherd, from what I saw, the only thing he did to block his opponent from the tap was be under the ball when it was coming down. Pretty sure he's allowed to do that also. On the other hand, what Kosi did was clearly an infringement. You can't jump all over your opponent like that in a ruck contest.

 

[Subtemperate]

It did seem a bit weak at the time, but Jolly initiated the contact..... Whether or not I like it the free was there.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

It did seem a bit weak at the time, but Jolly initiated the contact..... Whether or not I like it the free was there.

Did he? I thought he was just standing there. I didn't see any move by him to initiate the contact. What exactly did he do?

 

[r dub 19]

Blocking in the ruck contest. Has been paid all year.

 

[Plugger35]

You got half your goals from soft free kicks, suck it up.

 

[PieLebo87]

It was a free kick, mate.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

Blocking in the ruck contest. Has been paid all year.

I'm question whether simply being the only person in the ruck contests, or bring there first, well before your opponent, constitutes blocking. I think it was the softest free kick played all day.

You got half your goals from soft free kicks, suck it up.

Bay 13 is that way ----------------->

 

[Da Main Man]

You got half your goals from soft free kicks, suck it up.

was a legit question about the game...calm down sir.

 

[Bozo]

It wasn't a body on body contest as Kosi was making a run at the contest and Jolly ensured his body was in between Kosi and the flight of the ball so keeping Kosi from getting a genuine ruck contest in. If Jolly moved towards the ball as well rather than away or keeping his position then it wouldn't have been a free ie Jolly was more concerned with keeping Kosi out of the ruck contest than going for the ball.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

It wasn't a body on body contest as Kosi was making a run at the contest and Jolly ensured his body was in between Kosi and the flight of the ball so keeping Kosi from getting a genuine ruck contest in. If Jolly moved towards the ball as well rather than away or keeping his position then it wouldn't have been a free ie Jolly was more concerned with keeping Kosi out of the ruck contest than going for the ball.

I supposed that's where I don't understand the decision. It seems Jolly got pinged for not moving out of Kosi's way. If Kosi wasn't in the contest when the ball was bounced (where he was at that time, I have no idea, but he was nowhere near the bounce of the ball), then surely that's his fault.

Considering some of the other technical free kicks that were let go all day, as is traditional in a GF, I'd have thought this sort of thing was a candidate for the same treatment.

 

[Lockyer24]

Sandilands seems to get away with that all year, as does quite a few battler 2nd rucks.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

Was definitely there.

You can't block a player as they're running in.

That's ridiculous. This would get paid every time 1 ruckman was the first to the ruck contest. Jolly was in the contest, Kosi was late, and because Jolly was standing in the best place to contest the ball, where both ruckman should have been aiming to position themselves, and because Kosi was late to the contest, he get's a free? I'm sorry, but that's complete and utter crap.

What ever happened to the idea that you earn your kicks on GF, nothing comes for free, and certainly not because were late to a contest? If Kosi had've been in the contest from the beginning, as he should've been, then there wouldn't have been an issue, so paying him a free because he's late to the contests is just rubbish, especially in a GF. How soft can you get?

 

[WN123]

Jolly positioned himself to block Kosi's run - clear free kick

 

[jenny61_99]

Jolly wasn't actually going for the ball - made no attempt whatsoever. That's the difference. Wasn't apparent on first glance, but very evident on replay.

 

[lemon chicken]

Was one of the most blatant free kicks of the day, even the replays showed exactly what he did wrong. You dont know the rules if you're questioning that decision.

 

[transmed_999]

Blocking in the ruck contest. Has been paid all year.

I was thinking it was a soft free to the sainters until i saw the replay.

Definate free. Jolly made no attempt to go for the ball but rather blocked kosi's path to the contest.

 

[Spluff]

Always a free kick. Jolly just turned all his attention to stopping Kosi.

 

[transmed_999]

It didn't really look like a shepherd to me. If that's what it was paid for, it was pretty poor IMO. I don't believe taking your eyes off the ball in itself constitutes an infringement. He was probably wondering where the opposition ruckman was. As for a shepherd, from what I saw, the only thing he did to block his opponent from the tap was be under the ball when it was coming down. Pretty sure he's allowed to do that also. On the other hand, what Kosi did was clearly an infringement. You can't jump all over your opponent like that in a ruck contest.

That says it all really...

 

[Joffaboy]

That's ridiculous. This would get paid every time 1 ruckman was the first to the ruck contest. Jolly was in the contest, Kosi was late, and because Jolly was standing in the best place to contest the ball, where both ruckman should have been aiming to position themselves, and because Kosi was late to the contest, he get's a free? I'm sorry, but that's complete and utter crap.

What ever happened to the idea that you earn your kicks on GF, nothing comes for free, and certainly not because were late to a contest? If Kosi had've been in the contest from the beginning, as he should've been, then there wouldn't have been an issue, so paying him a free because he's late to the contests is just rubbish, especially in a GF. How soft can you get?

Learn the rules, has been paid all year.

Moment I saw it at the ground (right in front of me ) I said blocking free kick. Absolutely blatant.

Mate you really need to know how this has been intrepreted all year.

the one you should complain about was Milnes hands in the back of O'Brien for his goal in the fourth quarter.

There you go, I given you a free kick for a legit whinge

 

[transmed_999]

That's ridiculous. This would get paid every time 1 ruckman was the first to the ruck contest. Jolly was in the contest, Kosi was late, and because Jolly was standing in the best place to contest the ball, where both ruckman should have been aiming to position themselves, and because Kosi was late to the contest, he get's a free? I'm sorry, but that's complete and utter crap.

What ever happened to the idea that you earn your kicks on GF, nothing comes for free, and certainly not because were late to a contest? If Kosi had've been in the contest from the beginning, as he should've been, then there wouldn't have been an issue, so paying him a free because he's late to the contests is just rubbish, especially in a GF. How soft can you get?

I just though pies fans were biased when it comes to umpiring decisions. Now it's been confirmed to me they simply don't understand the rules. Silly me.

 

[doppleganger]

the one you should complain about was Milnes hands in the back of O'Brien for his goal in the fourth quarter.

There you go, I given you a free kick for a legit whinge

That should never have been paid.

Harry lost the ball in flight and Milne outmarked him.

Would have been absolutely brilliant if paid tho!!

 

[Bombers_Forever]

It was there - the fact Jolly didn't blow up about it was a giveaway.

 

[CAS79]

I know Collingwood fans are passionate about the game but the free against Jolly was spot on. He went the player with the sole intent to block him going for the ball nor did he even attempt to disguise it, not on in a ruck contest. It was a clear free kick and totally fair enough.

What's strange though is why Jolly needed to do that, he is a better ruckman than needing to sport those tactics.