Round 8.

[Donny]

Hawks 35-28 at half time.

[What'sinaname]

and that's why you dot doubt Clarkson's decision.

Hawks spank GWS.

[Donny]

Hawks 71-31.

-----------

Tigers 25-13.

100 mtr penalty. Goal Fyfe.

25-19.

[Donny]

Hawks won 71-38.

AF points: Henderson 125, Heqater 124.

[think positive]

Ablett's high hit is very similar to his one last week. What will MC do this time?

hes made them look stupid, so hopefully 2, he contests they say three!

[ronrat]

Some good results for us this weekend. A minibreak between Geelong and us and the next tier.

[Donny]

Richmond 86-59 at 3 quarter time.

[Donny]

Richmond won 111-86.

AF points: Lobb 125, Houli 113, Fyfe, Ellis 111.

[K]

What have GWS done?!

[K]

"... Under AFL rule 17.11, a free kick shall be awarded against a player or official who intentionally shakes a goal or behind post (either before or after a player has disposed of the football). ..."

https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-05-10/ ... -free-kick
...

"Seven claimed to have checked with umpires boss Hayden Kennedy and reported that officials had reviewed the footage and were aware of what had occurred but were comfortable that no action was taken because it did not affect the kick. ..."

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/dan ... 51m90.html

"AFL boss Gillon McLachlan has praised the "practical" umpiring decision to warn but not penalise Sydney’s Dane Rampe..."

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/ram ... 51mb9.html


Gleeson: "Gill McLachlan’s argument that it was a common-sense decision and the warning to get off the post was akin to warning a player to take a step back on a mark or he’ll give away a 50-metre penalty is a false equivalence.

A player does not know where a mark is when he is told to take a few steps back, he is guided by the umpire where the mark is. Rampe knew where the post was and he jumped on it.
Players who run through the mark are given a 50m penalty for doing something that is often unintentional.

Common sense could say they just be told to get out of the way; they are not they are penalised.

What Rampe did was not unintentional, he knew what he was doing, he jumped on a post and it shook. It was stupid and it should have been more costly. It was for Essendon."

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/4-p ... 51mkn.html


But if the law's wording is "intentionally shake" the post, Gleeson's argument is also bad, because he's trying to transfer the word "intentionally" from shaking to getting outside assistance for greater elevation.

[K]

The 2019 Laws say:

"17.12 OTHER
A Free Kick shall be awarded against a Player who:
(a) throws the football;
(b) hands the football to another Player;
...
(f) intentionally lifts a Player from the same Team to contest the football;
..."

There's nothing explicit in there about climbing the posts, except Rule 17.11 on "shaking" the posts "intentionally".

[Pies4shaw]

No-one cares, except that we all enjoy a good joke at Essendon's expense. I expect a free kick to be paid against him if he does it against a proper team (like, say, Collingwood), though.

[K]

I reckon the last player who deliberately shook the post was Dustin Fletcher. I don't remember anyone previously trying to climb it.

[K]

Rampe slapped with fines for umpire comments, scaling goalpost

https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-05-14/ ... g-goalpost

$5,000 + $5000 suspended for the comment.
Fully suspended $1000 fine for the climb.


D. Cherny (The Age): "Michael Christian says he wasn't told why the Dane Rampe matter was taken out of his hands."


I don't understand why all these journos like Robinson are claiming this is AFL corruption, etc. for not paying the free kick. If you take the law's wording, it does, as reported, say "intentionally shakes". He did not intentionally shake the thing. He intentionally climbed it. The umpire had every right just to tell him to get down.