TOPIC:

The 50 metre penalty is just symptomatic of the ingraied problem with the umpires. Zealotry and vainglorious are their catchwords. There was a 50 metre penalty given to a player in the AFL where the ball had slipped out of the players hand onto the ground and the player had made contact with the ball with his foot (that is he kicked it). The player on the mark moved forward to get the ball assuming it was play on since the ball had been kicked. The 'umpire' instead of applying some common sense awarded a 50 metre penalty. An umpire with a modicum of common sense would have told both players to get back to their appropriate positions and the game would have continued. HOWEVER, common sense and umpires are mutually exclusive and once again the umpire had to imposed themselves on the game. It goes without saying, but I will say it, I had no allegiance to either of the AFL clubs in question - totally impartial.

There would be a lot more respect for the umpires if they realised that Copernicus was right and realise that we revolve around the sun not around the umpires.

Saw that Sunday 42, interesting decision, surely its play on, or common sense says lets all slow down, take a breath and start again, here is the mark.........

If the ball is signalled that it is out of play time is stopped.

The 50 metre penalty is merely one example of a vast number where the umpires show they have no idea. How many times on Saturday was a free kick given by an umpire who was in a worse position than an umpire with a completely unimpeded view of what was happening?

Would it have been a 50 metre penalty if one of the Swans interchange players had done the same thing?
Its a automatic 50 metre penalty to the opposition if the runner out on the field is in the wrong place at the wrong time,rightly or wrongly.

If you lot want to ignore the rule in place as quoted by Sacko thats up to you.

So if a free kick is awarded to a Perth player and a Swans' player has the ball 50 metres away if he does not immediately return the ball ON THE FULL that is a 50 metre penalty? If it isn't, why not?

swan42 wrote: The 50 metre penalty is just symptomatic of the ingraied problem with the umpires. Zealotry and vainglorious are their catchwords. There was a 50 metre penalty given to a player in the AFL where the ball had slipped out of the players hand onto the ground and the player had made contact with the ball with his foot (that is he kicked it). The player on the mark moved forward to get the ball assuming it was play on since the ball had been kicked. The 'umpire' instead of applying some common sense awarded a 50 metre penalty. An umpire with a modicum of common sense would have told both players to get back to their appropriate positions and the game would have continued. HOWEVER, common sense and umpires are mutually exclusive and once again the umpire had to imposed themselves on the game. It goes without saying, but I will say it, I had no allegiance to either of the AFL clubs in question - totally impartial.

There would be a lot more respect for the umpires if they realised that Copernicus was right and realise that we revolve around the sun not around the umpires.

Swan the umpire in the Wells one did not call play on, hence the 50m penalty. Those are the rules & the ump made the correct call.

swan42 wrote: So if a free kick is awarded to a Perth player and a Swans' player has the ball 50 metres away if he does not immediately return the ball ON THE FULL that is a 50 metre penalty? If it isn't, why not?

Do you really think thats a reasonable comparison??
Mine in regards to "if the Swans interchange player had done the same thing",would that have been 50 metres?? is close to what happened.

swan42 wrote: So if a free kick is awarded to a Perth player and a Swans' player has the ball 50 metres away if he does not immediately return the ball ON THE FULL that is a 50 metre penalty? If it isn't, why not?

The problem here Swan is you clearly do not know the rules. You complain about all these wrong decisions being made but you can bet your bullocks to a barn dance the decisions are correct and you just simply don't know what you're talking about. Your arguments re the 50 are laughable

No sacko - everyone knows that not every breach of the rules is penalised. How many times in a game is a player penalised for running too far and how many times in a game is a player not penalised when patently they have run too far. You cannot grab a player without the ball and how many throws are not penalised?

Also for 30pyd does an umpire yell play on every time a player kicks the ball after a free kick or a mark?