TOPIC:

First game of WAFL I've watched live since being in WA. Enjoyed it a lot.
Fair to say I dislike East Perth after Saturday. Sat in amongst their supporters. What a feral bunch! Great come back by Swan Districts. Pity they didn't get the 4 points. Was barracking hard!

Free kick count of 24-20 if favor of the DuckHeads shows that the umpires have once again looked after the Swans. Imagine how feral you'd be if you had received the 24-10 count that Subi copped on the Weekend. Good teams find a way to win regardless of umpires or AFL listed players.

free kick stats are like hit out stats - irrelevant.

its where you get them and whether the same infringment is penalised for both sides that counts.

I wasnt at the game so i cant comment on what happened.

Mad Dog wrote:

swan42 wrote:

mikeh wrote: Sorry guys I disagree....its like any game. Swans were undisciplined and 2nd to the ball for the first 3 quarters and consequently they gave away cheap free kicks and 50's. In the last quarter they were disciplined and first to the ball and hey presto they started getting the most frees. Makes sense doesn't it?? The trick is to play 4 quarters of disciplined footy and then the umpires become irrelevant.

Mikeh and Mad Dog no question we were lacking in many areas for the majority of the first three quarters. However, and it is a big however, is was patently obvious that free kicks which were pain in the club formerly known as East Perth's forward line were not paid in our forward line. How many times were holding the man and marking infringements not paid in our forward line and the merest of contact resulted in free kicks up the other end? With respect to the 50 metre and 120 metre penalties pay to the club formerly known as East Perth you can probably if you insist on using the letter of the law rather than a degree of commonsense say they were there. Again however, how many times did the club formerly known as East Perth's players interfere with a Swans' player after the completion of a mark which should have incurred a 50 metre penalty. In essence for the first three quarters there was an inequitable application of the laws of the game.

With respect to the positives from the game and there were several:

Broad's game yesterday was perhaps his best league game;
young players like Daniels, Riddoch, Nuich and Coniglio etc will be much the better for the experience;
importantly we had two choices going into the last quarter - rollover and get thumped or show a ticker and fight the game out. The boys chose the latter and with a little bit more luck we may have snatched the victory;
whilst we need a full four quarter commitment and effort for all our games from all players the start to the season from guys like Rogers, Riggio, Elari and Notte augur well for a season where we agian exceed the expectations of the supposed experts;
Our colts' team continues to impress and our reserves' team under the circumstances of the host club alignment which meant that in essence they were playing half a WAFL league side fought the game out to the end.

Far out,are we going to cop this every time we lose this year?
Did you manage to get to the qtr time huddle? Not only did Coops tell the fwds that they were worrying about playing for frees instead of attacking the ball but this was reiterated by Harding at the main break so I'm told. Sure there were a couple missed but please don't blame the umpires before you blame our average performance. Frees were 24-20 our way and most of their goals were easy. In fact I'm struggling to remember them scoring many if any from free kicks.

MD how about after the 120 metre penalty or the 50 metre penalty after the siren.

24 - 20 merely confirms the dictum: lies, damn lies and statistics. It is easy to give free kicks in one's backline; it is far more significant when frees are paid up one team's forward line and not for the same type of offences in the other team's forward line. No question we didn't play particularly well in the first three quarters; equally true we weren't given the free kicks we should have been awarded in the forward based on what was paid in the club formerly known as East Perth's forward line.

Bakesy wrote: First game of WAFL I've watched live since being in WA. Enjoyed it a lot.
Fair to say I dislike East Perth after Saturday. Sat in amongst their supporters. What a feral bunch! Great come back by Swan Districts. Pity they didn't get the 4 points. Was barracking hard!

Ep supporters feral...? You kidding....we weren't the ones booing injured platers coming off the ground.

On a side note interesting to hear Subi and WP players were involved in a punch up on Sat night in Leederville with Police being called in.

chaddy22 wrote:

swan42 wrote:

mikeh wrote:
Our colts' team continues to impress and our reserves' team under the circumstances of the host club alignment which meant that in essence they were playing half a WAFL league side fought the game out to the end.

Good story swan42 but it ain't true.No half a league side in east perth reserves.
two players have played more then 10 games in Howlett and Hart.three of the four eagles players have not played a league game yet.A lot of last years colts playing.under the alignment.We ain't gonna be able to stockpile experienced league players in the reserves.If Steven wityk hadn't jumped ship so early he most probably wuld have played two league games this season for us instead of reserves with you yesterday.

Chaddy22 how about some simple maths. 11 West Coast Eagles' players in the club formerly known as East Perth's league team out of a total of 22 players represents 50% of the team. If you remove those 11 players from the team you would have needed to promote 11 players from your reserves' team to fill the vacancies. Now I am willing to concede that the 11 is out of 23 players in a reserves' team; so therefore, it technically is not quite 50%. On balance though it would be reasonable to assert that represents 50% of a league team. QED.

42 have you not forgotten there were also a handful of Wiggles playing in WARTs Reserves team on Saturday also boosting "their depth"?!

The 120 metre penalty was BS. Faulkner didn't give ball back to a bewildering free kick decision so was penalised 50m rightfully. He then held out ball with left hand to EP player as he ran past only for the EP player to drop the ball. Umpire had turned his head for a second to head down the ground, turned back and saw the ball rolling away so gave another 50mtr penalty which he turned in to a 70mtr penalty. Umpire did not see what happened and guessed therefore making an incorrect decision which was totally influenced by the SD bewilderment as to why a free kick had been given initially. The awarding of the 2nd 50mtr penalty was a horrific decision which created a goal for EP from the back flank.

Apart from this horrendous decision which was made by the ump trying to impress his ego in to the game I thought the umpiring as a whole did not impact the result even though their centre square bouncing seemed to deliberately avoid the ruck contest most of the day

Rogers report referred straight to the tribunal. If he gets time it's a joke!

Hiya Mad Dog....didn't see the collision...how did contact eventuate?