Boundary line throw in is completely different to a marking contest. I wasn't having a go at you either Fevolaaa, it's just a very frustrating situation.

In a marking contest, if he sees that the ball is going to carry over his head before his opponent, he should have every right to stop to change direction.

_________________
Richard Pratt - A Carlton legend.

oh for sucks sake so now we hate whits so much that he is at fault because the stupid umpiring fraternity @#$%&! this game up????

look at the free... Is he supposed to kepp running?

Stand and allow the bloke to mark on his shoulders?

Fall over?

Not lead in the first place?

This is just shit! Its a football game not a friggin dance! lance reads the flight (silly boy) adjusts because he sees it will go over him (just keep running lad) is aware of the bloke coming (where are your blinkers lad!) and decides to hold ground and be ready to run back to where the ball is going to bouce rather than allow his opponent to take an easy mark over him (for shame for shame).

When a rule goes against the natural inclinations of a football it is a stupid rule - this is one hell of a stupoid interpretation!

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

They aren't completely different at all, Lance was backing up with the flight to contest the ball...

They are completely different.

Thanks for the intensive discussion on the matter

Being a shortass I don't get a run in the ruck, but it's quite obvious they are different as one is in general play and the other is at a stoppage. That's about as intense as I get.

But in reality, both are going for the ball that's going over his head, and in both he's backing into the opposition and not giving them a free run at the ball which is against the spirit of the game

A ruck contest and a marking contest are two completely different passages of play.

It's against the spirit of the game to pay a free against a player who is trying to get into the best position to mark the ball.

Well it appears we disagree on the rule's validity itself, but other than that there's no issue with them highlighting Whitnall as he is the main perpetrator of this

The rule is fine, the interpretation is completely up the shit though.

Lance got pinged for a sheppard in the last game and in last years Melbourne game both times he completely cracked it. True he was reacting to bad kicks. But in both occasions he positioned himself to stop his opponents run at the ball. Lance knew what he was doing, the ball fell in the open and Lance was ready to swoop on the ball. If he made any attempt to actually go for the ball in the contest, it would be seen as OK. But he was waiting first for contact, then to go for the ball. His primary intention was to stop the opponent getting to the ball.. That is a sheppard. I thought that both those particular calls were correct.

Then why are you allowed to shepherd a ball through for a goal?
Why are you allowed to shepherd an opponent from the loose ball so a teammate can gather?

Once again the laws of our great game have been streteched to bursting point because some clowns, either in the media or in the umpiring fraternity, have deemed the actions of certain players to be illegal. It's true that Lance sometimes shepherds the ball from his opponent, but I would contend that 95% of the time it's once the ball is within the required 5 metres, thus deeming it legal. The problems arise when we have one of the new fangled "interpretations" that have been concocted. Put simply, what Lance did against Richmond on Saturday was legal, as from what I saw, the ball was clearly in the area, and the free should have been paid to him for in the back. Unfortunately, the knobs at the AFL have skewered the rules and their interpretations to such an extent that everyone is confused, includes umpires.

At least he should stick the arms out to look as though he's going for the ball, that might help him. Because if he just stands there, especially if he's looking at his opponent behind him, then it looks awfully sus...particularly if the umpire is not in the right position.

_________________
"A good composer does not initiate. He steals."

- Igor Stravinsky

Ah yes, well just look at the Director of Umpiring! It explains a lot I believe.

Spot on.
Earlier in his career, Lance recieved the free kick on occasions as the opponent jumped all over him.
Replays clearly indicated Lance recieved the free by inducing his opponent to offend.
Very smart play by Lance however the umpires tend to jack up when replays indicate they've been suckered.
Last year he tried it several times and whilst he benefitted early in the season, he was pinged a few times after.

In reality he is shepherding his opponent instead of going for the ball.

It worked a while back but its time for new tricks.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

Well said both of you

I don't usualy swear BUT..%^&$)^V %(*% *)*)%( )^_^ )^)^ $$%*&*%&(*%*&%*% %(&%(% *&*)^^T%$^%$)(*^&$$EW^%*&^(*&*& * *^YT*R& B *Ty t....shit!

I agee with you DAnnyboy but you didn't say f%$^en enough!

So if he stands there and an opposition player slams into his back BUT doesn't get to the Carlton ball carrier running past....that's a legitimate shepherd.... or are some of you suggesting it's a free to the opposition because he didn't 'go for the ball'.

Players sheperd the ball out of bounds a dozen times a game. Players hold their ground all the time........what are we discussing this for..... for Chistsakes have a look at the leading forwards and you'll see backmen shepherded out ILLEGALLY heaps of times and never paid.
IF the ball is within 5 metres....the DICKHED who is behind it has to get around you.....leaglly......end of story.

JUST worry about the ones that are there!!!!

(The ruck contest IS completely different as the ruckmen HAS to allow a clear run to THE OPPOSING RUCKMAN. French went nuts when he was pinged for shepherding out the oppositions THIRD man up ???...just more proof of howe stupid the umpires and umpire director are sometimes!)

_________________
“Every single element of the Club has to be the best in the league, meticulously and methodically, and only by doing this will we be elite and challenge for number 17.”
Greg Lee

Thank you. Agree with every word. Some people are so down on Lance that he can't do anything right.

_________________
Richard Pratt - A Carlton legend.