Sorry, I've been a little busy. I haven't posted the teams yet.
I will be going to this game with my daughter and the guys practice game as well. I am looking forward to it indeed.
SATURDAY, MARCH 4
Carlton v Bulldogs, Ikon Park, 11.35am AEDT
CARLTON
B: L.Attard 14, A.Downie 30, R.Privitelli 9
HB: L.Brazzale 12, D.Hardiman 31, M.Keryk 4
C: L.Arnell 13
HF: S.Hosking 10, A.Brown 27, G.Pound 6
F: J.Kennedy 23, B.Moody 16, D.Vescio 3
Foll: K.Shierlaw 25, K.Loynes 2 N.Exon 15
I/C: B.Jakobsson 35, K.Gillespie-Jones 5, T.Lucas-Rodd 18, T.Nestor 20, I.Ayre 22, S.Audley 26
Emergencies: B.Davey 1, K.Darby 8
No change
It would be nice if Davey was fit for this one, but I wouldn't put my money on it.
WESTERN BULLDOGS
B: L.Bailey 13, L.Moorecroft 23, K.Lamb 27
HB: H.Wildes 17, B.Hunt 21, K.Ebb 12
C: E.Kearney 5
HF: N.Callinan 10, L.Spark 11, H.Scott 22
F: J.Lambert 7, T.Ernst 19, K.McLeod 6
Foll: A.O'Connor 4, E.Blackburn 2, B.Lochland 1
I/C: L.Birch 18, M.McDonald 15, A.Gogos 36, L.Williams 9, K.Tyndall 8, R.Timmins 20
Emergencies: E.Gamble 14, C.Clarkson 24
In: A.O'Connor, R.Timmins
Out: E.Gamble, C.Clarkson
I am hoping for the sort of effort and planning I saw in the first 2 weeks.
Brianna Davey is a late inclusion, and very welcome too!!
Great effort girls.
Young Bella Ayers having the time of her life. Keep it up.
The crazy third man up rule strikes >:(
The boundary throw in clears the rucks and heads straight to a Carlton player who understandably goes for the ball. Free kick and goal to the Bulldogs.
The crazy third man up rule strikes >:(
The boundary throw in clears the rucks and heads straight to a Carlton player who understandably goes for the ball. Free kick and goal to the Bulldogs.
Was pointed out by Mel Hickey that the umps told them if the boundary umpire effectively throws directly to another player, they are entitled to hit the ball.
Basically saying the umps got it 100% wrong.
Not sure you can blame the rule for that, more the umps.
Was pointed out by Mel Hickey that the umps told them if the boundary umpire effectively throws directly to another player, they are entitled to hit the ball.
Basically saying the umps got it 100% wrong.
Not sure you can blame the rule for that, more the umps.
The ball wasn't thrown directly to our player, it simply cleared the two nominated rucks. We got a free kick shortly after when the ball cleared the rucks and landed on a Bulldog's chest. The umpires were consistent ::)
Nathan Burke's comment about allowing the ball to bounce before trying to take possession being contrary to the way the game has always been played summed it up for me.
Good effort by the girls to hold off a determined and fast finishing opposition. Nice to see the scores getting higher. Quite possibly we were saved by the bell, but there's nothing wrong with that.
Bravo bluettes.
The ball wasn't thrown directly to our player, it simply cleared the two nominated rucks. We got a free kick shortly after when the ball cleared the rucks and landed on a Bulldog's chest. The umpires were consistent ::)
Nathan Burke's comment about allowing the ball to bounce before trying to take possession being contrary to the way the game has always been played summed it up for me.
The ball was thrown out of reach of the ruckmen. Our player was there. Thus it was thrown directly to our player. It was not a case of our player going to the contest and interfering with the contest.
Yes, it was evened up later in a similar situation.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
As you mentioned, Burke and Hickey highlighted that the only alternative is for the players to run away from the ball as it is coming towards them. Clearly that is farcical, which highlights that the umpires interpretation of the rule was indeed incorrect as i stated earlier.
Good effort by the girls to hold off a determined and fast finishing opposition. Nice to see the scores getting higher. Quite possibly we were saved by the bell, but there's nothing wrong with that.
Bravo bluettes.
Must be close to a record score this year. Certainly a record aggregate.
Must be close to a record score this year. Certainly a record aggregate.
Could be Jim.
Consider we took on one of the flag and well beat them most of the day was very good. that we missed a couple of sitters and hit the post was not so good. Our centre square work needs some tweaking, but there were some really good signs today.
The ball was thrown out of reach of the ruckmen. Our player was there. Thus it was thrown directly to our player. It was not a case of our player going to the contest and interfering with the contest.
Yes, it was evened up later in a similar situation.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
As you mentioned, Burke and Hickey highlighted that the only alternative is for the players to run away from the ball as it is coming towards them. Clearly that is farcical, which highlights that the umpires interpretation of the rule was indeed incorrect as i stated earlier.
The two wrongs differed in that the bullies free was a goal, ours was a field kick. Wrongs like that could easily cost the game. Luckily not this time.
The girls played well and should be proud of themselves. Loved young Ayeres enthusiasm.
PS
Our men might learn by watching the vision. Sarah Hoskins took the game on and it finished in a beautiful Darcy goal. A combination of risk, skill, speed, clean hands, goal nous, and confidence. Congratulations to the Bluettes and coaching crew. It was a pleasure to watch :))
Shame there's no finals in the women's game. We might get lucky and finish runner up, if we win the last 2 games and other results go our way. Especially the Crows and Demons. We play the "cellar dwellers" next time, so hopefully that's a win.
Shame there's no finals in the women's game. We might get lucky and finish runner up, if we win the last 2 games and other results go our way. Especially the Crows and Demons. We play the "cellar dwellers" next time, so hopefully that's a win.
Adelaide losing the Lions really screws us over.
If it was the other way around, we'd have a very important match in the last round. Assuming both us and the lions win our 'other' match, a win over the lions in the last round would mean it would come down to % over who makes the finals. Now thats out the window and we need the lions to lose to the dogs next week for the same scenario. Which given that the dogs should get Katie Brennan back next week, its not unlikely.
Of course we could hope Adelaide lose to Melbourne next week. If that occurs then it could be a 4-way tie for top spot with 4 teams sitting on 5-2.
My eldest daughter and I went down for the footy yesterday. The first part of the day was excellent. The 2nd part had a few problems, not the least of all was the crowd.
The girls:
I was really pleased with the way we played this game. For much of the day we were well on top of another fancied rival and we looked t have found a few future champions on the way. We were well up for most of the day. The dogs did their best, but even the umpires could not get them over the line.
[1] Rucks:
We really had ruck dominance for most of this game. We put a few girls in the middle and each one managed t get their hands o the ball first with good leaps and good body work. The rucks even managed to get a few clearances. Gillespie – Jones, Shierlaw, Moody and Downie can really hold their heads up. And they took marks around the ground.
[2] Midfield:
You would thin with a winning ruck combination, our mids would be on top, but that wasn’t the case. There were periods when the Dogs were sharking every tap out. They appeared to have done their homework on our mids. Arnell struggled for possessions, but she was gutsy and didn’t want to go off when hurt. Shae Audley was probably our best mid on the day. Tilly Lucas-Rodd was also important.
[3] Strong Defence:
We welcomed Bri Davey back this week and the difference was obvious. Even though she was well below her best, her sure ball handling, cleanness with the ball and ability to turn the game around really capped off a solid defence. Danni Hardimann had another good game in defence, although her kicking is a work in progress. The whole back 6 worked together well. Bulldog goals were generally against the flow of play, even early when they had the lead.
[4] The rise of the tall forward?
In the last few weeks we have played around with our forward line a bit. Gabby Pound, Kate Gillespie Jones and the mercurial Darcy Vescio have been the only permanent fixtures. Lately we have had Kate Shierlaw and Isabella Ayre play.
With Ayre, Gillespie-Jones, Shierlaw and Moody spending time down forward it gives us a number of aerial options. And then there is Darcy Vescio, AFLW’s version of Peter Bosustow. This week she held her grab. It should be mark of the week. Umpires will have to look closely at her as teams will be trying to shepherd her out rather than risking their defenders being a step ladder. God knows the Buzz had to deal with that most weeks.
Vescio did get some nice goals again, but it was the marking power of the other tall forwards that stuck out. Bella Ayre in particular looked like a star in the making. Her aerial work was excellent. And the increase in taller options has made it easier for Kate Gillespie-Jones, who is not getting double teamed so much now. If we can get the ball down, we have the options to deal with it.
[5] Small Forwards? Do we need a female Eddie Betts?
I looked at the stats today and was amazed that Gabby Pound was down for only 5 possessions. She must have got them all in the 3rd quarter, where she played really well and made goals by winning one on one and one on two battles. In taht3rd quarter she had space and played like a female Eddie Betts. However, the only other smaller girl to do much was Tilly Lucas-Rodd, who was required up-field. We do need to work in this area, as we tend to get crumbing goals from Darcy Vescio primarily.
[6] Taking them on:
One of the better things our team has done recently is show more daring and dash in taking their opponents on. Yesterday Sarah Hosking did the dash and it paid off with a Vescio goal. I’d like to see more.
Best players:
Darcy Vescio – considering the opportunities she had, she was able to change the game.
The ruck girls – All of them deserve a mention, especially Alison Downie
Bella Ayre – sticky fingers were good to watch. She has to earn to stop hitting the post so often!
Bri Davey – really slow early but was dynamic after half time.
Danni Hardiman – another solid offort in defence.
Tilly Lucas-Rodd - not that quick, not that big, but gives her all.
Yes -well, we're a good chance next week, although it's at Domain Stadium, which doesn't help.
Was pointed out by Mel Hickey that the umps told them if the boundary umpire effectively throws directly to another player, they are entitled to hit the ball.
Basically saying the umps got it 100% wrong.
Not sure you can blame the rule for that, more the umps.
Mel Hickey was wrong! The no third man up law does not allow for a shallow or astray boundary throw-in or ball-up whether or not it goes directly to a player. It is a free kick if the ball makes contact with a player who isn't one of the two nominated rucks.
Mel Hickey's version of the rule makes more sense and there are calls for changes ::)
Stupid rule...
Imagine a "chaos" throw in win with everyone running away from the ball in case it hits them.
The umpires are smart enough (just ;D) to be able to determine if a genuine third man attempt is being made.
Incidental contact can be either "play on" or a bounce....fix it before the season starts.
I'm going to repeat what I have stated about this rule change in the past:
This will be one of those rules that gets over umpired initially and after about 4 weeks will be forgotten all about.
The tipping point will come when teams stop playing with ruckmen altogether at boundary throw ins. We were fairly close to it on saturday when Korcheck arrived late to a ruck contest, and the umpire asked us to nominate a ruck.
Stupid rule...
Imagine a "chaos" throw in win with everyone running away from the ball in case it hits them.
The umpires are smart enough (just ;D) to be able to determine if a genuine third man attempt is being made.
Incidental contact can be either "play on" or a bounce....fix it before the season starts.
The problem is that it is contrary to the primary objective of the game; get the footy.
Law 15.4.5 (f) could have been applied to stop the third man up (although I don't think it should) and allow play on when there is incidental contact.
Mel Hickey was wrong! The no third man up law does not allow for a shallow or astray boundary throw-in or ball-up whether or not it goes directly to a player. It is a free kick if the ball makes contact with a player who isn't one of the two nominated rucks.
Mel Hickey's version of the rule makes more sense and there are calls for changes ::)
See my post in the other thread.
http://www.carltonfc.com.au/sites/Carlton/news/2017-03-07/blues-duo-named-aflw-rising-star-nominees
Carlton’s Bella Ayre and Tilly Lucas-Rodd are the Round 5 NAB AFL Women’s Rising Star nominees - the first pair from the same club to be nominated in the same week.
I thought Bella Ayre looked like she was having a ball out there. She's just a kid. What a wonderful accolade.
Congratulations to Bella and the determined Tilly.
Go Bluettes.
http://www.carltonfc.com.au/sites/Carlton/news/2017-03-07/blues-duo-named-aflw-rising-star-nominees
Since when have they been giving out rising star awards? First i've heard about it.
Since when have they been giving out rising star awards? First i've heard about it.
NAB announced that it was sponsoring the AFLW Rising Star and other aspects of the women's competition at the start of the season. Rising Star nominations have been made after each round.
Forgive me for thinking this is quite stupid, but arent they all rising stars??
Its the inaugural season and in the eyes of Joe Average supporter who is only being exposed to proffesional womens AFL footy recently, all of them are rising stars.
Forgive me for thinking this is quite stupid, but arent they all rising stars??
Its the inaugural season and in the eyes of Joe Average supporter who is only being exposed to proffesional womens AFL footy recently, all of them are rising stars.
One would think so Thry but nominations are restricted to players who are 21 and under. I guess if you have a sponsor wishing to throw money at the AFLW you come up with an award that they're happy with.
I wonder what they are going to call the best and fairest award; the Brownless?
So its an ageist award then...
Brilliant. I can think of no better way to perpetuate the appearance of equality.
So its an ageist award then...
Brilliant. I can think of no better way to perpetuate the appearance of equality.
Geez, other side of the bed Thry! :D
Geez, other side of the bed Thry! :D
Yeah, its been that way this year.
I have a bit going on professionally which is making me scrutinize stupid decision making based on flimsy criteria.
I have a bit going on professionally which is making me scrutinize stupid decision making based on flimsy criteria.
Is there any other way?
I've heard it even has a name.......work!
So its an ageist award then...
Brilliant. I can think of no better way to perpetuate the appearance of equality.
I thought of the "ageist" angle but decided not to bring it up. However, I don't really have an issue with encouraging young folk.
Perhaps there should be a "waning star" award to square the ledger ;)
Delete
I thought of the "ageist" angle but decided not to bring it up. However, I don't really have an issue with encouraging young folk.
Perhaps there should be a "waning star" award to square the ledger ;)
It's probably going to be the equivalent of the brownlow. Young folk tend to be a bit more inconsistent but brilliant at their best whilst older players tend to keep on keeping on.
For reference kade Simpson.