View Full Version : If it wasn't for the shocking umpiring ......
Fitzroy1
1 Oct 2006, 15:17
I know that the AFL wants an even comp. bad how bad was the umpiring in the 1st half ????
We would have easily won if the umpiring was correct.
At least we can go into next season knowing that the Swans are the best side in the league , we just couldn't beat 20 men on the field at the same time.
p.s. why do Eagles supporters post on the Swans board ??? After last years Swans vistory I celebrated for weeks - certainly had not time to post inane comments on this board.
Rubbish.
I can't recall a game where I thought the umpiring had less effect. Other than Goldspink flat on his back, I barely noticed them.
West Coast's midfield was awesome in the first half and it is pretty amazing that they weren't further ahead, particularly given the two blunders that gifted them goals.
Despite a one point margin, the better team on the day won the game, and all that is left for us is to be proud that our boys fought back so gallantly, and to look forward to 2007.
natlovestheswans
1 Oct 2006, 20:23
You really can't insult the games umpiring, which goes the same for last year GF aswell. I thought they stayed out of it alot and let the game keep going, which is the way it really should be. Yes, there were some bad decisions, or lack of, but it went both ways. There's no point complaining.
We lost, blame it on our first half performance.. not the umps.
I know that the AFL wants an even comp. bad how bad was the umpiring in the 1st half ????
We would have easily won if the umpiring was correct.
At least we can go into next season knowing that the Swans are the best side in the league , we just couldn't beat 20 men on the field at the same time.
p.s. why do Eagles supporters post on the Swans board ??? After last years Swans vistory I celebrated for weeks - certainly had not time to post inane comments on this board.
My friend you have no idea.....
Yesterdays game was played in two halfs. West Coast brilliant in the first and Sydney equally brilliant in the second. In the end we hang on by one point and take the cup. Free kicks were 21 to Syd and 20 to WC. On talkback radio over here yesterday people were complaining that the Eagles were hard done by. IMO the umpires made a few mistakes just like they do every week.
Swallow the bitter pill and look forward to more unbelievable football from two fantastic footy clubs.
Goddnight!!!!
Benevolent Ert
1 Oct 2006, 21:54
Nothing wrong with the umpiring, how either side can bitch about it is beyond me
I know that the AFL wants an even comp. bad how bad was the umpiring in the 1st half ????
We would have easily won if the umpiring was correct.
At least we can go into next season knowing that the Swans are the best side in the league , we just couldn't beat 20 men on the field at the same time.
p.s. why do Eagles supporters post on the Swans board ??? After last years Swans vistory I celebrated for weeks - certainly had not time to post inane comments on this board.Stop your whinging you were beaten by a better team in a great game
RedWhite4Ever
2 Oct 2006, 00:26
My friend you have no idea.....
Yesterdays game was played in two halfs. West Coast brilliant in the first and Sydney equally brilliant in the second. In the end we hang on by one point and take the cup. Free kicks were 21 to Syd and 20 to WC. On talkback radio over here yesterday people were complaining that the Eagles were hard done by. IMO the umpires made a few mistakes just like they do every week.
Swallow the bitter pill and look forward to more unbelievable football from two fantastic footy clubs.
Goddnight!!!!
I concur.
A few dodgy descions both ways, but hey, you have to expect that in a game of footy.
The best team won on the day, cheers:thumbsu:
I concur.
A few dodgy descions both ways, but hey, you have to expect that in a game of footy.
The best team won on the day, cheers:thumbsu:
Onya
Hopefully our great footy sides can continue to give us mighty games just like the last six....
Actually Brian Taylor commented on Sundays Footy show that in his opinion Sydney had an extra player in the third quarter,the umps.He also said that when Goldspink went down play should have gone on as it does when a player goes down.
sauce_head
2 Oct 2006, 06:25
Actually Brian Taylor commented on Sundays Footy show that in his opinion Sydney had an extra player in the third quarter,the umps.He also said that when Goldspink went down play should have gone on as it does when a player goes down.
I think Sydney had the better of the umpires, but who cares, it was a great game.
Hats off to the eagles, I'm devastated but we were beaten by a more consistent team.
There are two umpiring decisions which did leave me wondering though. Feedback
on my interpretation appreciated.
In the first quarter, Barry Hall got a free kick in front of goal which he inexcusably missed but when the infringement occurred, O'Loughlan grabbed the ball and kicked a goal. Why wasn't advantage called and the goal allowed?
Same thing happened in the second quarter, a goal was kicked, by Hall I think, after a free kick deep in the forward line but again the ball was called back and we missed?
Anyway, I think Jude Bolton and Barry Hall will have sleepless nights and nightmares for some time now.
I know that the AFL wants an even comp. bad how bad was the umpiring in the 1st half ????
We would have easily won if the umpiring was correct.
At least we can go into next season knowing that the Swans are the best side in the league , we just couldn't beat 20 men on the field at the same time.
p.s. why do Eagles supporters post on the Swans board ??? After last years Swans vistory I celebrated for weeks - certainly had not time to post inane comments on this board.
HOW? WHY?? WHAAAAAT??? I really think that although there were a few bad decisions each way the umpiring was some of the best I've seen all year and didnt help either side with a win.
It was catch-up footy all day from the swannies, if you had got in front in that final quarter I think it wouldve been yours and wouldnt have let it go but catch-up is such a frustrating game to play. Fought hard and should be proud regardless.
sydney eagle
2 Oct 2006, 11:54
The fact that BOTH sides are bitching about the umpiring implies that it wasn't one sided.:)
swansgal
2 Oct 2006, 12:04
Generally no complaints about the umpiring except for the insistence of Goldspink to line up the mark of Barry Hall in the second (?) quarter after he had played on and kicked a goal. It smacked of arrogance from an umpire determined to put his own stamp on the game.
:thumbsd:
Goldspink failed in the most basic duty of checking whether an advantage had been gained before bringing play back, costing the swans an important goal.
I thought it was the best umpiring I've seen in a long time. It was a bit strange that the strict holding the ball interpretation that had been in play all year was pretty drastically relaxed, but I actually think that was a good thing and at least they were consistent.
I can't work out why it appeared, and everybody is saying, that West Coast were the better team. 4 pretty simple set shots at goal that were missed (Bolton x 2 and Hall x 2) and a heap of skill errors but you fell 1 point short. I know watching it WC seemed to be the better team, but I reckon they froze a bit when the Swannies put the the pressure on - a bit of "here we go again" I reckon.
A great effort by what I think is the most admirable football team I have ever seen. I would just love it if my Pies would get together and play the committed, unselfish type fo football that the Swans play.
With the Hall goal, Hall had run off his line, Glass was heading towards him, and then Hall pointed at him to get back on the mark. Glass looked at the umpire for clarification, the ump decided to bring Hall back, and while Glass was distracted Hall tried to have a shot. Hall told Glass to get back on the line, the umpire agreed and reset the mark.
The Flash
2 Oct 2006, 19:26
Hats off to the eagles, I'm devastated but we were beaten by a more consistent team.
There are two umpiring decisions which did leave me wondering though. Feedback
on my interpretation appreciated.
In the first quarter, Barry Hall got a free kick in front of goal which he inexcusably missed but when the infringement occurred, O'Loughlan grabbed the ball and kicked a goal. Why wasn't advantage called and the goal allowed?
Same thing happened in the second quarter, a goal was kicked, by Hall I think, after a free kick deep in the forward line but again the ball was called back and we missed?
Anyway, I think Jude Bolton and Barry Hall will have sleepless nights and nightmares for some time now.
Great effort by the swannies, but I disagree with what your saying. Firstly that shouldnt have been a free kick to Hall, and the players around stopped, and Mick picked it up and snapped. If play has stopped you cant call advantage. The 2nd incident where the ball was called back was another poor decision as he stepped off his line by about 5 metres. If the ump had called play on instead of telling Glass to come back around Hall would have been tackled. Thus no goal.
Embley touched Okeefes kick and it was awarded as a goal, and Davis mark at the end of the 3rd was simply not a mark, and he kicked a goal. The umpiring benefited Sydney.
natlovestheswans
2 Oct 2006, 19:30
Great effort by the swannies, but I disagree with what your saying. Firstly that shouldnt have been a free kick to Hall, and the players around stopped, and Mick picked it up and snapped. If play has stopped you cant call advantage. The 2nd incident where the ball was called back was another poor decision as he stepped off his line by about 5 metres. If the ump had called play on instead of telling Glass to come back around Hall would have been tackled. Thus no goal.
Embley touched Okeefes kick and it was awarded as a goal, and Davis mark at the end of the 3rd was simply not a mark, and he kicked a goal. The umpiring benefited Sydney.
The Davis mark was definately a mark. No doubt about it, he held on to it for long enough.
The Flash
2 Oct 2006, 19:36
The Davis mark was definately a mark. No doubt about it, he held on to it for long enough.
That would be lucky to be paid on a wet day. No way in the world that he held it long enough, or control the ball.
Here It Is
2 Oct 2006, 23:34
Without watching it again on tele - and I won't - I reckon we copped a flogging from Goldspink and to a lesser extent Vozzo.
However, if we had played anywhere near our potential for four quarters instead of two, they wouldn't have had the chance to influence the result.
Nothing more can be said or done to change it. We lost, and life is almost not worth living. At least until round one next year.
Akumastarr
3 Oct 2006, 00:19
To the topic creator, stop complaining
Both sides played well, the Eagles won in the end after a brilliant game of football, congratulate the Eagles for their win, congratulate the Swans for their efforts and be done with it... jeez...
SWANNIES RULE
3 Oct 2006, 01:46
I thought the umpiring was OK. We made far too many mistakes in the first half and that is what cost us the game. Buchanan in the goal sqare fumbling to give Judd a goal........not acceptable. Set shots from Hall and Bolton were terrible misses. If we had of played better in the 1st half we would of won the game, simple as that.
Also, we were slaughtered in the ruck. The total hit outs was 40-22 in favour of the eagles........we lost by a point. Jolly and Doyle are decent ruckmen but they just don't have the class of Dean Cox. And I don't think Darren Jolly was switched on.
I am really proud of the way we came back after half time though, when Goodesy kicked that goal in the first 10 seconds of the last quarter I thought we were a real chance but we just couldn't get that extra goal we needed.
Making the GF from 4th is a great effort in itself. The last 5 GAMES (http://www.theocshow.com/forums/showthread.php?p=116825#) have been decided by less than a kick each time between these sides, that is quite extraordinary when you think about it.
SWANNIES RULE
3 Oct 2006, 01:47
How sad was it to see goodesy cry?
mrbehemoth
3 Oct 2006, 06:51
A lot of WC fans seem to be complaining about the umpiring. I can't see what they're getting at, and I don't see it here either. I don't think either team was particularly advantaged by the umpiring, even though it wasn't great. The only really poor one against Sydney I can remember was holding the ball against Kennelly when he slipped over.
I honestly couldn't complain about the umpiring in the GF, and that's saying something, because I honestly believe the Swans get a raw deal from the umps more often than not, particularly Hall.
Fitzroy1
3 Oct 2006, 14:30
To the topic creator, stop complaining
Both sides played well, the Eagles won in the end after a brilliant game of football, congratulate the Eagles for their win, congratulate the Swans for their efforts and be done with it... jeez...
Not complaining - just pointing out the facts (looks like only me and "Here it is" agree though).
I'm still proud of the Swannies and know we'll do good again next season (and shake the hands of the Auskick kids when we receive our medals !).
Hats off to the eagles, I'm devastated but we were beaten by a more consistent team.
There are two umpiring decisions which did leave me wondering though. Feedback
on my interpretation appreciated.
In the first quarter, Barry Hall got a free kick in front of goal which he inexcusably missed but when the infringement occurred, O'Loughlan grabbed the ball and kicked a goal. Why wasn't advantage called and the goal allowed?
because there was a gap between the two events...rule says it must be be continuous...everyone stopped
Same thing happened in the second quarter, a goal was kicked, by Hall I think, after a free kick deep in the forward line but again the ball was called back and we missed?
He played on over the mark..technically its right but I see your points
Anyway, I think Jude Bolton and Barry Hall will have sleepless nights and nightmares for some time now.
ok my points..
1 one free kick to hall was a disgrace, they said holding the arm but Hall was holding Glasses jumper....play on.....
2 Late in the game embley was crunched in the back...no free...it nearly cost us the game...
3 the snap late in the game was touched but was awarded a goal.....yeah it was hard to pick up but watch the flight of the ball it was spinning sidewards (helicopter style) after it went past players it was spinning end over end (like a normal drop punt and when it hit the ground it rolled on..)...this gives you a big clue it was touched and not lightly either
overall it was well umpired game.....
Benevolent Ert
9 Oct 2006, 00:41
overall it was well umpired game.....
And that's all that needs to be said about the topic
no doubt supporters from either side can pick out a handful of decisions that COULD have gone the other way, but realistically it was very consistent.
I don't think we need to discuss this any further