Moved Thread Why does Richmond get destroyed by the umpires every week ?

[Meteoric Rise]

No, I'm simply saying that if you actually want to substantiate any claims of bias, this would be a good method to follow, albeit time-consuming.

Feel free to escalate the issue to level 3 if it's beyond your capabilities however

There of course may be no bias at all. It could just be the one time in 6,667 that a team loses 11 free kick counts in succession. I will allow you who is claiming the 0.0015% chance is operative support your claim. I will rest my case on the 99.985% certainty.

 

[bzparkes]

There of course may be no bias at all. It could just be the one time in 6,667 that a team loses 11 free kick counts in succession. I will allow you who is claiming the 0.0015% chance is operative support your claim. I will rest my case on the 99.985% certainty.

Ok, because you're too lazy to do any actual work, here's what I came up with:

During Hardwick's run this year, Richmond averaged 50.3 tackles.

Since McQualter took over, Richmond averages 60.72 tackles.

That's an average increase of over 10 tackles per game.

Now, what happens when a tackle is executed poorly you ask?

Well, you may give away free kicks for the following;

1. Holding the man.
   This occurs when a player is tackled without the ball, or the tackle lingers too long after the ball is disposed of.
   
   
2. High contact.
   Whilst this can occur through incidental contact throughout the game, this happens frequently during tackles, whereby the tackler doesn't lower themselves to avoid high contact, or when the player being tackled either 'shrugs', in an attempt to break the tackle, or ducks.
   
   
3. In the back.
   This happens when the player being tackled falls forward and the momentum carries the tackler with them, thus causing them to fall upon their back.
   
   
4. Dangerous/sling tackle.
   Typically happens when a player tackles another player by pinning their arms, or rotating them with centrifugal force and the player being tackled makes significant contact to the ground with their head, or is exposed to the risk thereof. This may also happen when a player is being 'dumped' in a similar fashion.

So, to make it clearer for you, under McQualter's coaching, they are clearly playing a more tackle heavy gameplan, as evidence by their average tackles per game rising by a whole 10, which is a significant amount. Most teams only fluctuate their averages, year on year, by around 3-5, unless there's been a significant shift in their style over the off season.

There's clearly been an emphasis on improving Richmond's tackling since the interim coach took over and thus, the risk of giving frees away through infringing has drastically increased.

Or, it could be that the slime green maggots simply hate McQualter and there is indeed an AFL conspiracy to screw him over.

Believe what you want to believe, my friend. You will choose to do so, regardless of any facts presented to you anyway.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Ok, because you're too lazy to do any actual work, here's what I came up with:

During Hardwick's run this year, Richmond averaged 50.3 tackles.

Since McQualter took over, Richmond averages 60.72 tackles.

That's an average increase of over 10 tackles per game.

Now, what happens when a tackle is executed poorly you ask?

Well, you may give away free kicks for the following;

1. Holding the man.
   This occurs when a player is tackled without the ball, or the tackle lingers too long after the ball is disposed of.
   
   
2. High contact.
   Whilst this can occur through incidental contact throughout the game, this happens frequently during tackles, whereby the tackler doesn't lower themselves to avoid high contact, or when the player being tackled either 'shrugs', in an attempt to break the tackle, or ducks.
   
   
3. In the back.
   This happens when the player being tackled falls forward and the momentum carries the tackler with them, thus causing them to fall upon their back.
   
   
4. Dangerous/sling tackle.
   Typically happens when a player tackles another player by pinning their arms, or rotating them with centrifugal force and the player being tackled makes significant contact to the ground with their head, or is exposed to the risk thereof. This may also happen when a player is being 'dumped' in a similar fashion.

So, to make it clearer for you, under McQualter's coaching, they are clearly playing a more tackle heavy gameplan, as evidence by their average tackles per game rising by a whole 10, which is a significant amount. Most teams only fluctuate their averages, year on year, by around 3-5, unless there's been a significant shift in their style over the off season.

There's clearly been an emphasis on improving Richmond's tackling since the interim coach took over and thus, the risk of giving frees away through infringing has drastically increased.

Or, it could be that the slime green maggots simply hate McQualter and there is indeed an AFL conspiracy to screw him over.

Believe what you want to believe, my friend. You will choose to do so, regardless of any facts presented to you anyway.

Ok....so you think Richmond increasing their legal tackles from 50 per game to 61 per game is the reason opposition teams infringe each other 50% more than they infringe Richmond under McQualter. And Richmond applying 11 extra legal tackles per game is also the reason Richmond have lost all 11 free kick counts under McQualter, a 6,666 to 1 chance of occurring to a football team.

You're really good at this bzp.

 

[bzparkes]

Ok....so you think Richmond increasing their legal tackles from 50 per game to 61 per game is the reason opposition teams infringe each other 50% more than they infringe Richmond under McQualter. And Richmond applying 11 extra legal tackles per game is also the reason Richmond have lost all 11 free kick counts under McQualter, a 6,666 to 1 chance of occurring to a football team.

You're really good at this bzp.

I dunno but you've clearly made no effort to research it and are probably just regurgitating some crap from the Richmond board.

Here, I got you a new hat.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I dunno but you've clearly made no effort to research it and are probably just regurgitating some crap from the Richmond board.

Here, I got you a new hat.

That's really sweet of you bzp.

Still trying to figure out why you would imagine Richmond laying 11 extra legal tackles per game under McQualter would naturally lead to Richmond's opponents giving away 50% more free kicks in other matches than they do against Richmond.

So here, I got you one as well...

 

[bzparkes]

That's really sweet of you bzp.

Still trying to figure out why you would imagine Richmond laying 11 extra legal tackles per game under McQualter would naturally lead to Richmond's opponents giving away 50% more free kicks in other matches than they do against Richmond.

So here, I got you one as well...

I've explained it. The concept appears a little tricky for you to understand, so I'll leave it at that.

Have fun believing in paranoid conspiracies though.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I've explained it. The concept appears a little tricky for you to understand, so I'll leave it at that.

Have fun believing in paranoid conspiracies though.

Yes your explanation of why Richmond increasing their rate of legal tackles per game by 11 would naturally lead to opponents infringing other teams at a 50% higher rate than they infringe Richmond totally nailed it bzp. And it didn't require us to make several leaps from solid ground into logical quicksand at all.

But thank you for having a crack at it, it was fun watching you make a total mess of it...

 

[bzparkes]

Yes your explanation of why Richmond increasing their rate of legal tackles per game by 11 would naturally lead to opponents infringing other teams at a 50% higher rate than they infringe Richmond totally nailed it bzp. And it didn't require us to make several leaps from solid ground into logical quicksand at all.

But thank you for having a crack at it, it was fun watching you make a total mess of it...

It's alright mate, everyone's fully aware Richmond supporters are the QAnon nutjobs of Bigfooty.

Thanks for proving it.

 

[Lsta062]

That was a sympathy vote.



Every team's supporters thinks this. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I specifically recall a game WCE played vs Richmond(Marvel?) where they got 7 shots on goal from mostly dodgy frees and converted them all, yet our forwards were getting mauled, with the ball nowhere near them, up the other end and didn't receive a single free kick.

Not all free kicks are equal.



Umpires are s**t and supporters are biased. That's all there is to it.

But not every team has a consistently negative differential like Richmond does. I feel like our complaints are backed by statistical and visual evidence.

Other than a few specific games, I don’t ever recall complaining about umpiring like this prior to 2017. We used to win them in some games, lose them in some games, and that’s about it. There was even a year where I thought we were favoured (don’t remember if it was 2013 or 2015). Since 2017 though, the umpiring in our games have been an overall nightmare.

I know what the problem is. It’s not necessarily the ones we concede. We mainly need to improve hiding our throws and high contact like other teams do. The main issue is with the free kicks we don’t get. Riewoldt gets held almost every game in the forward line and he barely receives a free kick. Curnow gets held and it’s paid no matter how many times it occurs.

Another is HTB. Prestia for example has less than a second to dispose before HTB gets called. Other teams drop the ball and it’s ball up.

Of course I’m not saying that no other team is hard done by. I’m just saying that things like this have been happening consistently since basically the start of 2017 and I’m so sick of it. I know I’m having an annoying whinge but I’m just airing out my pent up frustration about this. I don’t understand what’s going on and why this is happening. It’s as if the umpires feel uncomfortable giving us too many free kicks, especially back-to-back.

 

[bzparkes]

But not every team has a consistently negative differential like Richmond does. I feel like our complaints are backed by statistical and visual evidence.

Other than a few specific games, I don’t ever recall complaining about umpiring like this prior to 2017. We used to win them in some games, lose them in some games, and that’s about it. There was even a year where I thought we were favoured (don’t remember if it was 2013 or 2015). Since 2017 though, the umpiring in our games have been an overall nightmare.

I know what the problem is. It’s not necessarily the ones we concede. We mainly need to improve hiding our throws and high contact like other teams do. The main issue is with the free kicks we don’t get. Riewoldt gets held almost every game in the forward line and he barely receives a free kick. Curnow gets held and it’s paid no matter how many times it occurs.

Another is HTB. Prestia for example has less than a second to dispose before HTB gets called. Other teams drop the ball and it’s ball up.

Of course I’m not saying that no other team is hard done by. I’m just saying that things like this have been happening consistently since basically the start of 2017 and I’m so sick of it. I know I’m having an annoying whinge but I’m just airing out my pent up frustration about this. I don’t understand what’s going on and why this is happening. It’s as if the umpires feel uncomfortable giving us too many free kicks, especially back-to-back.

I get that it's frustrating but literally every supporter group feels they're hard done by the umps, Richmond just appear to be the most vocal about it.

For instance, you mention Riewoldt not getting frees whilst other forwards do. You'd probably be surprised to learn that supporters of other clubs think Riewoldt, and Lynch, get an armchair ride from the umps, whilst their KPF gets nothing.

Josh Kennedy got practically nothing from the umps for over a decade, yet the second he got one free kick, you can bet your bottom dollar every opposition supporter would harp on about how looked after he was.

Having an overly contested gameplan, where you have to rush disposals would lead in an uptick of frees against, something lost on our tinfoil hat friend from the previous page.

 

[Lsta062]

I get that it's frustrating but literally every supporter group feels they're hard done by the umps, Richmond just appear to be the most vocal about it.

For instance, you mention Riewoldt not getting frees whilst other forwards do. You'd probably be surprised to learn that supporters of other clubs think Riewoldt, and Lynch, get an armchair ride from the umps, whilst their KPF gets nothing.

Josh Kennedy got practically nothing from the umps for over a decade, yet the second he got one free kick, you can bet your bottom dollar every opposition supporter would harp on about how looked after he was.

Having an overly contested gameplan, where you have to rush disposals would lead in an uptick of frees against, something lost on our tinfoil hat friend from the previous page.

Yeah, but not every team has a negative differential like we consistently have. That’s why we’re so vocal about it. I’m not someone who always think we’re hard done by (e.g., pre-2017), but I think that something’s definitely off in our current era.

In my view, what’s happening is unconscious bias rather than active bias. I liken it to the situation of a teacher that witnesses a particular child misbehaving in one school year. They may keep a closer eye on them. Because they’re monitoring them closely, they’ll catch them doing things wrong even if their misbehaving has reduced to the class average. This type of implicit bias is basically what I’m talking about.

I think our huge negative free kick differential over the last 6 years comes from implicit or unconscious bias where Richmond players are “policed” tighter to the rules than others teams. Our free kick differential is by far worse than any other team in the last 6 years, so I think my theory has some legs.

By the way, I also see this happening consistently against other teams like GWS and Hawthorn. I have also seen this happen against Essendon, Sydney, and Geelong before, but it’s not for as long as the other teams I mentioned. So it’s definitely not just a Richmond thing.

These umpires need to be trained to assess every team on a case-by-case basis. I really don’t think that’s happening right now.

 

[bzparkes]

Yeah, but not every team has a negative differential like we consistently have. That’s why we’re so vocal about it. I’m not someone who always think we’re hard done by (e.g., pre-2017), but I think that something’s definitely off in our current era.

In my view, what’s happening is unconscious bias rather than active bias. I liken it to the situation of a teacher that witnesses a particular child misbehaving in one school year. They may keep a closer eye on them. Because they’re monitoring them closely, they’ll catch them doing things wrong even if their misbehaving has reduced to the class average. This type of implicit bias is basically what I’m talking about.

I think our huge negative free kick differential over the last 6 years comes from implicit or unconscious bias where Richmond players are “policed” tighter to the rules than others teams. Our free kick differential is by far worse than any other team in the last 6 years, so I think my theory has some legs.

By the way, I also see this happening consistently against other teams like GWS and Hawthorn. I have also seen this happen against Essendon, Sydney, and Geelong before, but it’s not for as long as the other teams I mentioned. So it’s definitely not just a Richmond thing.

These umpires need to be trained to assess every team on a case-by-case basis. I really don’t think that’s happening right now.

Does it really make that much of a difference though?

Richmond have had a negative differential, which can be attributed to how they are coached, since 2017 yet won 3 flags.

Western Bulldogs have gotten the rub from the umps for the better part of a decade, for 1 flag and no top 4 finishes.

It really is irrelevant, in the grand scheme of things.

 

[TheOptimum18]

For instance, you mention Riewoldt not getting frees whilst other forwards do. You'd probably be surprised to learn that supporters of other clubs think Riewoldt, and Lynch, get an armchair ride from the umps, whilst their KPF gets nothing.

But this is easily fact checked just by looking at the numbers.

Someone crunched the numbers a little earlier in the thread, but people can probably look deeper into the numbers.

 

[bzparkes]

But this is easily fact checked just by looking at the numbers.

Someone crunched the numbers a little earlier in the thread, but people can probably look deeper into the numbers.

Yeah, looking at the numbers proves nothing other than Richmond being on the negative side of of the free kick ledger.

You blokes aren't interested in figuring out why.

 

[TheOptimum18]

Yeah, looking at the numbers proves nothing other than Richmond being on the negative side of of the free kick ledger.

You blokes aren't interested in figuring out why.

I'm more talking about free kicks to key fwds, and more important, frees for in regards to key forwards, and that whole conversation.

I honestly can't be bothered debating the overall free kick differential with other supporters at this point.

 

[bzparkes]

I'm more talking about free kicks to key fwds, and more important, frees for in regards to key forwards, and that whole conversation.

I honestly can't be bothered debating the overall free kick differential with other supporters at this point.

That's fine but as I stated previously, every single supporter of a club thinks their KPF is massively hard done by whilst other clubs' KPFs get a total free ride.

The fact is that most KPFs get the same treatment.

 

[TheOptimum18]

That's fine but as I stated previously, every single supporter of a club thinks their KPF is massively hard done by whilst other clubs' KPFs get a total free ride.

The fact is that most KPFs get the same treatment.

If one key fwd is getting 50 free kicks a season, and another key fwd is only getting 5, how can you say that "most KPF's get the same treatment" (using purely arbitrary numbers).

What fans feel is one part of the story, but some fans say it cause they see opposition fans do it (and therefore, because this usually then devolves into conversations of cheating or bias, which no one wants to have a mature conversation about), while other fans see clips on twitter, or look at lopsided stats and then claim that their KPF is treated unfairly.

 

[bzparkes]

If one key fwd is getting 50 free kicks a season, and another key fwd is only getting 5, how can you say that "most KPF's get the same treatment" (using purely arbitrary numbers).

What fans feel is one part of the story, but some fans say it cause they see opposition fans do it (and therefore, because this usually then devolves into conversations of cheating or bias, which no one wants to have a mature conversation about), while other fans see clips on twitter, or look at lopsided stats and then claim that their KPF is treated unfairly.

If you want to prove your point, you need to go and watch all the games both those key forwards have played and analyse every free kick to ascertain if there's an inherent bias.

Looking at raw numbers proves nothing.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Here is some objective data that is available to us, that may surprise some people. It also supports the frustrations Richmond supporters are expressing as mentioned by Lsta062 in his posts above.


Charlie Curnow v Jack Riewoldt 2023.


Contested possessions per game not including free kicks for:

CC 5.2 v JR 4.0

Outside of free kicks, Curnow is winning 30% more contests than Riewoldt per game.

Offensive 1 v 1 contests per match:

CC 5.5 v JR 4.3(this is how many times the player has been in a contest forward of the ball)

Curnow finds himself in 1 v 1 contests 28% more often per game

1 v 1 contest win %

Curnow 29% v Riewoldt 29%

They both win the same percentage of their 1 v 1 contests and this includes the free kicks they are paid.

Free kicks for per match:

Curnow 1.7 v Riewoldt 0.6.

Curnow recieves 180% more free kicks than Riewoldt.

Free kicks for adjusted to their non free kick contest winning differential:

Curnow recieves 126% more free kicks than Riewoldt.

Free kick against per match:

Curnow 0.9 v Riewoldt 0.8

Free kicks against adjusted for contest differential:

Curnow gives away roughly 78% as many free kicks per contest as does Riewoldt.


Comment: So a lot of people here should be very surprised to see Riewoldt wins the same % of 1 v 1 contests as does Curnow, when free kicks are included. When you remove free kicks it would be safe to assume Riewoldt is winning a higher % of his 1 v 1 contests than Curnow.

So the question here is why even after adjusting for the indicated difference in the amount of contests they find themselves in - with Curnow likely in about 30% more contests - does Curnow get more than 1.26 times more free kicks than Riewoldt, and give away only 0.76 as many free kicks as Riewoldt? Especially when you consider Riewoldt wins a higher % of his 1 v 1 contests NOT resulting from a free kick.

 

[LOZWILDA]

It’s a given.
Geelong and Carlton are Umpires pets and Richmond are the bad boy’s regardless. Nothing new here, same old crap umpiring week in week out.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Elmer_Judd]

It’s a given.
Geelong and Carlton are Umpires pets and Richmond are the bad boy’s regardless. Nothing new here, same old crap umpiring week in week out.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

You still going to blame the umpires when you finish bottom 3 next season ?

Honestly the victim mentality amongst some Richmond supporters on this forum is beyond the pale.

 

[LOZWILDA]

Richmond are too slow, and turn the ball over too easily.
All games are terrible to watch due to inconsistent umpiring!
4 Umpires does not work at all.
Get rid of some of these woeful rules making it almost impossible to Umpire.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[_Mike_]

This season Port are getting the raw end of the deal, yet top 4




Current Stats

 

[TheOptimum18]

This season Port are getting the raw end of the deal, yet top 4


View attachment 1774747

Current Stats

We were -65 in 2017 (GWS on -46 and Freo on -40 being the next worst, I believe), -120 in 2018 (St Kilda next worst on -54, I believe), -34 in 2019 (about 2 or 3 teams with a worse differential) and -58 in 2020 (only 1 team worse than us, and Essendon above us having -49).

What's your point?

(I've only looked at H/A season)

 

[Meteoric Rise]

This season Port are getting the raw end of the deal, yet top 4


View attachment 1774747

Current Stats

Richmond's whole deficit has been accumulated in the 11 matches since McQualter took over. More than -5 free kick per game differential in that time. All 11 free kick counts lost.

I challenge anyone to find another team with 11 lost free kick counts in succession.