Past #12: Lindsay Thomas - released by NM to pursue rookie list spot at PA - thx4 everything Lindsay

[Marksup]

Ok, been told it was in the 2nd quarter, caught on mics apparently.

You're way too good at this.

 

[Gasometer]

Ok, been told it was in the 2nd quarter, caught on mics apparently.

Find it and twatter to Gerard Whateley. ..hes the moral conscience of the AFL media.

... think Scotts should have shut up at the presser

 

[The Other Dean]

Getting treated by the umpires as a stager because that's what he used to do. I said it 5 years ago that he needed to cut that shit out otherwise it would cost him in the long run....look what happens now, wouldn't get a free kick even if he was murdered on field

He is the proverbial boy who cried wolf. Cautionary tale for your kids.

I appreciate what you're saying, but isn't it kinda beside the point? Umpires have a duty to rise above all of that.

Call me naive, but shirley they are there to adjudicate each moment of play on its merits, regardless of the people or personalities or teams involved. They're not there to make character judgments. Or worse, act upon them. They are employed to enforce the rules of the game in a fair and unbiased manner.

If the ump really said what has been suggested, then his sorry arse should be sacked into oblivion.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

I appreciate what you're saying, but isn't it kinda beside the point? Umpires have a duty to rise above all of that.

Call me naive, but shirley they are there to adjudicate each moment of play on its merits, regardless of the people or personalities or teams involved. They're not there to make character judgments. Or worse, act upon them. They are employed to enforce the rules of the game in a fair and unbiased manner.

If the ump really said what has been suggested, then his sorry arse should be sacked into oblivion.

Human nature TOD. They are making decisions based on previous indiscretions. It's so blantantly obvious it's not funny.

 

[scottywiper]

The Giesch set it all up. Fair, ball players. You remember the Giesch. Loved Barry Halls restraint when he choked blokes.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

"We don't pay frees to duckers"


Sciliy get Two for ducking his head/dropping at the knees. Those two aren't paid and we win.

 

[astrovic]

Human nature TOD. They are making decisions based on previous indiscretions. It's so blantantly obvious it's not funny.

yes it's human nature to be affected by bias but that nature can be managed and controlled through education, training and experience. Impartiality is a learned skill that takes years to fully develop. It's a skill that many professions, such as cops, judges, psychologists etc are trained to develop and is very very important.

AFL level umpires are supposedly the best in the business and each brings with him over a decade of experience, training and education before even getting anywhere umpiring at the highest level. The most important attribute you need to get to this level is an ability to make balanced, rational decisions in a split second under extreme pressure. You don't develop that attribute by accident, it takes years of work.

Which is why it is completely unacceptable if umpires are letting bias creep into their decision making. It is unprofessional and completely at odds with what they have trained and are paid to do.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

"We don't pay frees to duckers"


Sciliy get Two for ducking his head/dropping at the knees. Those two aren't paid and we win.

That's the reason for the fury. They make it personal, not about the action.

Anyone playing on LT gets the benefit of the umpires' doubt, whether tackling or being tackled, and it's not on.

 

[Reagan Smash]

If you want to read what the dregs of society think on the issue. Tread lightly over to the MB.

It's gone from the umps not paying the decisions on merit, to a Lindsay Thomas and Brad Scott bashing exercise.

 

[Hojuman]

"We don't pay frees to duckers"


Sciliy get Two for ducking his head/dropping at the knees. Those two aren't paid and we win.

Is that what was said verbatim ? Caught on the ch. 7 microphones ?

 

[RoosDogsMerger]

So an aboriginal man is told in advance that whatever happens in the game he won't get a free kick while a suitably ayran player for the opponents is gifted goals in the same way. Maybe Haydn Kennedy can send his boys out in Klan garb next time to save confusion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Harris 10]

What is the actual rule, if you lower your knees and get caught high is it a free kick?

I actually don't know because I got so sick of reading about it over the last few weeks.

 

[Orange Peanut]

"We don't pay frees to duckers"

Is that the actual quote? Easily batted away by head office - the ump was a bit clumsy in saying we don't pay free kicks for ducking. Wasn't about Lindsay in general, just on that occasion.
North don't have to believe it, only the footy media and the general public. And they will, and Brad will look like he was deflecting after a loss and LT will cop it even more in the future.
I wasn't on the same page as Gaso last night, but I totally get it now.

 

[Reagan Smash]

There is no rule against lowering your knee's

It's just he hysterical media making mountains out of molehills

 

[Orange Peanut]

What is the actual rule, if you lower your knees and get caught high is it a free kick?

I actually don't know because I got so sick of reading about it over the last few weeks.

Yes it is. It's up to the tackler to adjust, not the ball holder to keep his body upright - as long as he doesn't drop his head.

 

[chubbspeterson]

I don't reckon I've ever heard an umpire make that comment before, they might say "no he ducked his head" but not "No free kick guys because Lindsay's a ducker". That would never be said of Joel Selwood.

 

[Dirty_11]

Yes it is. It's up to the tackler to adjust, not the ball holder to keep his body upright - as long as he doesn't drop his head.

Except if you are LT.

 

[Joshen]

I genuinely feel for this bloke.

Is the poster boy for high free kicks despite being well down the list of offenders.

In an age of hypersensitivity regarding mental health I find it staggering that he is systemically vilified by players, fans, and the media alike.

The fact that the AFLPA spend their time defending drug cheats over the integrity of the sport is equally mind blowing.

 

[Samsquanch]

The fact that the AFLPA spend their time defending drug cheats over the integrity of the sport is equally mind blowing.

Disgrace. Absolutely.

 

[Boomerfan99]

Good article (from a north fan).

http://www.theroar.com.au/2016/06/18/its-not-easy-being-lindsay/

 

[ferball]

Is that the actual quote? Easily batted away by head office - the ump was a bit clumsy in saying we don't pay free kicks for ducking. Wasn't about Lindsay in general, just on that occasion.
North don't have to believe it, only the footy media and the general public. And they will, and Brad will look like he was deflecting after a loss and LT will cop it even more in the future.
I wasn't on the same page as Gaso last night, but I totally get it now.

There is a world of difference between:

"We don't pay frees for ducking."

and

"We don't pay frees to duckers."

One is about what happens in the game the other is a predetermined decision to treat players differently based on past actions. Its not even an unconscious bias.

It seems that eery week LT gets bad free kicks against him that are onviously not frees. That's not taking into account the frees he doesn't get but should.

Its obvious free kicks against a player for simply being near the ball. LT is being targeted by the umpires. If they see someone fall over and he is nearby they assume he caused the incident. If he makes a fair tackle or bump it is interpreted as high even when the umpire is unsighted. He got suspended because of another players comments in the media despite multiple examples of exactly the same thing not even being cited. The person he was suspended for hitting even said it was a bad call to suspend him. If the club doesn't make a stand against this then its not standing by its players when its should.

Sure we might cop it for doing so but **** it. Its not like they can treat him any worse.

 

[Kimbo]

Sure we might cop it for doing so but **** it. Its not like they can treat him any worse.

True, but I fear for the ongoing attention he will now get and for his mental health.

The sad truth, I suspect, is if Lindsay took a break and said he was contemplating giving it away due to this undue and unfair attention, instead of it being a 'wake up' call and getting AFL support and sympathy, he'd be encouraged to go and lampooned for it.

It's okay, apparently, to call out crowds for inappropriate reactions, but not media or officials.

 

[Kimbo]

Lindsay avatar to stay!

 

[ferball]

Lindsay avatar to stay!

Mine is staying for the year after this bullshit.

 

[Orange Peanut]

There is a world of difference between:

"We don't pay frees for ducking."

and

"We don't pay frees to duckers."

One is about what happens in the game the other is a predetermined decision to treat players differently based on past actions. Its not even an unconscious bias.

It seems that eery week LT gets bad free kicks against him that are onviously not frees. That's not taking into account the frees he doesn't get but should.

Its obvious free kicks against a player for simply being near the ball. LT is being targeted by the umpires. If they see someone fall over and he is nearby they assume he caused the incident. If he makes a fair tackle or bump it is interpreted as high even when the umpire is unsighted. He got suspended because of another players comments in the media despite multiple examples of exactly the same thing not even being cited. The person he was suspended for hitting even said it was a bad call to suspend him. If the club doesn't make a stand against this then its not standing by its players when its should.

Sure we might cop it for doing so but **** it. Its not like they can treat him any worse.

I agree in principle ferball, I just don't think that was the best way to handle it. I do think (if that quote is right ) that what the ump said could be interpreted different ways. The way Brad said it went down in his presser was not nearly as ambiguous, so I think it would be easy for the umpires dept to swat the allegation away.
Don't get me wrong I'm glad he stuck up for LT again, but I'm less Gung go about supporting him now that I've seen what the alleged comment actually was.