The Bulldogs and Umpires: Time for a Royal Commission?

[danster168]

Noticed Bevo said his presser that he was disappointed that we gave away some undisciplined free kicks that gave Port some momentum in the third quarter. If people seriously don't think that it's a focus of his, they just aren't paying attention.

I can't stand these overly simplistic views in order to analyse or justify what looks like legitimate umpire and afl corruption.

To infer that the dogs focus more heavily on not giving as many frees away then you would have had to do the following:

a) Attend all the closed training sessions of the dogs, and heard clear instructions on tackling technique etc. This would have to be a consistent and repeated focus over a long period of time for it to become second nature. And during covid, no-one can attend training sessions and unless people actually know Bevo personally then they are just guessing.
b) Go to every other clubs training sessions and see how often and how much they focus on free kicks. This MUST be done in order to compare.

Unless anyone has done this they're just having a baseless wild stab in the dark.

There is more likely corruption involved than it to have anything to do with it being a specific focus from the Dogs. It's like saying 'we're in the GF because we try hard'. like wtf.

All i know is that Goodwin teaches his players not to flop. Kozzie was told by Goodwin to focus on the ball and not the free kick. A shame Bevo hasn't pulled Weightman, Hunter and Macrae aside to say the same thing. It's gross to watch.

 

[danster168]

Might be a moot point, Salem is so dangerous we might try and get JJ to run with him as a defensive forward role.

i love it how Weightman is now directly associated with being the guy who is dangerous for winning frees and nothing else. Good job reporter!!! calling it as it is.

 

[Sentinel]

It's far too much of a stretch to suggest the free kick differential could be down to a particular playing style when the obvious answer is league wide corruption.

 

[Alesana]

I can't stand these overly simplistic views in order to analyse or justify what looks like legitimate umpire and afl corruption.

To infer that the dogs focus more heavily on not giving as many frees away then you would have had to do the following:

a) Attend all the closed training sessions of the dogs, and heard clear instructions on tackling technique etc. This would have to be a consistent and repeated focus over a long period of time for it to become second nature. And during covid, no-one can attend training sessions and unless people actually know Bevo personally then they are just guessing.
b) Go to every other clubs training sessions and see how often and how much they focus on free kicks. This MUST be done in order to compare.

Unless anyone has done this they're just having a baseless wild stab in the dark.

There is more likely corruption involved than it to have anything to do with it being a specific focus from the Dogs. It's like saying 'we're in the GF because we try hard'. like wtf.

All i know is that Goodwin teaches his players not to flop. Kozzie was told by Goodwin to focus on the ball and not the free kick. A shame Bevo hasn't pulled Weightman, Hunter and Macrae aside to say the same thing. It's gross to watch.

That's good stuff, I needed a laugh

 

[Some Idiot]

I can't stand these overly simplistic views in order to analyse or justify what looks like legitimate umpire and afl corruption.

To infer that the dogs focus more heavily on not giving as many frees away then you would have had to do the following:

a) Attend all the closed training sessions of the dogs, and heard clear instructions on tackling technique etc. This would have to be a consistent and repeated focus over a long period of time for it to become second nature. And during covid, no-one can attend training sessions and unless people actually know Bevo personally then they are just guessing.
b) Go to every other clubs training sessions and see how often and how much they focus on free kicks. This MUST be done in order to compare.

Unless anyone has done this they're just having a baseless wild stab in the dark.

There is more likely corruption involved than it to have anything to do with it being a specific focus from the Dogs. It's like saying 'we're in the GF because we try hard'. like wtf.

All i know is that Goodwin teaches his players not to flop. Kozzie was told by Goodwin to focus on the ball and not the free kick. A shame Bevo hasn't pulled Weightman, Hunter and Macrae aside to say the same thing. It's gross to watch.

If there was corruption involved, we wouldn't get a negative differential (most often big one) everytime we play Port. Far more likely that it is a game style thing. Port's gamestyle works well against the Dogs in the free kicks department.

Also accusing Macrae of playing for free kicks really invalidates your argument, as it has been debunked multiple times.

Personally I find the likes of Spargo, Fritsch and Neal-Bullen pretty gross to watch. Oliver is no slouch in the flopping department either. Shame Goodwin hasn't been able to have the same influence on those guys as Pickett.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

I can't stand these overly simplistic views in order to analyse or justify what looks like legitimate umpire and afl corruption.

To infer that the dogs focus more heavily on not giving as many frees away then you would have had to do the following:

a) Attend all the closed training sessions of the dogs, and heard clear instructions on tackling technique etc. This would have to be a consistent and repeated focus over a long period of time for it to become second nature. And during covid, no-one can attend training sessions and unless people actually know Bevo personally then they are just guessing.
b) Go to every other clubs training sessions and see how often and how much they focus on free kicks. This MUST be done in order to compare.

Unless anyone has done this they're just having a baseless wild stab in the dark.

There is more likely corruption involved than it to have anything to do with it being a specific focus from the Dogs. It's like saying 'we're in the GF because we try hard'. like wtf.

All i know is that Goodwin teaches his players not to flop. Kozzie was told by Goodwin to focus on the ball and not the free kick. A shame Bevo hasn't pulled Weightman, Hunter and Macrae aside to say the same thing. It's gross to watch.

You could try
OPTION C

Open your eyes (both) when watching and really look at why frees are actually paid. You could also take time to understand that the reduction in frees against is a trend that coincides with Beveridge as coach. That is strong evidence in itself, that coaching has some correlation to the phenomena.

Go back to round 19 and have a look.

Reference a particular incident that I saw some complaints about.

Lachie Hunter disposed of the ball kicking up the line on the members wing (think it was 3rd qtr). He was then tackled high after disposal and a free was rightly paid downfield. I recall some uneducated person claiming he ducked, but it was a late tackle meriting a free kick in every circumstance imaginable.

I recall there were multiple frees for late tackles and while the Bulldogs are not immune the instances of them infringing like that would be extremely low.

However you are convinced that it is a conspiracy and you have every right to do so, despite every logical view making that absolutely implausible.

For you stupidity beats logic because stupidity requires no logic.

 

[danster168]

If there was corruption involved, we wouldn't get a negative differential (most often big one) everytime we play Port. Far more likely that it is a game style thing. Port's gamestyle works well against the Dogs in the free kicks department.

Also accusing Macrae of playing for free kicks really invalidates your argument, as it has been debunked multiple times.

Personally I find the likes of Spargo, Fritsch and Neal-Bullen pretty gross to watch. Oliver is no slouch in the flopping department either. Shame Goodwin hasn't been able to have the same influence on those guys as Pickett.

Macrae does stage for frees. Specifically the in the back. He collects a groundball, handballs and then unnaturally lunges forward as lies as flat as a pancake and any contact he feels he acts as if a 1 tonne fridge is lying on his back. This is something he's been doing for years.

I would've thought a Dogs fan would've picked up on this.

And then you say you 'most often' have a big negative differential every time you play Port. So I fact checked you. Incorrect. THey've won the free kick count by small margins. It may feel big because you usually get favoured but in fact it's only 1-4 free kicks more.

 

[danster168]

You could try
OPTION C

Open your eyes (both) when watching and really look at why frees are actually paid. You could also take time to understand that the reduction in frees against is a trend that coincides with Beveridge as coach. That is strong evidence in itself, that coaching has some correlation to the phenomena.

Go back to round 19 and have a look.

Reference a particular incident that I saw some complaints about.

Lachie Hunter disposed of the ball kicking up the line on the members wing (think it was 3rd qtr). He was then tackled high after disposal and a free was rightly paid downfield. I recall some uneducated person claiming he ducked, but it was a late tackle meriting a free kick in every circumstance imaginable.

I recall there were multiple frees for late tackles and while the Bulldogs are not immune the instances of them infringing like that would be extremely low.

However you are convinced that it is a conspiracy and you have every right to do so, despite every logical view making that absolutely implausible.

For you stupidity beats logic because stupidity requires no logic.

Can you please use an example that doesn't include Hunter, Macrae, and Weightman? Seriously. And please don't reference Round 19. I already pinpointed 6 goals that Dogs got gifted that led to direct goals. I also stated the time in the game. It was probably the most corrupt game of the year and a large reason why the Dog/AFL rship was confirmed in my mind.

In relation to Hunter, without having even seen the footage, I'm going to guess that Hunter deliberately slowed down (knowing he'd still get his kick away) and lower himself fractions of a second after disposing of the ball just as the tackler is coming in. Probably even using his right arm to shrug the tackle so that it collects him high.

 

[Northernsoul74]

Can you please use an example that doesn't include Hunter, Macrae, and Weightman? Seriously. And please don't reference Round 19. I already pinpointed 6 goals that Dogs got gifted that led to direct goals. I also stated the time in the game. It was probably the most corrupt game of the year and a large reason why the Dog/AFL rship was confirmed in my mind.

In relation to Hunter, without having even seen the footage, I'm going to guess that Hunter deliberately slowed down (knowing he'd still get his kick away) and lower himself fractions of a second after disposing of the ball just as the tackler is coming in. Probably even using his right arm to shrug the tackle so that it collects him high.

 

[danster168]

You could try
OPTION C

Open your eyes (both) when watching and really look at why frees are actually paid. You could also take time to understand that the reduction in frees against is a trend that coincides with Beveridge as coach. That is strong evidence in itself, that coaching has some correlation to the phenomena.

Go back to round 19 and have a look.

Reference a particular incident that I saw some complaints about.

Lachie Hunter disposed of the ball kicking up the line on the members wing (think it was 3rd qtr). He was then tackled high after disposal and a free was rightly paid downfield. I recall some uneducated person claiming he ducked, but it was a late tackle meriting a free kick in every circumstance imaginable.

I recall there were multiple frees for late tackles and while the Bulldogs are not immune the instances of them infringing like that would be extremely low.

However you are convinced that it is a conspiracy and you have every right to do so, despite every logical view making that absolutely implausible.

For you stupidity beats logic because stupidity requires no logic.

There was also a lot of noise from the public after the Dogs vs Ess game where Bontempelli was repeatedly given more time than anyone else to dispose of the ball. The Redman tackle that was called a dangerous tackle would've been paid holding the ball against 99.99% of AFL players. The umpires waited to see how the tackle was executed instead of paying the obvious HTB. But more to my point, after the public outcry, Bont finally started getting paid HTB the following 2 weeks getting pinged about 5 times for HTB. It was 100% a reaction from the public.

 

[Northernsoul74]

There was also a lot of noise from the public after the Dogs vs Ess game where Bontempelli was repeatedly given more time than anyone else to dispose of the ball. The Redman tackle that was called a dangerous tackle would've been paid holding the ball against 99.99% of AFL players. The umpires waited to see how the tackle was executed instead of paying the obvious HTB. But more to my point, after the public outcry, Bont finally started getting paid HTB the following 2 weeks getting pinged about 5 times for HTB. It was 100% a reaction from the public.

 

[danster168]

View attachment 1238269

Your deep analysis hat didn't take long to take off. That's the thing, as soon as you go by facts the Dogs fans arguments crash like a deck of cards. Melbourne is playing a 7-9th best team that has the 1st best umpiring. I'm much more worried about the umpires than any dogs player. If the umps stay out of it, we should win it by 50+. Dogs have no backline and their midfield is deep but have no ruckman. Their forwards are Naughton and nothing else. And other 10 goals are made up of FreeKick WesternBulldogs.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Can you please use an example that doesn't include Hunter, Macrae, and Weightman? Seriously. And please don't reference Round 19. I already pinpointed 6 goals that Dogs got gifted that led to direct goals. I also stated the time in the game. It was probably the most corrupt game of the year and a large reason why the Dog/AFL rship was confirmed in my mind.

In relation to Hunter, without having even seen the footage, I'm going to guess that Hunter deliberately slowed down (knowing he'd still get his kick away) and lower himself fractions of a second after disposing of the ball just as the tackler is coming in. Probably even using his right arm to shrug the tackle so that it collects him high.

When you can even justify that any tackle after disposal is the fault of the player correctly disposing of the football you simply prove that stupidity is your default position.

We can't suggest you lose credibility, because you have nothing there to lose.

 

[Northernsoul74]

Your deep analysis hat didn't take long to take off. That's the thing, as soon as you go by facts the Dogs fans arguments crash like a deck of cards. Melbourne is playing a 7-9th best team that has the 1st best umpiring. I'm much more worried about the umpires than any dogs player. If the umps stay out of it, we should win it by 50+. Dogs have no backline and their midfield is deep but have no ruckman. Their forwards are Naughton and nothing else. And other 10 goals are made up of FreeKick WesternBulldogs.

 

[danster168]

When you can even justify that any tackle after disposal is the fault of the player correctly disposing of the football you simply prove that stupidity is your default position.

We can't suggest you lose credibility, because you have nothing there to lose.

I was right wasn't I? was the free for high or for late contact? I know Hunters antics better than most dogs fans. I've seen every one of the dogs games this year. I've seen it all.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Macrae does stage for frees. Specifically the in the back. He collects a groundball, handballs and then unnaturally lunges forward as lies as flat as a pancake and any contact he feels he acts as if a 1 tonne fridge is lying on his back. This is something he's been doing for years.

I would've thought a Dogs fan would've picked up on this.

And then you say you 'most often' have a big negative differential every time you play Port. So I fact checked you. Incorrect. THey've won the free kick count by small margins. It may feel big because you usually get favoured but in fact it's only 1-4 free kicks more.

Since you are convinced that Macrae stages for frees, Clayton Oliver must be similar with both going at 1.7 per game through the season.

On fact checking you must be selective.
Last 2 games Port had a positive differential of 8 and 6 which seems a bit more than 1-4.

I must stop replying to you as you are incapable of rising above your stupidity agenda.

 

[Northernsoul74]

I was right wasn't I? was the free for high or for late contact? I know Hunters antics better than most dogs fans. I've seen every one of the dogs games this year. I've seen it all.

“Now they're some sad things known to man
But ain't too much sadder than
The tears of a clown”.

 

[danster168]

Since you are convinced that Macrae stages for frees, Clayton Oliver must be similar with both going at 1.7 per game through the season.

On fact checking you must be selective.
Last 2 games Port had a positive differential of 8 and 6 which seems a bit more than 1-4.

I must stop replying to you as you are incapable of rising above your stupidity agenda.

Oh that's cute you went back 1 game. What a sample size! Get on my level and look back further.

 

[danster168]

the thing is Dogs fans say 'X team complaining about the umpiring is so rich' to literally every team. The fact of the matter is, the umpires have gifted you a spot in the granny. They gave you the win against Essendon when the game was on the line and gave it to you against Brisbane with some horrendous non calls. You've played 1 good game in 6 weeks. Your lead up to the Port game was Ess and Brisbane, 2 pretty avg teams. (we smashed brisbane).

If you beat us, I would be very surprised if it wasn't due to the free kick count and the free kick count alone. If we get a 25-11 free kick advantage we don't beat you by the 20 points you beat us by in R19. It'd be a 50 pointer smashing and over at half time. That's why the bookies have us as favourites.

 

[conrad_437]

You're a funny man Danny boy. I envision you being that bloke at the end of the bar one day spouting the same BS you do on here.

 

[BarryMorgan]

the thing is Dogs fans say 'X team complaining about the umpiring is so rich' to literally every team. The fact of the matter is, the umpires have gifted you a spot in the granny. They gave you the win against Essendon when the game was on the line and gave it to you against Brisbane with some horrendous non calls. You've played 1 good game in 6 weeks. Your lead up to the Port game was Ess and Brisbane, 2 pretty avg teams. (we smashed brisbane).

If you beat us, I would be very surprised if it wasn't due to the free kick count and the free kick count alone. If we get a 25-11 free kick advantage we don't beat you by the 20 points you beat us by in R19. It'd be a 50 pointer smashing and over at half time. That's why the bookies have us as favourites.

Still waiting to hear your defence of Fritsch ducking into a tackle against the Cats?

 

[gordo2016]

Danster 36 posts always start with "lets look at the facts,'" or the "fact is." Must have been away from school that day in grade 2 when everyone else learnt the difference between a fact and an opinion.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Danster 36 posts always start with "lets look at the facts,'" or the "fact is." Must have been away from school that day in grade 2 when everyone else learnt the difference between a fact and an opinion.

A fact is not a fact unless it can be proved by his opinion.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I think someone is conceding that Melbourne can’t win, the odds are stacked against them. It’s too big a mountain to climb. Our 26 men against their 23. The result is inevitable, a foregone conclusion. There’s no way Melbourne can win after all the hard work the officials have put in to get us this far. It won’t be pretty, look away now.

 

[BarryMorgan]

Oh that's cute you went back 1 game. What a sample size! Get on my level and look back further.

Ok, let’s get on your level and look at a bigger sample size. Let’s get really crazy and look at the WHOLE YEAR (insane stuff, I know).
Let’s compare the amount of free kicks the Bulldogs, who you are saying are notorious divers and floppers, and the amount of free kicks, let’s say… Melbourne received.
The Bulldogs received a total of 458 free kicks for the season.
Melbourne received a total of 442.
That’s a difference of 16, which, when we’re dealing with numbers in the mid 400s, isn’t overly significant.
In fact, it’s less than 1 more free kick per round.
So, in summary, you are suggesting that the majority of free kicks awarded to the Bulldogs - no doubt handed to those renowned cheats, Macrae, Hunter, Weightman et al. - were the result of umpire corruption, yet all 442 free kicks awarded to those brave and noble Demons were awarded correctly, and in fact, they should have received more? Maybe even just one more free kick per game? Even thought that would mean they received more than the cheating, corrupt Bulldogs?