Your dominance meant nothing because we forced you wide by blocking the corridor and our constant pressure meant you had to rush your kicks and kick for goal in difficult angles.They were in winning positions because we didn't put them to bed. And yes bad kicking is bad football, but we dominated that game inside and out. We should've kicked better and put them 50 points down before the end of the 3rd. That was nothing but a percentage loss for us. We were never going to lose that game.
How can you argue that? Papley picked up the ball after the whistle had blown moved then forward realised nothing was on and tried to reverse his decision to play on.What about that 'play on' call where Papley stopped and said 'yeah nah'.
Buddy would have kicked that goal and put us 3 goals up.
No, I'm pretty sure running unopposed with ball in hand and getting tackled when you had prior opportunity has always been HTB. Hickey gets the ball, Cox is well behind him, he takes 4-5 steps, ignores the handball to Parker, and then gets tackled. Blatant missed call. If that had happened after a handball receive in the middle of the ground there would be zero doubt, but the umpire choked it.Check the rules. It isn’t.
Not to mention Reid getting decapitated in front of goal and nothing.Watching the start of the fourth, I the first thirty seconds, 20 out from goal, Gulden shoved in the back, no call, recovers and gets the ball before being dragged high by Guelfi ( no call noted by the commentators for those it matters to), ball gets cleared and kicked to Mills who drops the mark when he's hit front on by McGrath with no call. Three missed in a row, less than 20 out from the Swans goal.
But yeah, that Hickey call on the bombers half back flank. Awful stuff.
You won thoughThose grabs out of the ruck never get paid for HTB. No matter how long they have it for.
Also the Bombers should stop complaining about umpiring when you got a massive leg up in round 1.
Swans fans just go watch the round 1 game and you'll see for yourself how one sided and incorrect it was.
when he grabbed it it was ok, then he tried to barge thru tacklers it was iffy then he kept wiggling instead of trying to dispose then baaaaaaaaaaaaalllll for at least 3 seconds and then he dropped it like a hot spud to make sure of it.But, as you say, he did make an attempt.
That's...not what happened.when he grabbed it it was ok, then he tried to barge thru tacklers it was iffy then he kept wiggling instead of trying to dispose then baaaaaaaaaaaaalllll for at least 3 seconds and then he dropped it like a hot spud to make sure of it.
Surely taking the piss that umpire Mollison gave Sydney 16 frees to our 1. That can’t be legit surely
It's not damning at all without context. Were they all correct decisions? If not, which ones were blatantly wrong, how many were 50-50?Pretty damning statistic
Other teams will probably look at what we didThe Hickey one should've been htb, he got lucky there. I saw a lot that weren't paid too us either, especially that Gulden high tackle in the 4th qr. Don't really think we got rub of the green, rather Essendon did despite the free kick count it should've been even more to us to be completely honest. We deserved the win, should've iced it but poor goal kicking cost us throughout. Esssendon did their homework on us very well.
Sydney won the clearances, Essendon won the tackles. Everything else was pretty even, except for the free kicks. In fact, one could argue that the difference in free-kicks being 15 would easily account for the difference of 30 disposals.Well same sh*t tonight then aye. We destroyed Essendon all game on contested and uncontested possessions. Should've put them to bed, and a handful of freekicks around the ground would've made no difference to us dominating tonight.
Wait, wait, wait... So the umpiring was supposedly terrible both ways tonight yes? By this logic one team copped 15 bad calls whilst the other had to suffer nearly 30 of them and the final margin was less than a goal. If the umpiring is bad then the free kick count becomes a factor.Its not about the free kick count, its about the right decisions.
3 more inside 50's despite winning the clearances by 23. It's not an effective metric. Hasn't been since Hawthorn's dynasty. Also free kicks actually count as contested possessions. So effectively minus 13 contested ball from their tally.Sydney won the clearances, Essendon won the tackles. Everything else was pretty even, except for the free kicks. In fact, one could argue that the difference in free-kicks being 15 would easily account for the difference of 30 disposals.
There is really no reason for the free kick count to ever be lopsided. There are hundreds of letter of law infringements every game. If they only paid the significant grievances there might be reason for unbalanced counts, but the decisions are so random in their significance.Wait, wait, wait... So the umpiring was supposedly terrible both ways tonight yes? By this logic one team copped 15 bad calls whilst the other had to suffer nearly 30 of them and the final margin was less than a goal. If the umpiring is bad then the free kick count becomes a factor.
Mate we’ve lost in rd 3 for 3 years running, frankly losses in April don’t really bother me. What does bother me is incompetent umpiring in favour of teams like yours and Geelong when you play at home. If it’s true that one umpire paid 16 free kicks to Sydney and 1 to essendon, don’t you think that’s a worry? I’d be saying the same thing if the game was at marvel and the result was reversed.Or you lost to the Swans last week and can't get over it like your coach