Remove this Banner Ad

Gieschen

  • Thread starter Thread starter Arcassius
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

True that the G managed not to mention that a supporter of any club would be spewing on 1/3 of RR's decisions;he's definitely not going to mention or allude to small-man-syndrome like the commentary team did.
Let's not forget the political nature of GG's appointment and position.
I thought we benefited from a couple,others were missed as usual.
 
An umpire could accidentally pay a free kick to someone in the crowd and Gieschan would still say he was happy with the decision.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

The problem with that show is they don't compare the similar situations where the opposite decision is made ... it is the inconsistency that annoys players/fans the most.
 
Can any of us really say that we were expecting him to say anything to the contrary though?

Geischen admitting that one of his gimps got it wrong will never happen in my lifetime.
 
Angelus said:
Can any of us really say that we were expecting him to say anything to the contrary though?

Geischen admitting that one of his gimps got it wrong will never happen in my lifetime.
Click to expand...

It's happened, but it only happens if its blatantly blatantly obvious ... actually even then he may not always do it, but he has come out and said the umps have got it wrong before.

Anyway, except for one of Frodo's goals (first one the one after the goal I think), they were all there or there abouts anyway - especially the last couple, they were Sydney brain fades plain and simple.
 
Had no problem with the umpires during the weekend. Sydney could have won and I'd think the same. The only thing that stood out was the amount of 50m penalties, which Sydney also received, and scored goals from.

The throw at the end was missed by me, but looked fair on the replay.

There was a stage during the game where I was thinking we were getting a good run with the umps, but that isn't to say they weren't deserved. Ignore the For/Against stats, the team that puts their head over the ball, and has it as their focus, gets the most free kicks. If your team isn't on the positive side of the free kick tally, it's usually because you haven't attacked the contest as well as the team that is.

Couple of edgy decisions, but no more than in any other game.

I think the only reason this is being discussed, is because Ballas was utterly dominating the players and supporters. You could have thrown a ****ing Unicorn on the park and they would have gone ape shit. That freekick and goal he got sent them feral. From that point on, all logic went out the window, and anything that didn't go their way after that was welcomed like the mother in law.

The Sydney supporters lost their cool, just like ours do most weeks. Once the blood is pumping, the vast majority of supporters don't have the ability to see things clearly.

Like I said, I think we had a good run, but that's because we played better contested footy.
 
scon said:
True that the G managed not to mention that a supporter of any club would be spewing on 1/3 of RR's decisions;he's definitely not going to mention or allude to small-man-syndrome like the commentary team did.
Let's not forget the political nature of GG's appointment and position.
I thought we benefited from a couple,others were missed as usual.
Click to expand...

i reckon brian taylor has nick dal santo syndrome with his constant belittling of vertically challenged people on the field.
fair dinkum if u watch it again u will hear him go on about "wee man" & "diminuitive" all game.
 
docker_champ29 said:
yeah. The only suspect decision that went our way that I remember was a holding the ball inside 50. I don't know why it was such a big deal. The Sydney players were stupid and their fans blame it on the umpires (and Ballantyne :p )
Click to expand...

That was the only really blatant one for me as well, however, the way incorrect disposal has(n't) been called all season, it's a total lottery in every tackle.

Having re-watched the game now, the only 50 that wasn't there was the fifty to Sydney for one of our players impeding the mark which led to a Sydney goal as he was clearly on the mark with the Sydney player moving strangely after taking it. I do however think Sydney would have likely gotten a goal there anyway as their forward line was wide open.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

esquilax said:
WTF?????

The LRT duck into Broughts was a howler!
Click to expand...
That was shocking (as was Sydney's love of one-handed hand-balls) but I was only referring to frees Sydney should have gotten not the millions upon millions that went against us:)
 
Were there two incidents of ducking? Because someone did it to Fyfe, basically burrowed into his ribs and got a free.
 
muzzington said:
Were there two incidents of ducking? Because someone did it to Fyfe, basically burrowed into his ribs and got a free.
Click to expand...

The umpires actually let play go on after one pretty obvious duck in our forward line which is just about the first time I've seen some common sense used all year. There was still ducking and frees galore but it's got to be pretty hard to officiate.
 
I've seen a few ducks in contested areas be called play on which is great, but it also makes some of the more obvious ones stick out.
 
muzzington said:
Were there two incidents of ducking? Because someone did it to Fyfe, basically burrowed into his ribs and got a free.
Click to expand...

I think that was the LRT one. He got the ball and then buried his head in to Fyfes stomach and Fyfe gave away the free kick
 
TheTaco said:
Having re-watched the game now, the only 50 that wasn't there was the fifty to Sydney for one of our players impeding the mark which led to a Sydney goal as he was clearly on the mark with the Sydney player moving strangely after taking it. I do however think Sydney would have likely gotten a goal there anyway as their forward line was wide open.
Click to expand...

He was over the mark by all of 20cm and was given half a second to correct his mistake. The umpire awarded the penalty way too quickly. There really needs to be a 25m penalty for trivial shit like this. Save the 50m penalties for blatant behind the play stuff or intentional infringements.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

valkorum said:
I think that was the LRT one. He got the ball and then buried his head in to Fyfes stomach and Fyfe gave away the free kick
Click to expand...
This one was pretty horrible. Fyfe appeared to hold back when he saw he wasn't going to be able to make the contest in a legal manner - giving LRT time to lift his head so he could tackle, but LRT seemed to notice this and plowed his head into Fyfe to get the free. This was basically the only howler I noticed all game though.

I did think that 50m penalty at the end to us was a fair amount over 50m, but I don't know the dimensions of the SCG so it may have been pretty close. I can't really pass judgment by watching it on a TV screen.
 
Can't believe Longmuire emailed the umps on clarification. Of all our losses Harvey has said it was our fault not the injuries or the umps ours, yet when things start to be fair the opposition coach has to clarify with the umps. Unbelievable Eastern States bias in our comp ( no offence to people living their).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom