-
Rd 14 Reviews + Club boards »
BL v StK · WB v FRE · RIC v HAW · ADE v SYD · NM v COL · GWS v PA ·
And post your "Liked, Learned, Hated" right here.
Hawks v Geelong umpiring
- Thread starter dan warna
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The Finger
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #3
Kept Hawthorn in it.
you are taking the piss right? half of hawthorns goals were from frees, its the only thing keeping them in that game.
Worst call was the second of there 4 50s, where the umpire called play on and then awarded 50 for a geelong player going for the smother. ridiculous stuff
- Thread starter
- #5
you are joking right? hawks were handed the best part of the umpiring.
- Banned
- #6
om-nom-nom yummy troll food...
ah just a troll. i see. continue thread
Won't be happy if we get Chris Donlon or Simon Overland again, I'll leave it at that....
Gak Attack
Brownlow Medallist
It was terrible overall no doubt. Just amazingly bad considering it's a final and these guys are meant to be in the best half of the umpires. At least it evened out in general, probably looked a bit worse because Hawks got a few goals from terrible terrible decisions. If that Nicholls idiot gets a game next week after calling a 50 after he had called 'play on' then it shows how much more money/time needs to be put into umpires at the top level.
lol
Without the umps the cats would have won by 60+
that first quarter was terrible, Hawks were getting frees for pretty much bullshit. And that second 50 to Franklin was a complete joke.
- Sep 22, 2000
- 62,351
- 41,700
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Ford
Come on Jimmy,you can surely troll better than that.You're giving Bigfooty a bad name.
seriously you really do have no clue do you ???
The umpires literally kept the Hawks within touch by gifting them goals all game ..Nicholls was especially important to them all game he refused to pay blatant frees to the Cats whilst pulling frees out for the Hawks all over the ground ...umpires probably contributed 4 goals to the Hawks .
It was a disgraceful effort.
The umpiring wasn't as bad as people are making out. There were some missed calls / bad calls, but these evened out at the end.
In regards to the 50s, the first was for the Cat's player not giving the ball back to the correct player. You see these every game, so that was a correct call. The umpire having to explain this rule to the Cat's player just shows the level of ignorance about the rules from the players themselves.
The second one was when the Hawk player (Hodge?) took a mark on the wing running with the flight of the ball and away from his goal. The Cat's player was about 5 metres over the mark and was trying to block the Hawk from the side and making no attempt at getting behind the mark - definite 50.
The third was the play-on call. Buddy took the mark, went back a bit, then played on to go around the mark. The umpire called play-on and the third man for the Cats (the one not on the mark) who went to smother the kick was already in the 5m protection zone, therefore it was called a 50. It's technical, but I think correct.
The 4th one was when the Cat player was penalised for pushing the Hawk player in the back while he was on the ground (and was legged himself after the free was given) and was then penalised 50m for not giving the ball back quickly enough. With this one you could argue that it wasn't a push in the back (probably was - a bit soft but it seemed to impede the Hawk player) and it should have been a free to the Cats for a trip, but the call for the 50 was correct IMO.
There was an OOB which the Hawk player didn't give the ball directly the the Cat player - it was a bit to the side and at about knee height - but wasn't called 50, so the Cats can feel aggrieved there.
The thing with the 50m penalty is that if it is given anywhere forward on the defensive side of the centre square, then it will almost always result in a shot on goal or an inside 50 attack on the goal, which is why fans get upset. However, with the ones tonight, most of the blame can be laid at the feet of the players themselves and not the umpires.
In regards to the 50s, the first was for the Cat's player not giving the ball back to the correct player. You see these every game, so that was a correct call. The umpire having to explain this rule to the Cat's player just shows the level of ignorance about the rules from the players themselves.
The second one was when the Hawk player (Hodge?) took a mark on the wing running with the flight of the ball and away from his goal. The Cat's player was about 5 metres over the mark and was trying to block the Hawk from the side and making no attempt at getting behind the mark - definite 50.
The third was the play-on call. Buddy took the mark, went back a bit, then played on to go around the mark. The umpire called play-on and the third man for the Cats (the one not on the mark) who went to smother the kick was already in the 5m protection zone, therefore it was called a 50. It's technical, but I think correct.
The 4th one was when the Cat player was penalised for pushing the Hawk player in the back while he was on the ground (and was legged himself after the free was given) and was then penalised 50m for not giving the ball back quickly enough. With this one you could argue that it wasn't a push in the back (probably was - a bit soft but it seemed to impede the Hawk player) and it should have been a free to the Cats for a trip, but the call for the 50 was correct IMO.
There was an OOB which the Hawk player didn't give the ball directly the the Cat player - it was a bit to the side and at about knee height - but wasn't called 50, so the Cats can feel aggrieved there.
The thing with the 50m penalty is that if it is given anywhere forward on the defensive side of the centre square, then it will almost always result in a shot on goal or an inside 50 attack on the goal, which is why fans get upset. However, with the ones tonight, most of the blame can be laid at the feet of the players themselves and not the umpires.
Umpiring was one of the better displays this year. A few shitty calls, like the 50 to Franklin and the kick against Chapman. But that's going to happen. Just need to let the umpires know that it's OK to stay out of the game now and then.
- Mar 14, 2009
- 2,211
- 2,602
- AFL Club
- Geelong
The Cats got a rough deal tonight with 3 of the 9 Hawk goals a direct result of really poorly interpreted 50m penalties.
The 50m penalty and how it is randomly meted out by umpires with no natural feel for the game is a real blight. Minor indiscretions simply don't warrant such a harsh penalty, particularly in modern football where field position is key.
What's even more disturbing is that it is now etched in "grandstand vernacular" with a constant cry of "fifty" from the mindless and challenged. And that's just plain sad.
The 50m penalty and how it is randomly meted out by umpires with no natural feel for the game is a real blight. Minor indiscretions simply don't warrant such a harsh penalty, particularly in modern football where field position is key.
What's even more disturbing is that it is now etched in "grandstand vernacular" with a constant cry of "fifty" from the mindless and challenged. And that's just plain sad.
I was at the game and the umps were terrible. Due to their shocking decisions, Hawthorn were at least 3 goals closer to the Cats than they should have been at half time, and 4 goals closer at 3/4 time. I can't believe these guys are umpiring finals.
TeamThatSavedAFL
Senior List
At least there were no free kicks pulled out of ruck contests where everyone just stops and gives the umpire a WTF look.
I didn't think the umpiring was all that bad. Its always shitty when the opposition get goals from frees that are there, but not that obvious. But that's the way it goes sometimes.
They were quick on the trigger with some 50's. Another week they won't be.
They were quick on the trigger with some 50's. Another week they won't be.
niceslacks
Senior List
That free against Chapman that led to the 50 was ridiculous. If you call that in the back, then you have to call 200 frees for incidental contact throughout the game. It was technical and ultimately was not in the spirit of how the game should be officiated.
hawkman
Hall of Famer
Like most games, the umpiring went with the flow of the game. Hawthorn got a good run early, Geelong got a good run late
I thought the umpiring was very average for a final. I thought it kept the Hawks in the game for a while. From memory they got 3 goals resulting from 50m penalties, and a dubious free kick to Lewis in front of goal which gifted them one.
- Jul 12, 2003
- 6,984
- 12,101
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Schoenmakers ducking his head into the tackle and getting a free for high contact.
If these amateurs were any good they wouldn't award free kicks.
Blatant ducking of the head and he got the free, right in front of the umpire.
Remember Chris Donlon is the umpire who reported Tarrant for the legitimate bump on Koschitzke.
The umpires are also not awake to Lewis' tactics at stoppages.
If these amateurs were any good they wouldn't award free kicks.
Blatant ducking of the head and he got the free, right in front of the umpire.
Remember Chris Donlon is the umpire who reported Tarrant for the legitimate bump on Koschitzke.
The umpires are also not awake to Lewis' tactics at stoppages.
Similar threads
