Autopsy Loss v Giants

BloodySwan

Premiership Player
Oct 2, 2016
3,713
6,043
AFL Club
Sydney

(Log in to remove this ad.)

robbieando

Moderator
Oct 9, 2001
16,084
8,601
Spitting Bars
AFL Club
Sydney
The AFL is right, we shouldn't expect the umpires to call incident which happened dead centre in front of them.
Now we know why the umpires miss so many free kicks, they can't be expected to pay something in real time when there are so many players around them. Like how can they be expected to do their job?
 

Wolftone

Premiership Player
Feb 1, 2012
3,209
2,513
Lilyfield
AFL Club
Sydney
Yeah so im saying make it the rule you can defend the arms so its always that way
The rule does not need changing. It is a very clear rule. You can't take hold of a player's arm and drag it down. The umpire got it wrong. Just like the same umpire got the Menzell 50 wrong. Getting the drift.

Where rules have no room for interpretation, either a player holds the arm or he doesn't, with three maggots out there the correct interpretation should always be paid. There is no reason for at least one umpire not to see that. It was as obvious as a Tom Cat's Cods. I mean even Blind Freddy saw that. Maybe I should just reserve places for these three in the St Kilda Road Campus of School For the Sight Impared.



On ANE-LX2J using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

The King!

Chosen One
Aug 3, 2004
100,255
80,419
Backwater
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Cavs, Redsox, Patriots
The rule does not need changing. It is a very clear rule. You can't take hold of a player's arm and drag it down. The umpire got it wrong. Just like the same umpire got the Menzell 50 wrong. Getting the drift.

Where rules have no room for interpretation, either a player holds the arm or he doesn't, with three maggots out there the correct interpretation should always be paid. There is no reason for at least one umpire not to see that. It was as obvious as a Tom Cat's Cods. I mean even Blind Freddy saw that. Maybe I should just reserve places for these three in the St Kilda Road Campus of School For the Sight Impared.



On ANE-LX2J using BigFooty.com mobile app

no argument from me the decision is wrong

as a defender id like to punch the arms
 

Wolftone

Premiership Player
Feb 1, 2012
3,209
2,513
Lilyfield
AFL Club
Sydney
No. Defenders get away with enough as it is. There are not enough goals scored and if you fu** that rule off it will ruin the game completely. There will never be a pack mark taken again. Everybody will just hold players arms down. That's how bloody silly your suggestion is. Think about it please.
it should have been a free, was a bulls**t decision

im just saying fu** the rule off and umps won't have to bother, defenders can then defend
On ANE-LX2J using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

The King!

Chosen One
Aug 3, 2004
100,255
80,419
Backwater
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Cavs, Redsox, Patriots
No. Defenders get away with enough as it is. There are not enough goals scored and if you fu** that rule off it will ruin the game completely. There will never be a pack mark taken again. Everybody will just hold players arms down. That's how bloody silly your suggestion is. Think about it please.

On ANE-LX2J using BigFooty.com mobile app

holding arms down would be holding the man

besides rance does it anyway

defenders can do fu** all compared to the old days
 

Wolftone

Premiership Player
Feb 1, 2012
3,209
2,513
Lilyfield
AFL Club
Sydney
no let defenders chop the arms again or defend the man

would make it easier for undersized defenders

used to be able to chop or belt a guy in the hands/arm

archer did it all the time
You were never allowed to do that. There were many frees paid for that. But the umpires back then were pretty slack on a lot of rules like smacking a bloke in the mouth, shirt fronting, killing players was almost allowed. So you'd go back to the bad old days where Spud The Thug Frawley just went out and punched a FF's head all day. He laughs about it. Well Plugger didn't like it one day so he dropped him. Umpire said nothing. Knew Frawley was a thug. Well good onya. Archer was another thug and David King. To return to a time where very ordinary players looked good because they were allowed to thump other players and hold other players down, see Silvagni the most overrated FB ever, then we might as well just shut up shop and follow NRL.

On ANE-LX2J using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BruceFromBalnarring

Norm Smith Medallist
Jan 13, 2007
6,306
7,652
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Could have only been cheating? Conspiratorial nonsense. Never explain as malice what can more easily be explained by incompetence. The umpires aren't perfect but to suggest some sort of conscious conspiracy is fanciful and embarassing.
I’ve tried to think of alternatives, really I have, and I’ve forgiven the Reid one (I’m a fan of Reid) but it’s the Menzel one (I’m not a fan of Menzel) I can’t think of an alternative explanation for.
 

The King!

Chosen One
Aug 3, 2004
100,255
80,419
Backwater
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Cavs, Redsox, Patriots
You were never allowed to do that. There were many frees paid for that. But the umpires back then were pretty slack on a lot of rules like smacking a bloke in the mouth, shirt fronting, killing players was almost allowed. So you'd go back to the bad old days where Spud The Thug Frawley just went out and punched a FF's head all day. He laughs about it. Well Plugger didn't like it one day so he dropped him. Umpire said nothing. Knew Frawley was a thug. Well good onya. Archer was another thug and David King. To return to a time where very ordinary players looked good because they were allowed to thump other players and hold other players down, see Silvagni the most overrated FB ever, then we might as well just shut up shop and follow NRL.

On ANE-LX2J using BigFooty.com mobile app

silvangi the full back of the century? righto

id go back to when defenders could actually defend , not punch someone , not just hold them, but defend

it would make rampes life easier
 

Mick Oxlong

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 27, 2007
10,616
11,823
AFL Club
Sydney

RobbieK

Club Legend
Aug 20, 2009
1,950
2,772
Berlin
AFL Club
Sydney
I’ve tried to think of alternatives, really I have, and I’ve forgiven the Reid one (I’m a fan of Reid) but it’s the Menzel one (I’m not a fan of Menzel) I can’t think of an alternative explanation for.
You need to try harder.

Seriously, things get missed all the time for all sorts of reasons. The game happens at a very fast pace and umpires can be easily blindsided. The difference between a fair contest and late contact is a fraction of a second. What seems obvious from one angle is not visible at all from another. Even with multiple umpires you can not realistically expect every infringement to get picked up. This is even more so true in our game where so many different interpretations exist that require subjective decisions to be made, not to mention the fact that the AFL is constantly making adjustments to these interpretations.

Watching on TV we get the luxury of multiple camera angles, multiple replays and slow motion. The umpires don't get that, they get one perspective and one split second to make a decision. They will make mistakes and miss things.

So, the umpires didn't cost us this game. They aren't out to get us in a conscious and concerted way. You need to accept that and move on. Umpiring issues are simply outside of our control. There are a bunch of things that we can't control - the weather, the ground size, the opponent's lineup, structures and plans. You don't lose a game because of any of these things that are outside of your control, you lose it because you don't do the things that ARE in your control well enough to either counter or maximise any advantage or disadvantage these things outside of your control cause.

As the AFL article here says, we lost it ourselves when players made a sequence of poor skill errors - missing very easy set shots, dropping a chest mark 20m out and gifting an easy goal with a poorly executed switch across the half back line... we were our own worst enemy in the final quarter. We had the opportunity to win the game, just like we did a few weeks ago against Freo, but ultimately we didn't play well enough. No one to blame but ourselves.
 
Last edited:

bungee

Jack's gone to have his back, crack and sack waxed
Aug 16, 2006
6,173
6,475
South East England.
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
I follow no other, only Swans
You were never allowed to do that. There were many frees paid for that. But the umpires back then were pretty slack on a lot of rules like smacking a bloke in the mouth, shirt fronting, killing players was almost allowed. So you'd go back to the bad old days where Spud The Thug Frawley just went out and punched a FF's head all day. He laughs about it. Well Plugger didn't like it one day so he dropped him. Umpire said nothing. Knew Frawley was a thug. Well good onya. Archer was another thug and David King. To return to a time where very ordinary players looked good because they were allowed to thump other players and hold other players down, see Silvagni the most overrated FB ever, then we might as well just shut up shop and follow NRL.

On ANE-LX2J using BigFooty.com mobile app
Luke Ablett (NOG) smashed through Archer in one game, knocked him over and quite literally walked over him. I loved him for it.
 

bungee

Jack's gone to have his back, crack and sack waxed
Aug 16, 2006
6,173
6,475
South East England.
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
I follow no other, only Swans
You need to try harder.

Seriously, things get missed all the time for all sorts of reasons. The game happens at a very fast pace and umpires can be easily blindsided. The difference between a fair contest and late contact is a fraction of a second. What seems obvious from one angle is not visible at all from another. Even with multiple umpires you can not realistically expect every infringement to get picked up. This is even more so true in our game where so many different interpretations exist that require subjective decisions to be made, not to mention the fact that the AFL is constantly making adjustments to these interpretations.

Watching on TV we get the luxury of multiple camera angles, multiple replays and slow motion. The umpires don't get that, they get one perspective and one split second to make a decision. They will make mistakes and miss things.

So, the umpires didn't cost us this game. They aren't out to get us in a conscious and concerted way. You need to accept that and move on. Umpiring issues are simply outside of our control. There are a bunch of things that we can't control - the weather, the ground size, the opponent's lineup, structures and plans. You don't lose a game because of any of these things that are outside of your control, you lose it because you don't do the things that ARE in your control well enough to either counter or maximise any advantage or disadvantage these things outside of your control cause.

As the AFL article here says, we lost it ourselves when players made a sequence of poor skill errors - missing very easy set shots, dropping a chest mark 20m out and gifting an easy goal with a poorly executed switch across the half back line... we were our own worst enemy in the final quarter. We had the opportunity to win the game, just like we did a few weeks ago against Freo, but ultimately we didn't play well enough. No one to blame but ourselves.
Sure we had our chances but I cannot accept that the umpires didn't cost us this game. Despite being a young side, getting smashed in the hitouts and yes, making lots of errors, our boys won 3 of 4 quarters and had no less than 3 chances to win the game in the dying minutes all denied by poor or biased umpiring. Menzel's 50m was as clear as day, Reid arms were clearly pulled down, not chopped but pulled in plain sight. Finally, the free against Fox was ridiculous. How can that last be due to the umpire being blind-sided ? If he didn't see it then how could he call it ?

I'm not like our most loyal fan Leg-End who sees AFL conspiracies in every shadow (through rose/white coloured glasses) yet this game simply smacked of AFL bias. The AFL want to grow the game in NSW so the ideal ending for them at the GWS home ground was a close fought finish where the rebuilding Swans gave their best, came close but the new club got the points and boosted their finals chances. Fans are satisfied and the AFL makes out like a bandit on TV rights as the derby goes up another notch. The umpires' employer is the AFL so naturally they make their calls at the discretion and direction of the AFL when required.
 

RobbieK

Club Legend
Aug 20, 2009
1,950
2,772
Berlin
AFL Club
Sydney
Sure we had our chances but I cannot accept that the umpires didn't cost us this game. Despite being a young side, getting smashed in the hitouts and yes, making lots of errors, our boys won 3 of 4 quarters and had no less than 3 chances to win the game in the dying minutes all denied by poor or biased umpiring. Menzel's 50m was as clear as day, Reid arms were clearly pulled down, not chopped but pulled in plain sight. Finally, the free against Fox was ridiculous. How can that last be due to the umpire being blind-sided ? If he didn't see it then how could he call it ?

I'm not like our most loyal fan Leg-End who sees AFL conspiracies in every shadow (through rose/white coloured glasses) yet this game simply smacked of AFL bias. The AFL want to grow the game in NSW so the ideal ending for them at the GWS home ground was a close fought finish where the rebuilding Swans gave their best, came close but the new club got the points and boosted their finals chances. Fans are satisfied and the AFL makes out like a bandit on TV rights as the derby goes up another notch. The umpires' employer is the AFL so naturally they make their calls at the discretion and direction of the AFL when required.
There is simply no evidence that the AFL is directing umpires to officiate the games in a way that targets any team in a positive or a negative way. None.

There is evidence that umpires can act in unimpartial or incompetent ways that can hurt or help a team. No doubt. They are human. But that is not the same thing as saying these mistakes are pre-planned and controlled from above.

Not only is there no evidence, the AFL simply isn't competent enough to do such a thing and keep it under wraps.

If you don't wanted to be lumped in with irrational conspiracy theorists I'd suggest the best thing to do would be not spout irrational conspiracy theories.
 

bungee

Jack's gone to have his back, crack and sack waxed
Aug 16, 2006
6,173
6,475
South East England.
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
I follow no other, only Swans
There is simply no evidence that the AFL is directing umpires to officiate the games in a way that targets any team in a positive or a negative way. None.

There is evidence that umpires can act in unimpartial or incompetent ways that can hurt or help a team. No doubt. They are human. But that is not the same thing as saying these mistakes are pre-planned and controlled from above.

Not only is there no evidence, the AFL simply isn't competent enough to do such a thing and keep it under wraps.

If you don't wanted to be lumped in with irrational conspiracy theorists I'd suggest the best thing to do would be not spout irrational conspiracy theories.
.....And if you don't want to be lumped in with the illogical AFL apologists I'd suggest the best thing to do would be not to spout irrational apologies.

Umpires are employed by the AFL. Personal bias is less logical than organisational bias when it's fairly consistent across the umpiring fraternity, especially when the AFL has complete control of the umpires. Do you really think they just exercise their personal bias and/or incompetence and the AFL is cool about that ?

My point stands no matter who is pulling the strings. Umpiring bias and/or failings cost us this game.
 

RobbieK

Club Legend
Aug 20, 2009
1,950
2,772
Berlin
AFL Club
Sydney
.....And if you don't want to be lumped in with the illogical AFL apologists I'd suggest the best thing to do would be not to spout irrational apologies.

Umpires are employed by the AFL. Personal bias is less logical than organisational bias when it's fairly consistent across the umpiring fraternity, especially when the AFL has complete control of the umpires. Do you really think they just exercise their personal bias and/or incompetence and the AFL is cool about that ?

My point stands no matter who is pulling the strings. Umpiring bias and/or failings cost us this game.
This is nonsense. I'm an "AFL apologist" because I called them too incompetent to run the scam you believe they are perpetrating?

The AFL does not have complete control over what is happening on the football field. There are simply far too many variables, too many people involved, too much scrutiny to allow the kind of scheme you believe is being undertaken to last for any amount of time without it being exposed and becoming the kind of scandal that would destroy the game.

If we had executed better on three or four of those key plays in the final quarter no amount of umpiring bias would have been able to effect the result. Umpiring calls/non calls hurt us, but they didn't cost us the game. We managed to do that ourselves.
 

bungee

Jack's gone to have his back, crack and sack waxed
Aug 16, 2006
6,173
6,475
South East England.
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
I follow no other, only Swans
This is nonsense. I'm an "AFL apologist" because I called them too incompetent to run the scam you believe they are perpetrating?

The AFL does not have complete control over what is happening on the football field. There are simply far too many variables, too many people involved, too much scrutiny to allow the kind of scheme you believe is being undertaken to last for any amount of time without it being exposed and becoming the kind of scandal that would destroy the game.

If we had executed better on three or four of those key plays in the final quarter no amount of umpiring bias would have been able to effect the result. Umpiring calls/non calls hurt us, but they didn't cost us the game. We managed to do that ourselves.
Robbie it's sweet and naiive that you believe its not biased but you live in a dream world. Of course the AFL seeks to steer the competition to meet their objectives to spread the game at grassroots level, develop key markets and monetise the TV, streaming and merchandise rights. Sometimes its obvious like the trading ban but most times its far more subtle.

It's not hard. They talk. The AFL umpires know the objectives and the preferred outcomes, though of course they can't be seen to influence the games. Still they know which side their bread is buttered on. So they give a soft free, miss a free, a missed 50m, a momentum killer if needed. Of course they try to tidy up the stats if they're too lop sided, usually by awarding junk time frees. Nothing too obvious but watch the 2016 GF if you want to see AFL bias.

Normally it would never be as obvious as 3 errors in one team's favour in the dying minutes but the weekend's game was very close. Pay any of those correctly and the outcome is not what the AFL prefers. So to defuse accusations of bias the AFL admits the umpire made an error and thus they absolve themselves of blame. Issue AFL apology, defend umpires, rinse repeat.

it's only by calling them out that we can mitigate this behaviour.

BTW. Horse says "WTF ?"

1565029860335.png
 

Top Bottom