Something smells a bit fishy...

[- PC -]

Sorry to but in on your argument. Before Jones' the revelations and other observations that have emerged, I'd have scoffed at those suggestions, as I think you are. Now I'm not so sure.

Join in

Just interested to see if people really think the AFL and the umpires have an agenda to cheat.

Interstate sides have been alluding to this for months and we were told its our imagination

Funny that

 

[JeffDunne]

Join in

Just interested to see if people really think the AFL and the umpires have an agenda to cheat.

Interstate sides have been alluding to this for months and we were told its our imagination

Funny that

Funny then that you are so quick to dismiss these claims.

 

[Schneiderman]

I think the umpires should stay well away from legal action. Too costly, unlikely to get a conclusive outcome, makes you look too precious.

Well that will all depend on how the fans react. If undue pressure mounts on the two from a scanal that proves to be baseless, and something gives as a result, the umpires would be entitled to sue for lost wages. Considering the calibre of these umpires (ie. they have and will umpire GFs for a few years yet), there is a lot of money at stake.

 

[Murray]

1) I don't know.

I don't know exactly what happened so how could I say they should be sacked? I do feel however the AFL should have stood them down pending the results of the investigation. Any credible organisation would.

2) Do I believe they cheated? Hard question to answer. If you’re asking whether I thought they deliberately went out and tried to alter the result of the game, no I don't (not based on the evidence). Do I think they wanted to send St Kilda a message - bloody oath I do.

That's the problem I have with the umpires. Running battles between the umpires and certain clubs has gotten completely out of hand - that's the story in all this.


If (2) can be proven (and the evidence on the public record suggests rather than proves the case), then I'd definitely answer (1) as YES.

If this is nothing more than run-away egos and the umpires losing sight of their primary role, then I'm sure things can be sorted out less dramatically.

See either way I see this whole episode as a win for the clubs. Finally the AFL will need to address the issue rather than passing complaints off as biased whinging.

This may all look like a backdown, but I think we might actually see change.

I think it is deeper than that JD.

They snubbed StKilda pre-game - proven
Why?
The only reason could be because of the comments by GT.

It is then not such a huge leap to believe the words allegedly said by Head.

It is then not such a huge leap to expect Head to deny the words

Logically it all fits.

Of course it DOES require proof and their is Prima-facie evidence to that effect

 

[- PC -]

1) This may all look like a backdown, but I think we might actually see change.

Fair enough

Someone mentioned about getting the umpires ''handlers'' eg media handlers or training them how to deal with situations such as this.

Players are trained in media handling from the day they are recruited..what do umpires get? It also seems to me the umpires dont truly feel a part of the AFL or the clubs make them feel like outsiders. Whether this is the AFLs fault or the clubs reticence towards umpires I dont know..I would suggest the animosity comes from the clubs and their own self interest.

I can imagine 3 umpires sitting in the qantas lounge alone with reporters coming up to them asking them or just watching for a reaction to any fress or even GTs reactions. There is noone there looking after their interests and advising them that watching the last quarter may not be in their best interests.Then with all that scrutiny not only in the lounge but all night by 9..which they see... then to have a 9 reporter make a flippant comment would only enflame the feeling of aloneness.

I think this has been handled badly by the AFL but I do feel there is a hidden agenda by channel 9 to turn this into something bigger than there really is.

 

[- PC -]

Funny then that you are so quick to dismiss these claims.

Not really dismiss them... just dont think it warrants the beat up it got.

Live with it deal with it and get over it

Its my Neil Craig taught philosophy..when my teams players make less mistakes ( like being tackled from behind ) than the umpires then I will have something to say.

 

[noddy]

Heres a tip JD... interstate sides supporters have been B*tching about umpires for the last 3 months. Get over it

Try the last 16 years.

 

[JeffDunne]

Not really dismiss them... just dont think it warrants the beat up it got.

Live with it deal with it and get over it

Its my Neil Craig taught philosophy..when my teams players make less mistakes ( like being tackled from behind ) than the umpires then I will have something to say.

Neil Craig you'll find is like most other coaches but he is a smart operator. What he says is true, but when the games officials start sending his team "vibes" - he'll react.

The issue here is not umpriring decisions. Sure they are the focus of the publcis attention but I think everyone agrees interpretation and incorrect calls are a part of life. Happens in every sport, the difference is how it's handled.

But the issue is not about that. It's about umpires not following protocol, "innocent jibes" at players and officials, blatant bias against certain players - it's the umpires chosing to lose sight of their primary focus.

I don't doubt the comments were said on the plane. Why? Simply because there was already enough innuendo and off the record information to attrack the media's interest if this was nothing more than a witch-hunt. Remember this game was full of questionable decisions that rewarded one team goals - the media always make that an issue regardless - but it was also a game when the umpires "snubbed" a team before the game. There's enough innuendo there to keep the HeraldSun busy for a week.

There's an issue that needed to be addressed. Backdowns all around and no leagal action would indicate to me that maybe it's been resolved.

Either that or the AFL have used their influence to quell dissent.

If it's the former - fantastic and everyone move on.

It it's the later - god help us!