Roast Stevic and co - all anti-Swans conspiracies within

[sr20]

There was a stretch (can't remember if it was the second or third quarter) when Hawthorn went down the wing from one end of the ground to the other, and I swear every contest in that passage was accompanied by a whistle and a free kick to Hawthorn. One or two of them I thought were there, the others I thought 'literally nothing happened there to warrant a free'. To me it felt like momentum frees. Like we gave away the first one or two in that passage, and so then the umpires were on our case at the following few contests looking for anything. It goes both ways. It's happened to us where we've had a quick succession of frees go our way.

I think momentum frees are an umpiring issue in general and Clarkson, the self-assumed advocate for umpiring equality, should focus on umpiring even in wins if that's the route he wants to take. Bringing it up after a loss, and singling out only one-sided examples for his argument's sake, achieves absolutely nothing.

I remember it from being at the game in the 2nd Quarter - Gunston got the free kick for a hold and subsequently goaled. Back to the centre, we kicked it forward and Heeney snapped the goal. Awarded a goal and taken back to the centre, only to be overturned and returned to a kick in. Free kick for Hawthorn on Sydneys 50 from the kick in. free kick for Hawthorn on the Win from that kick. Free kick to Hawthorn on their 50 from that kick. So they got 4 free kicks and a Swans goal
Overturned within the space of 2 minutes.

 

[sataris]

Vince McMahon would be proud.

 

[The King!]

Clarko may see this thread

 

[sataris]

Clarko may see this thread

I'll wait for him to send me an email.

 

[Andyjh]

When will we see a replay of the shot McVeigh I think it was insisted he touched

The VFL has probably "lost the footage"

 

[sataris]

They've essentially implemented a rule change at the request of Hawthorn.

 

[Jewelsbon]

They've essentially implemented a rule change at the request of Hawthorn.

Yep, are you surprised?

 

[RW]

They've essentially implemented a rule change at the request of Hawthorn.

From what I can see the changes seem aimed at making defenders more accountable. Which isn't a bad thing for the competition. But it's too early to predict what the impact will be, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[cherub]

From what I can see the changes seem aimed at making defenders more accountable. Which isn't a bad thing for the competition. But it's too early to predict what the impact will be, we'll just have to wait and see.

I think you take the "moderate" in moderator too far!!!!

 

[sataris]

From what I can see the changes seem aimed at making defenders more accountable. Which isn't a bad thing for the competition. But it's too early to predict what the impact will be, we'll just have to wait and see.

Doesn't matter.

Hawthorn are effectively in charge of the AFL.

 

[Number37]

From what I can see the changes seem aimed at making defenders more accountable. Which isn't a bad thing for the competition. But it's too early to predict what the impact will be, we'll just have to wait and see.

Make defenders more accountable?
There is never any rule change where there isn't unintended consequences.
Watch forwards play for free kicks from now on.

 

[sataris]

Still in disbelief that Hawthorn can make changes to the game without anyone challenging them.

 

[RW]

I think you take the "moderate" in moderator too far!!!!

Perhaps, but I like to look at both sides of an issue.

 

[aussietomt]

We didnt play that badly mate.

Fair dinkum, tribunal has been going for an hour...originally they sat for 15 minutes to set the brothers Curnow free.
Word coming out....."it's bigger than O J Simpson".
Laughable the whole thing. One decision only for Ed Curnow...out. Have a little more sympathy for Charlie Curnow.
Why were the umpires asked for evidence ....all the facts were there.

 

[Tuco]

So for years the AFL has been paying dozens of umpires to deliberately give wins to teams at the expense of others, and at no point has any umpire or former umpire spoken to anyone about it?

That's up there with "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" tbh

While I agree with your point, that's not exactly how corruption works.

When lawmakers choose how and when the rules apply, or even who they should aplly to in an an arbitrary manner things can go south quickly.

The FBI didn't even acknowkedge the existence of organized crime until a 1950 Senate Committee forced it to start investigating the Mafia.

J Edgar Hoover famously declared the mafia was a myth (while criminal bosses paraded the incriminating photoes thry had of him at gay swingers events for shits and giggles at parties).

In truth the local government, state and federal law enforcement, the judiciary and even the military industrial complex had all been corruptly collaborating for two centuries with the Mafia at one time or another.

But no, if anything in the AFL I think we just have some conflicts of interest, a lack of impartiality, and some "please the master" subconscious pandering going on.

 

[sataris]

"I'm holding them up for you" - AFL umpire.

 

[Tesla Tenet]

Sorry if not allow.

Hi all, just picked this up from another board, and some still claim there is no interstate bias, one way or the other. You can make your own conclusions.

Very interesting indeed.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Sorry if not allow.

Hi all, just picked this up from another board, and some still claim there is no interstate bias, one way or the other. You can make your own conclusions.

Very interesting indeed.

I did a similar analysis to same conclusion several years ago. I didnt tally it like that but quickly realised the bias evidence

 

[sataris]

I did a similar analysis to same conclusion several years ago. I didnt tally it like that but quickly realised the bias evidence

Are there any non-vic umpires running around?

 

[luderick]

I did a similar analysis to same conclusion several years ago. I didnt tally it like that but quickly realised the bias evidence

It’s hard to understand interstate teams at both extremes - fully expect the swans to be where they are but WC ?? Why


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Are there any non-vic umpires running around?

As at 2017 there were 5 (WA), 4 (SA), 2 (QLD), 2 (TAS), 1 (ACT) and the vast majority 17 (VIC).

I wouldnt be surprised if the AFL allow WA umpires to umpire WA matches because of travel time/ cost. If there is such a policy that would explain WCE bias

 

[sataris]

As at 2017 there were 5 (WA), 4 (SA), 2 (QLD), 2 (TAS), 1 (ACT) and the vast majority 17 (VIC).

I wouldnt be surprised if the AFL allow WA umpires to umpire WA matches because of travel time/ cost. If there is such a policy that would explain WCE bias

That's the only thing I can think of.

Also if those numbers are correct, there are more Astronauts then AFL Umpires.

Astronauts: 44
AFL Umpires: 31

 

[Angry Red Bull]

That's the only thing I can think of.

Also if those numbers are correct, there are more Astronauts then AFL Umpires.

Astronauts: 44
AFL Umpires: 31

The flights in and out of WA almost mandates use of WA umpires else there would be overnight accommodation cost each time. If that is the way they do things omg what a pack of idiots. Bit like the bad old days of Indian cricket umpires.

"I don't care you hit it and was 2 feet down leg side you're out LBW!"

 

[Troystenvic]

Sorry if not allow.

Hi all, just picked this up from another board, and some still claim there is no interstate bias, one way or the other. You can make your own conclusions.


Very interesting indeed.

How can you argue that dogs weren't gifted a flag in 2016

 

[SwansProudly]

Tony Lockett and Lance Franklin were rarely given free kicks (Tony was like zero?). Apart from the frees for/against differential, it would be interesting where on the field the opposition were given free kicks compared to the Swans.