Scandal The 2016 finals series was rigged

[matthew_s]

About?

losing.

 

[sprockets]

Thanks for putting that video up, it just shows the bias many footy supporters have. Most of the decisions in there were correct.

 

[Bald]

Thanks for putting that video up, it just shows the bias many footy supporters have. Most of the decisions in there were correct.

Was gonna say. If there was a conspiracy this video does nothing to aid that view

 

[ryancash]

It is an obvious question. So all the premierships since 2001 have been rigged. Why do you follow the sport then?

Exactly mate. Only an imbecile would still follow the game if they really believed this garbage.

 

[Mofra]

Yep, the AFL gave Buddy an ankle injury early in the game too.
Gosh they're clever

 

[Iskender Time]

they're all rigged mate, especially obvious from 2001 onwards. the VFL literally manufactured 3 dynasties, 2 were drug cheats

Collingwood having a dynasty would have been too much in the realms of fantasy so they just got one.

 

[big78sam]

Without Troy Pannell the Bulldogs would never have won the 2016 flag. As a dogs fan he should never have been allowed to umpire their games. His disgraceful 17-1 personal free kick count cost the crows a win. There were many other decisions, such as a "not 15" when sloane marked it 15 out straight in front that don't even count in that 17-1 count. The BOG that day was Stringer who had something linke 17 touches and 4 goals. His input was very similar statistically to Pannell's that day. We lost by a kick. It boggles the mind that he was butt tapping stringer as he was having a shot at goal.

Umpires get to have input into which game of the round they umpire when they are retiring. Guess which team played in the game Panell chose to umpire in his final game? I was there and watching his decisions that day and I was in no way surprised. His oither free kick counts in games he umpired with the bulldogs were always one way traffic.

That win cost the crows a top 4 spot. The dogs would have had to travel to Adelaide in the finals series and looking at the history of games between the 2 clubs, there is no way the dogs win in Adelaide.

Not that I'm bitter or anything.

 

[Blackhawk42]

If ever there was a year where a small-fry club from Victoria was the enemy within AFL house it was 2016 when the Bulldogs denied the AFL the all Sydney grand final they crave.

The only howler from that grand final was the non-decision against Wood with contact below the knees to Hannerbery.

Not every game needs an even free kick count. The Dogs had a small, fast side that had a mentality of 'win the footy at all costs'. It resulted in a lot of free kicks for high and in the back. Simple as that.

 

[BarryMorgan]

Without Troy Pannell the Bulldogs would never have won the 2016 flag. As a dogs fan he should never have been allowed to umpire their games. His disgraceful 17-1 personal free kick count cost the crows a win. There were many other decisions, such as a "not 15" when sloane marked it 15 out straight in front that don't even count in that 17-1 count. The BOG that day was Stringer who had something linke 17 touches and 4 goals. His input was very similar statistically to Pannell's that day. We lost by a kick. It boggles the mind that he was butt tapping stringer as he was having a shot at goal.

Umpires get to have input into which game of the round they umpire when they are retiring. Guess which team played in the game Panell chose to umpire in his final game? I was there and watching his decisions that day and I was in no way surprised. His oither free kick counts in games he umpired with the bulldogs were always one way traffic.

That win cost the crows a top 4 spot. The dogs would have had to travel to Adelaide in the finals series and looking at the history of games between the 2 clubs, there is no way the dogs win in Adelaide.

Not that I'm bitter or anything.

The blame for that loss lies squarely at the feet of the Crows and their failure to introduce the all-conquering power stance a year earlier.

 

[Cotchins Hair Piece]

Yep, the AFL gave Buddy an ankle injury early in the game too.
Gosh they're clever

Probably paid a free-kick against him when he fell over.

 

[brmi]

Swans got beaten by the better team on the day. They relied on a few star players to get them over the line and had too many passengers.

We played as a team and every bloke that pulled on the Red White and Blue had an impact or moment at some stage during the game, as did the blokes wearing Green. Can't the same for the Swans players.

 

[juss]

Embarrassing umpiring
but you know...
#bravedogs

Wasn't "rigged" but yeh Dogs got an absolute gift run that day with how influential the bad umpiring was in a close game.

I'd put it more down to unconscious bias or incompetence than anything else though.

 

[Bulldog1954]

That win cost the crows a top 4 spot. The dogs would have had to travel to Adelaide in the finals series and looking at the history of games between the 2 clubs, there is no way the dogs win in Adelaide.

Yeah no way the Dogs travel to Adelaide and win in the finals series. Sure we smashed West Coast in Perth who had beaten us 7 of the last 8 times there. And we smashed Hawthorn who had beaten us 8 times in a row. But no way we beat Adelaide who had beaten us 2 of the last 4 times we had played in Adelaide.

 

[dosser]

Wasn't "rigged" but yeh Dogs got an absolute gift run that day with how influential the bad umpiring was in a close game.

I'd put it more down to unconscious bias or incompetence than anything else though.

This.
There is no way that the AFL would deliberately rig games or they would lose all of the betting sponsorship. That is not to say that they don't attempt to influence the outcome before the game begins (see non-suspensions of Dunkley (96) and Hall (05)). However, as a Swans supporter living in Melbourne I recall the whole month of increasing media saturation of how this will be the year of a Bulldogs premiership, the 'brave bulldogs', etc until it became a case of anyone who was not an actual Swans supporter would be following the Bulldogs for the 'fairy tale'. The umps don't live in a vacuum and if there was going to be no unconscious bias then they would be supermen. To have one ump having a bad day (and all in the one direction) would be a pretty regular occurrence, to have two would be unusual, but to have all of them making mistakes in basically the same direction suggests that it wasn't cooincidence.
Once again, it was NOT RIGGED, however I believe that the subconscious bias was a real thing. And it wasn't just the frees that were paid, as every footy supporter knows, it is those that are not paid that cause the most frustration and there seemed to be an awful lot of them that went one way.
Anyway, it is five years ago and now is just a GF with an asterisk for Swans supporters. I think we have a lot to look forward to in our future at the moment.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

If ever there was a year where a small-fry club from Victoria was the enemy within AFL house it was 2016 when the Bulldogs denied the AFL the all Sydney grand final they crave.

The only howler from that grand final was the non-decision against Wood with contact below the knees to Hannerbery.

Not every game needs an even free kick count. The Dogs had a small, fast side that had a mentality of 'win the footy at all costs'. It resulted in a lot of free kicks for high and in the back. Simple as that.

This is the greatest myth from that game.

The rule (Lindsay Thomas Rule) was introduced to prevent sliding in and then got adapted to contact below the knees.

In the incident with Hannebery,
Wood DID NOT slide in
Wood DID NOT make contact below the knee

Fact is that Hannebery stepped across the ball into Wood's path and Wood connected with Hannebery above the knee. It was an ugly outcome but Wood played within the rules.

 

[Marmozet]

I couldn't agree more - the 2016 finals series was a set up.

Actually, the whole season was a crock.

I mean, what other explanation could there be for Port not making the 8?

In 2016?

That year was a complete write-off from the start for us when Ryder got rubbed out for the year + a high-injury toll.

 

[GetDimmaBack]

This.
There is no way that the AFL would deliberately rig games or they would lose all of the betting sponsorship. That is not to say that they don't attempt to influence the outcome before the game begins (see non-suspensions of Dunkley (96) and Hall (05)). However, as a Swans supporter living in Melbourne I recall the whole month of increasing media saturation of how this will be the year of a Bulldogs premiership, the 'brave bulldogs', etc until it became a case of anyone who was not an actual Swans supporter would be following the Bulldogs for the 'fairy tale'. The umps don't live in a vacuum and if there was going to be no unconscious bias then they would be supermen. To have one ump having a bad day (and all in the one direction) would be a pretty regular occurrence, to have two would be unusual, but to have all of them making mistakes in basically the same direction suggests that it wasn't cooincidence.
Once again, it was NOT RIGGED, however I believe that the subconscious bias was a real thing. And it wasn't just the frees that were paid, as every footy supporter knows, it is those that are not paid that cause the most frustration and there seemed to be an awful lot of them that went one way.
Anyway, it is five years ago and now is just a GF with an asterisk for Swans supporters. I think we have a lot to look forward to in our future at the moment.

I assume you realise that in 2005 every non WCE supporter was on the Swans bandwagon? You must have enjoyed that.

Of course it wasn't rigged.

Baz getting off for a punch to the guts, though...hmmm.

 

[GetDimmaBack]

In 2016?

That year was a complete write-off from the start for us when Ryder got rubbed out for the year + a high-injury toll.

Nah mate.

Rigged is rigged.

 

[dosser]

I assume you realise that in 2005 every non WCE supporter was on the Swans bandwagon? You must have enjoyed that.

Of course it wasn't rigged.

Baz getting off for a punch to the guts, though...hmmm.

Yes, I absolutely enjoyed that in the same way that you would have enjoyed it in 16.

 

[SSwans2011]

Across the finals series they went 48-89 free kicks. I'm not that shitted we lost because of the umpires, because I think GWS would have beaten us anyway, but I think the Bulldogs win was definitely aided by some questionable umpiring.

 

[SSwans2011]

This is the greatest myth from that game.

The rule (Lindsay Thomas Rule) was introduced to prevent sliding in and then got adapted to contact below the knees.

In the incident with Hannebery,
Wood DID NOT slide in
Wood DID NOT make contact below the knee

Fact is that Hannebery stepped across the ball into Wood's path and Wood connected with Hannebery above the knee. It was an ugly outcome but Wood played within the rules.

Lol yeah no contact below the knees there. You can argue the umpires didn't influence the outcome, but no need to lie.

 

[Sentinel]

Lol yeah no contact below the knees there. You can argue the umpires didn't influence the outcome, but no need to lie.

The rule prohibits 'making forceful contact below the knees'. Here's the exact point that the forceful impact was made by Wood's torso - to the knee, not below it.

 

[SSwans2011]

The rule prohibits 'forceful contact below the knee'. Here's the exact point that the forceful impact was made by Wood's torso - to the knee, not below it.

View attachment 1183709

Mate you're dreaming if you think no forceful contact was made below the knee

 

[Sentinel]

Mate you're dreaming if you think no forceful contact was made below the knee

Yeah I've seen it. Show me the point of impact below the knee.

You know also, even if that free kick was paid, the Swans would still have lost

 

[SSwans2011]

Yeah I've seen it. Show me the point of impact below the knee.

The rule stipulates that "any contact below the knee". Wood made contact with his knee, mostly above it, but undoubtedly partly below it too. Quite clearly too. Free kick every day of the week. The AFL have confirmed as much.