The Bulldogs and Umpires: Time for a Royal Commission?

[Banyo Bloods]

There was one maybe in the second quarter that the bulldog player hit the ball directly through for a behind outside of the box. No free for that maybe rules have changed on that wasn’t under particular pressure thought GWS deserved that one and a few jumper holds but dogs frees were mostly there. They are masters at drawing the free kick but it’s no secret and other teams have to adapt. Dogs were on and momentum carried them to victory even though they Tried hard to lose it early squandering opportunities.

 

[The 747]

Dogs were a far better team last night and should have won by ten goals. But errr the umpiring was questionable and cleary in their favour.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

There was one maybe in the second quarter that the bulldog player hit the ball directly through for a behind outside of the box. No free for that maybe rules have changed on that wasn’t under particular pressure thought GWS deserved that one and a few jumper holds but dogs frees were mostly there. They are masters at drawing the free kick but it’s no secret and other teams have to adapt. Dogs were on and momentum carried them to victory even though they Tried hard to lose it early squandering opportunities.

Last week a Geelong player punched it through from 15m out, with the nearest hawks 20m away.
I honestly think they've forgotten about the deliberate rushed behind

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

Was Bigfooty around in 1954? Be interesting to see if we deserved that one.

yeah they blamed the quick handball back in 1954 too, some things never change, arrogant clubs disliking the upstart Salty Marsh boys winning.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

This wasn't the correct night to bump this thread.

I observed that the correlation between the Bulldogs winning and a highly lopsided Free Kick count was significant.

Basically, if they don't dominate the Free Kick count, they don't win.

You're right that this is a totally different discussion to the OP, so appending it onto this thread probably wasn't ideal.

However the OP was never really about a conspiracy or bias necessarily, it was an observation on the incredibly unusual free kick count in Bulldogs games since Beveridge took over. So although GWS were just absolutely woeful last night, it was relevant.

 

[bresker]

Interestingly the GWS thugballs lost the free kick against North Melbourne last week too.

 

[Obeanie1]

Anybody who honestly believes the umpiring tonight was fair is beyond hope.

Wow I must have had too many last night. I didnt even notice the refs. Was watching on the tablet though.

 

[TheBont]

Royal commission lol

look we’re we are finishing on the ladder

 

[Northernsoul74]

Interestingly the GWS thugballs lost the free kick against North Melbourne last week too.

Weird, it’s almost like the team in the ascendency, with momentum, having a crack and getting to the ball first is more likely to get a free kick. Who’d have thought it? Pretty much like every team sport in the world. The whole free kick count should be equal argument from Afl fans is one of the more moronic arguments I’ve experienced following sport.

 

[GoalSneak38]

There was one maybe in the second quarter that the bulldog player hit the ball directly through for a behind outside of the box. No free for that maybe rules have changed on that wasn’t under particular pressure thought GWS deserved that one and a few jumper holds but dogs frees were mostly there. They are masters at drawing the free kick but it’s no secret and other teams have to adapt. Dogs were on and momentum carried them to victory even though they Tried hard to lose it early squandering opportunities.

Outside of the box. What game are you watching?

On moto g(7) plus using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Banyo Bloods]

Outside of the box. What game are you watching?

On moto g(7) plus using BigFooty.com mobile app

Take the goggles off and re-watch it second quarter

 

[RAPPA]

Bulldogs don’t kill games. Umpires kill games.

 

[The_Flying_Egg]

I am shocked that the team that came out just looking to niggle and fight gave away more free kicks than the team trying to actually play hard and put their head over the ball

 

[MinerBoy]

Wow I must have had too many last night. I didnt even notice the refs. Was watching on the tablet though.

And a different sport too............ refs?

 

[Testekill]

I for one am shocked that the team that went out looking to fight gave away a lot of frees.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I for one am shocked that the team that went out looking to fight gave away a lot of frees.

Not sure of the relevance really.

For example, Hopper, Williams and Shaw have away 10 Frees between them. None of them for 'fighting'. And they only had 7 Tackles between them.

Shaw himself gave away 3 Frees without even laying 1 Tackle.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Not sure of the relevance really.

For example, Hopper, Williams and Shaw have away 10 Frees between them. None of them for 'fighting'. And they only had 7 Tackles between them.

Shaw himself gave away 3 Frees without even laying 1 Tackle.

My observation is that free kicks aren't only conceded from tackles.

You now scragging, push in the back, incorrect disposal etc can cost you a free kick without you laying an actual tackle.

 

[Testekill]

Not sure of the relevance really.

For example, Hopper, Williams and Shaw have away 10 Frees between them. None of them for 'fighting'. And they only had 7 Tackles between them.

Shaw himself gave away 3 Frees without even laying 1 Tackle.

Shaw kicks the ball out on the full a lot, he makes front on contest a lot also and goes the body in marking contests.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

My observation is that free kicks aren't only conceded from tackles.

You now scragging, push in the back, incorrect disposal etc can cost you a free kick without you laying an actual tackle.

But that doesn't add up either.

Incorrect Disposal and 'scragging' have nothing to do with 'being first to the ball', and Incorrect Disposal has nothing to do with fighting either.

 

[Testekill]

My observation is that free kicks aren't only conceded from tackles.

You now scragging, push in the back, incorrect disposal etc can cost you a free kick without you laying an actual tackle.

Williams got run down a lot also, that'll explain a few of his frees as well.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Shaw kicks the ball out on the full a lot, he makes front on contest a lot also and goes the body in marking contests.

So what does that have to do with fighting?

 

[Bulldog Joe]

But that doesn't add up either.

Incorrect Disposal and 'scragging' have nothing to do with 'being first to the ball', and Incorrect Disposal has nothing to do with fighting either.

So you are being obtuse (naturally or deliberately).

I simply gave you an answer that provided a logical reason for players have free kicks paid against without being involved in tackling.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

So you are being obtuse (naturally or deliberately).

I simply gave you an answer that provided a logical reason for players have free kicks paid against without being involved in tackling.

It's not logical in the context of the statement that I responded to though, which was "I for one am shocked that the team that went out looking to fight gave away a lot of frees."

 

[Werewolf]

There was one maybe in the second quarter that the bulldog player hit the ball directly through for a behind outside of the box. No free for that maybe rules have changed on that wasn’t under particular pressure thought GWS deserved that one and a few jumper holds but dogs frees were mostly there. They are masters at drawing the free kick but it’s no secret and other teams have to adapt. Dogs were on and momentum carried them to victory even though they Tried hard to lose it early squandering opportunities.

I thought the free kick to Wallis against Williams in the first quarter was a bit harsh because they were both holding. Otherwise the Bulldogs tackling and attack on the ball was outstanding compared to the first two rounds, and the Giants were playing the man instead of the ball so the free kicks weren't surprising. What I found bizarre was how the Giants were so timid with their ball movement, they didn't take the game on at all

 

[Banyo Bloods]

I thought the free kick to Wallis against Williams in the first quarter was a bit harsh because they were both holding. Otherwise the Bulldogs tackling and attack on the ball was outstanding compared to the first two rounds, and the Giants were playing the man instead of the ball so the free kicks weren't surprising. What I found bizarre was how the Giants were so timid with their ball movement, they didn't take the game on at all

I was ok with that one because Williams tugged the jumper first and I'm assuming that's what got that call. No argument from me, dogs were the more settled outfit and focused on the pill that's why the free kicks were for the most part a result of the dogs effort.

I just called the one I mentioned because I was curious if the rule had been relaxed. Maybe there was pressure around the player I couldn't see as I only viewed it live and then the replay they showed.