The last game of Razor Ray's career

[GordonGecko]

Link didn't work for me but Im assuming it's the one in the last quarter for LRT.

LRT had his head over the ball and Fyfe runs in and makes contact with the head. LRT may have kept his head down for a little bit but Fyfe should know that he has to tackle him correctly there as he's the one that makes contact.

It is the last quarter.

LRT ducks, there are two movements, he ducks his head and lurches forward.

Fyfe comes to a halt and LRT with a head ducked sprawls forward into Fyfe.

It's a joke of a call.

 

[.Shotties.]

It is the last quarter.

LRT ducks, there are two movements, he ducks his head and lurches forward.

Fyfe comes to a halt and LRT with a head ducked sprawls forward into Fyfe.

It's a joke of a call.

Sorry, didn't result directly in a goal therefore it didn't advantage Sydney / wasn't a bad call.

 

[DTRAIN87]

It is the last quarter.

LRT ducks, there are two movements, he ducks his head and lurches forward.

Fyfe comes to a halt and LRT with a head ducked sprawls forward into Fyfe.

It's a joke of a call.

We all know these types of tackles lead to frees. Has been the case all the last two years.

 

[Alfonz]

See that's the thing, you went and tallied up all the kicks given and ummed and ahhhd a bit but what was frustrating for Sydney fans are cases where Jesse White had a 50 against him. To the letter of the law, yes it was there, but then in a free kick at the other end in the same quarter a free is given and Lower soccers the ball away, wasting more time than White with no fifty.

Right before the Malceski free, Mayne knocked out Mattner flying for a mark without making contact, not paid and a moment later the ridiculous HTB, which wasn't paid with the same severity for Ballantyne or Fyfe gave Freo another shot. The Ballantyne free after a goal was also technically correct, but why was that paid and not against Ballantyne who came in and bumped Grundy and missed a few swipes before Grundy jumper punched him. You're not allowed to attempt to strike your opponent either and Razor was there for it.

I think you might be missing the point. You can keep bringing up things that went against Sydney and not factoring in that similar frustrating decisions went in favour of Sydney. I'm not denying we didn't get an overall advantage, but it isn't anywhere near the horrifying-blatant-cheating-worst-one-sided-umpiring performance of all time that some want others to believe.

By the way, if Ballantyne flails his arms around and makes no illegal contact to Grundy, then lo and behold it is not a free kick. Are you proposing the umpire gives a free kick away for "attempting to make high contact", when a player actually makes no high contact?

 

[.Shotties.]

I think you might be missing the point. You can keep bringing up things that went against Sydney and not factoring in that similar frustrating decisions went in favour of Sydney.

Which apart from a few token comments, you did as well.

By the way, if Ballantyne flails his arms around and makes no illegal contact to Grundy, then lo and behold it is not a free kick. Are you proposing the umpire gives a free kick away for "attempting to make high contact", when a player actually makes no high contact?

No, I'm proposing a free is given if when the ball is dead and a player makes two attempts to hit another player, whether successful or not.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

If there were any mistakes I'am sure that Jeff would admit it. As I have said in other forums the level of accuracy the umpires have is very high!

I suggest you never repeat this statement verbally. Bullshit that strong is bound to leave an after taste.

We all know these types of tackles lead to frees. Has been the case all the last two years.

Correct, but should no longer be the case. It is my understanding that umpires have been told to interpret high contact differently if the contact is contributed to by a player ducking their head. Needs to be jumped on because the number of players putting their head down and effectively ramming their heads into another player to get a kick is increasing.

 

[Mcveigh]

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8274690

"I did speak to him on Monday, he was good, we went through a number of the free-kicks," Longmire told reporters on Tuesday.


"We agreed on some, he admitted some were wrong, he admitted some were right.

Only just saw this article, seems to be the only one that specifically mentions there there were incorrect calls made. Pretty pathetic of the Geish/AFL to only point out the correct decisions on "what's your call" doesn't create a very balanced or constructive view does it?

meh...

 

[GordonGecko]

Sorry, didn't result directly in a goal therefore it didn't advantage Sydney / wasn't a bad call.

Yes it did.

 

[.Shotties.]

Yes it did.

Nope, sorry. Went to a contest which apparently doesn't count.

Anyway, what was your problem with the free again? You said Fyfe stood still and LRT ran into him, correct?

At the point LRT collects the ball Fyfe is standing in the middle of the 5. By the time LRT has planted his other foot, Fyfe has gone over the top. Can you run past me how Fyfe could have come to a halt before making contact in this situation given that he's moved forward?

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

Regardless of that, LRT ducked like a Selwood in to the tackle

You can't deny that he ducked

Yes, Fyfe advanced, as you would if someone picked up the ball in front of you to lay the tackle. As far as I can see Fyfe did nothing wrong

LRT was in the wrong - by putting his own safety at risk by ducking in to a tackle

 

[.Shotties.]

Regardless of that, LRT ducked like a Selwood in to the tackle

You can't deny that he ducked

Yes, Fyfe advanced, as you would if someone picked up the ball in front of you to lay the tackle. As far as I can see Fyfe did nothing wrong

LRT was in the wrong - by putting his own safety at risk by ducking in to a tackle

How could he have ducked if he hadn't straightened up? There was less than half a second from when he collected the ball to when he was hit. Should he have come to a complete halt in that time?

 

[rhinowce]

How could he have ducked if he hadn't straightened up? There was less than half a second from when he collected the ball to when he was hit. Should he have come to a complete halt in that time?

It was pretty obvious that he was playing for the free, seen fyfe coming chose to keep his head down surely you can see that.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

Nope, sorry. Went to a contest which apparently doesn't count.

Anyway, what was your problem with the free again? You said Fyfe stood still and LRT ran into him, correct?

At the point LRT collects the ball Fyfe is standing in the middle of the 5. By the time LRT has planted his other foot, Fyfe has gone over the top. Can you run past me how Fyfe could have come to a halt before making contact in this situation given that he's moved forward?

Nice sleuthing there, but you're no Columbo.

Observe in the first frame that Fyfe is grounding his right foot and his left is in the air. At this stage LRT looks to be approximately a metre away. In the second frame Fyfe has grounded his left foot roughly 10-12cm ahead of where it was in the air, his right foot is now firmly grounded. LRT has made up ground and cannons head first into a now stationary Fyfe. Your incorrect interpretation of the events is contributed to by the viewer's position changing with the camera panning from one frame to the next.

 

[Mcveigh]

You're all wrong!

Both players stopped moving immediately, however razor ray wanted to blow his whistle so he bent space and time with his own ego, creating a mini black hole that removed the space inbetween the players, causing a vacuum which sucked them together

Only then was he "correct" in blowing his whistle.


note: I don't care whether ray was the umpire or not, it happened.... =/

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

i lol'd - good one

 

[.Shotties.]

It was pretty obvious that he was playing for the free, seen fyfe coming chose to keep his head down surely you can see that.

It was less then half a second from when he got the ball to when he was hit, sprinting in wet weather. I think you're giving a little too much credit as to how much a player can process in those circumstances.

 

[giantsully]

I think you might be missing the point. You can keep bringing up things that went against Sydney and not factoring in that similar frustrating decisions went in favour of Sydney. I'm not denying we didn't get an overall advantage, but it isn't anywhere near the horrifying-blatant-cheating-worst-one-sided-umpiring performance of all time that some want others to believe.

By the way, if Ballantyne flails his arms around and makes no illegal contact to Grundy, then lo and behold it is not a free kick. Are you proposing the umpire gives a free kick away for "attempting to make high contact", when a player actually makes no high contact?

YOU GOT 8 GOALS FROM SOFT/WRONG FREE KICKS!!!!

What exactly would make the "horrifying-blatant-cheating-worst-one-sided-umpiring performance of all time" for you? I'm guessing being on the other end of this shafting would make you pretty damn sad.

 

[stellation]

Regardless of that, LRT ducked like a Selwood in to the tackle

You can't deny that he ducked

Yes, Fyfe advanced, as you would if someone picked up the ball in front of you to lay the tackle. As far as I can see Fyfe did nothing wrong

LRT was in the wrong - by putting his own safety at risk by ducking in to a tackle

LRT is what, 6'5"? How else was he supposed to pick the ball up without putting his head down?

 

[Roddy]

As a neutral fan, the Swannies were shafted, r*ped, monstered and scewed by inept and lop-sided umpiring the other day. Disgraceful effort by a bunch of over-acting prima donnas who think they're the reason people go.

 

[DTRAIN87]

YOU GOT 8 GOALS FROM SOFT/WRONG FREE KICKS!!!!

What exactly would make the "horrifying-blatant-cheating-worst-one-sided-umpiring performance of all time" for you? I'm guessing being on the other end of this shafting would make you pretty damn sad.

A pity they have all been proven to be correct. In fact the only one that was criticised was the last one that led to 50 for not giving the ball back because he took too long.

 

[.Shotties.]

A pity they have all been proven to be correct. In fact the only one that was criticised was the last one that led to 50 for not giving the ball back because he took too long.

The fact that they were technically correct isn't the issue. The fact that those same technically there free kicks weren't paid going the other way, but you obviously didn't watch the game so there's no real point discussing it with you.

 

[skzm]

The fact that they were technically correct isn't the issue. The fact that those same technically there free kicks weren't paid going the other way...

Dont worry mate...I know it is a strange feeling for a Swans supporter but you'll get used it now that GWS has joined. Us Sydney Bombers can offer you guidance in dealing with being screwed by the umps...

 

[.Shotties.]

Dont worry mate...I know it is a strange feeling for a Swans supporter but you'll get used it now that GWS has joined. Us Sydney Bombers can offer you guidance in dealing with being screwed by the umps...

Nah. Every game you guys have sooked about the umps you've been beaten in most stats that count and got away with shit like McPhee's kick from the Members stand bar or the Hocking to McVeigh throw for a goal this year.

 

[Confuscius]

By the way, if Ballantyne flails his arms around and makes no illegal contact to Grundy, then lo and behold it is not a free kick. Are you proposing the umpire gives a free kick away for "attempting to make high contact", when a player actually makes no high contact?

Didn't see the game so I can't comment on the umpiring, but just thought I would say that Steven Baker has been suspended for 'attempting to strike', so there must be a rule against it somewhere.

 

[Plugger35]

A pity they have all been proven to be correct. In fact the only one that was criticised was the last one that led to 50 for not giving the ball back because he took too long.

Thanks Jeff.

You can make an argument to justify almost any free kick if you want to get technical, Gieschen and Anderson are masters of it.

The fact is that Sydney had a lot of very soft free kicks go against them, several of which cost them goals. The umpires could have let those incidents go and let the players decide the game but as they so often do they had to interfere and ruin the game with heavy handed umpiring and grandstanding.