No Oppo Supporters The Umpiring thread.

[Rob]

So Chris Scott and Rodney Eade both apparently think that complaining to the umpire panel can pay off. But you never hear of Freo doing it. In fact Lyon this week actively dismissed the idea he would do it. Is that just him being proud? If he's doing it behind closed doors you wouldn't know it.

I guess it depends on why you're calling them. If you're just doing it to have a whinge then it's probably not worth it - may as well do that via the media and have the club pay the fine if you're not subtle enough. If it's to genuinely clarify the rule then the club would be negligent if they didn't follow it up. The Kersten deliberate late in the Melbourne game comes to mind as an obvious example of a genuine WTF decision that we would need to know whether it's actually the way it's now being umpired or they just ****ed up.

 

[estibador]

On that Kersten decision - there was an identical one on Friday night where one of the teams had flooded up the ground and on the quick break after a turnover a player went for a speculative 70m shot into an empty forward line. Bounced out of bounds just next to the post and, surprise, surprise, wasn't called deliberate.

 

[Grandstan]

On that Kersten decision - there was an identical one on Friday night where one of the teams had flooded up the ground and on the quick break after a turnover a player went for a speculative 70m shot into an empty forward line. Bounced out of bounds just next to the post and, surprise, surprise, wasn't called deliberate.

Given that Kennedy unequivocally defended the Kersten call, I expect he'll be out this week acknowledging it was the wrong decision.

 

[Nothing]

Given that Kennedy unequivocally defended the Kersten call, I expect he'll be out this week acknowledging it was the wrong decision.

Thanks for brightening an already bright Sunday morning. I haven't heard a decent joke in ages.

 

[Grandstan]

I guess it depends on why you're calling them. If you're just doing it to have a whinge then it's probably not worth it - may as well do that via the media and have the club pay the fine if you're not subtle enough. If it's to genuinely clarify the rule then the club would be negligent if they didn't follow it up. The Kersten deliberate late in the Melbourne game comes to mind as an obvious example of a genuine WTF decision that we would need to know whether it's actually the way it's now being umpired or they just ****** up.

When coaches say they are going to call the umps is it for genuine clarity? Perhaps some of the time, but it seems that much of the time it's to scapegoat and appease fans, which Lyon clearly doesn't give a rats about.
But going on the comments from Eade and Scott, another reason is to highlight areas you think the umps are repeatedly overlooking and improve future awareness. A few here would say Sandi arm chopping/Fyfe holding could fit into that category.
I'm not remotely a "lobby umpires every week" type, but surely if you don't play that game once in 5 years you're missing out.

 

[Scham]

On that Kersten decision - there was an identical one on Friday night where one of the teams had flooded up the ground and on the quick break after a turnover a player went for a speculative 70m shot into an empty forward line. Bounced out of bounds just next to the post and, surprise, surprise, wasn't called deliberate.

The kick was headed to the goal mouth though. And then took a break towards the boundary. The way Kennedy justified the Kerstin one was that Kerstins kick was straight down the ground from where he kicked it, i.e. not towards the goal.

 

[Scham]

When coaches say they are going to call the umps is it for genuine clarity? Perhaps some of the time, but it seems that much of the time it's to scapegoat and appease fans, which Lyon clearly doesn't give a rats about.
But going on the comments from Eade and Scott, another reason is to highlight areas you think the umps are repeatedly overlooking and improve future awareness. A few here would say Sandi arm chopping/Fyfe holding could fit into that category.
I'm not remotely a "lobby umpires every week" type, but surely if you don't play that game once in 5 years you're missing out.

Based on the treatment we get we should be in contact at least once a year imo. One of the reasons the Eagles get such a good run is because they whinge so much. Nisbett is a champion at it. And I remember during Wooshas reign he was always on about any unfair treatment of his players and there were very few post match interviews where he didn't say he was going to be in touch with Geishen during the week. It paid off.

 

[Tbonefreo]

Waiting for the vics to go off about the bias 'interstate' umpiring this arvo. Those clowns get a crazy suck on the tomato.

The umps try to prove the point against us anyway. Gonna be a slog today

 

[gaskin]

Waiting for the vics to go off about the bias 'interstate' umpiring this arvo. Those clowns get a crazy suck on the tomato.

The umps try to prove the point against us anyway. Gonna be a slog today

They started days ago on the Essendon board. Apparently the way we felt about the Derby umps when they were announced is how they feel about today's umpires.

 

[Gussman]

On that Kersten decision - there was an identical one on Friday night where one of the teams had flooded up the ground and on the quick break after a turnover a player went for a speculative 70m shot into an empty forward line. Bounced out of bounds just next to the post and, surprise, surprise, wasn't called deliberate.

And it happened a few weeks ago, where a bulldogs player did the same thing (I think against the Lions) in the final quarter. Deliberate wasn't called on the Bulldogs player either.

So the Kersten call is 100% bs.

 

[Tbonefreo]

They started days ago on the Essendon board. Apparently the way we felt about the Derby umps when they were announced is how they feel about today's umpires.

I like how they own anzac day but complain when they play 3 games in 2 weeks

 

[PurpleEyes]

I've been an amused reader of the Richmond board tonight, I didn't see the game but the general consensus on there is "we wuz robbed".
One interesting post though that caught my eye was that Richmond has not won the free kick count once this year.
Which surely in itself is enough to destroy the ridiculous conspiracy theories on here that the AFL is influencing outcomes through the umpiring department. If the AFL would want any club to succeed it would be Richmond

Below are Richmond's games so far this season and what I would expect of the umpiring given my research;
R1 A CA 12-25 - Carlton home game at the G. I would expect Carlton would win the Frees, especially if umpires trying to make a game of it opening round.
R2 H CO 21-25 - Collingwood at the G. Again, I would expect the Collingwood fans to outnumber Richmonds.
R3 H WC 21-26 - West Coast get unreasonably looked after ... even away from home.
R4 A BL 20-28 - An away game at the Gabba ... again no surprise to lose the Free Kick count.
R5 H ME 23-21 - Home game against Melbourne at the G, probably a good chance of winning the Frees ... which they did.
R6 A AD 15-21 - Away game at Adelaide, to be expected to lose the Free Kicks.
R7 H WB 13-25 - Western Bulldogs were looked after all last year, so again, no surprises here.

My experience with researching umpires and Free Kicks leads me to believe that umpires in general will of course look after home crowds, they will also often look after a team being beaten especially in big games at the G, they look after West Coast most of the time (it is just worse at Subi) and the umpires will tend to be harder on teams that are unbeaten and leading the competition (as happened to Freo in 2015 after 6 rounds win 6 wins). All of those theories fit perfectly with Richmond's current start to the season.

So no, Richmond's Free Kick stats in 2017, actually support my "ridiculous conspiracy theories".

 

[Mudd]

21-12 in our favour today, the AFL must know we have uncovered their master plan and put it on hold for a week.

 

[yoong]

21-12 in our favour today, the AFL must know we have uncovered their master plan and put it on hold for a week.

What are the odds that we send them a "please explain" email last week?

 

[stax on the mull]

The advantage paid for Brad Hill's goal in the 3rd term was as bad as any decision against us this year.

 

[Ripper]

21-12 in our favour today, the AFL must know we have uncovered their master plan and put it on hold for a week.

I was a bit embarrassed by it , I would be spewing if it was us on the end of it. I think a bit of it was Umpire Williamson umpiring WAFL style which is more ticky touchwood.

 

[Grape Bear]

What are the odds that we send them a "please explain" email last week?

I hope we did.

 

[Arcassius]

There was a high tackle we didn't get pinged for, and a mark outside of the boundary that should have been called OOB. A few non calls didn't go our way, but it was good to see fyfe getting some protection after being targeted and sat on.

 

[Okinakashi]

On that Kersten decision - there was an identical one on Friday night where one of the teams had flooded up the ground and on the quick break after a turnover a player went for a speculative 70m shot into an empty forward line. Bounced out of bounds just next to the post and, surprise, surprise, wasn't called deliberate.

And another one today by the Bombers.

Glad Kersten's didn't cost us the game.

 

[gaskin]

F*** em. I'll maintain they were a disgrace for the non deliberate call that was almost a carbon copy of Kersten's against Melbourne that was apparently the correct call.

 

[StingBitten]

And Tigers got reamed this week... we're in for a solid hosing next week.

 

[Nightrain]

Thought the umps gave us a bit too much love today. Not used to it and would rather not have it. I just want to see a fairly umpired contest and games won off our own bat. That said we would have won in any case but probably by less.

The advantage paid for Brad Hill's goal in the 3rd term was as bad as any decision against us this year.

Absolutely disgraceful call. It is getting to the point where it is becoming embarrassing to admit you are an avid follower of the game. s**t like that makes you feel you are watching WWE at times.

And Tigers got reamed this week... we're in for a solid hosing next week.

Yep was thinking the same thing in the car on the way home. I hope the boys don't forget to pack the KY next week.

 

[Yato]

Definitely pro-Freo today - we still would have won but we did get the rub of the green.
The thing is it is obvious when we do get the rub of the green because it only happens occasionally.

 

[ydraw]

Yeah players had stopped and were looking to gethe umpires for explanation when hill kicjed that goal.

 

[Clems Knee]

I was at the game and haven't seen the replay yet. The play on that Brad Hill got a goal from looked like it was a wrong decision, and there were some boundary non-decisions that we got an advantage from.

I'm sure when I watch the replay I'll see some non decisions and wrong decisions, and it felt like we got a home ground benefit. In the last four years the home ground advantage in umpiring decisions has been increasing, and on the surface, this appears to be another one.

I remember an EssendonFremantle game where a Freo player got a free kick as he kicked for goal. The umpire then asked the Essendon defender if the Freo player should take the kick for goal again. Not surprisingly the defender declined. My point? Anecdotal evidence doesn't necessarily reflect the whole story. One game where some umpiring decisions are in our favour doesn't change the statistics that much.