No Oppo Supporters The Umpiring thread.

[Cobbler]

I dont think the bookies would put up with it they are the ones that make the money.

Unless your implying its the bookies swinging games in there favour acourding to what there worst pay days are? In which case they are mathematicians they dont need to fix matches which is why they have the best tipping ratio, they make money without having to fix and wouldn't jeopardize a multi million dollar business to do so. Now seeing how good they are at tipping you could assume they analyse all umps players grounds coaches etc and tip accordingly.

Is there underground AFL betting?

Im not saying it couldn't happen just think its very unlikely and a few calls against a good team like Adelaide etc wouldn't effect the outcome of the game

We were paying $3 before the teams were announced. Teams get announced and we instantly blow out to $3.50

Was an injured Mitchell, Giles and Mutimer worth that sort of fluctuation?

Was an Eagles loving Margetts, scorned Fisher and the other knob capable of such a swing in betting?

You're a bit blind to the world if you don't think any major sport isn't influenced by betting.

If you can make money on something, people will always find a way to manipulate it in their favour.

Put it this way. I'd have happily put all of my life savings and my parents and my grand parents life savings on Freo not winning the free kick count last night.

Easily predictable by everyone on these threads as soon as the umpires were listed.

 

[salim malik]

It will be a laugh when WC get pansted by Port next week and we knock of Essendon and its back to 4 and 3 for both sides. And for a bigger belly laugh WC front up to the Bulldogs the week after. Humour plus.

 

[Clems Knee]

I dont think the bookies would put up with it they are the ones that make the money.

Unless your implying its the bookies swinging games in there favour acourding to what there worst pay days are? In which case they are mathematicians they dont need to fix matches which is why they have the best tipping ratio, they make money without having to fix and wouldn't jeopardize a multi million dollar business to do so. Now seeing how good they are at tipping you could assume they analyse all umps players grounds coaches etc and tip accordingly.

Is there underground AFL betting?

Im not saying it couldn't happen just think its very unlikely and a few calls against a good team like Adelaide etc wouldn't effect the outcome of the game

I didn't mean that the bookies fix matches. I hope you are right and that betting syndicates haven't been involved to fix matches, but if the will to check on this isn't there, it could go on for years before anyone finds out.

Soccer, horse racing and cricket are comparatively easy to fix, I accept.

 

[gaskin]

I just read this on Facebook and couldn't believe my eyes:

Im an eagles fan and I'll even say it was biased as shit

 

[Ressies runner]

You're a bit blind to the world if you don't think any major sport isn't influenced by betting.

How the hell did you get that from what i posted? I didn't say that

 

[Mudd]

Umpiring inconsistency is no doubt a blight on the game. It is partly influenced by incompetence/lack of professionalism and training, and partly influenced by what are no doubt instructions given to watch out for certain players or certain teams that are doing x.y.z. It has nothing to do with AFL corruption or predetermined outcomes in games.
It's embarrassing how many people we have on here that believe the latter nonetheless. A couple of them are complete crackpots that I am not allowed to call out because I get infraction points for doing so. But most of you are otherwise sane people - I don't get it.

Well said

I've never understood the fascination about umpiring errors, or the argument that a couple of bad calls will cause professional footballers to drop their bundle and cause a momentum change.

Blame the things that we can control like our own bonehead players bombing it into McGovern's fat guts all night.

 

[Ressies runner]

Was an Eagles loving Margetts, scorned Fisher and the other knob capable of such a swing in betting?

Yes

 

[Ressies runner]

I didn't mean that the bookies fix matches. I hope you are right and that betting syndicates haven't been involved to fix matches, but if the will to check on this isn't there, it could go on for years before anyone finds out.

Soccer, horse racing and cricket are comparatively easy to fix, I accept.

If you did pay off the umps it would have to be just to make sure the favourite got over the line otherwise still to many variables. And even then the fav is paying **** all massive bets and a lot of risk, hard sport to try fix

 

[ep2018]

It will be a laugh when WC get pansted by Port next week and we knock of Essendon and its back to 4 and 3 for both sides. And for a bigger belly laugh WC front up to the Bulldogs the week after. Humour plus.

Wouldn't be writing the Port game off just yet, we have had a good record against them and at Adelaide oval the past few years. And barring the finals last year, the Dogs are shizen at Subi, as they were when they played you a few weeks ago, wouldn't be surprised to pull off a win there too.

 

[Square Peg]

How do you prove that it's nothing to do with AFL corruption or predetermined outcomes in games? Who is making sure that the game is fair?

I like the umpires adviser. He gets on to chat about a few decisions every week and I have no doubts about his integrity. I have known three WAFL umpires quite well and I have no doubts as to their integrity.

But I think the systems that the AFL have set in place do not protect the integrity of the game sufficiently.

The statistical analysis that I linked on page 1 should have sent alarm bells ringing across the industry. West Coast get a consistent and unfair advantage at home. We all know about Leigh Fisher's record umpiring Ross Lyon coached games. How come the AFL allow him to umpire Fremantle games? I know the umpires coaches concentrate on making sure they don't give incorrect frees, but there appears to be little or no emphasis on the number of missed frees.

I think the answer is to spend more money on the umpiring department. Make it a full time occupation that pays as well as the average AFL player. Use data to improve the rate of correct decision making and do what you can to encourage good umpires to make a career out of umpiring. And avoid any hint of bias by keeping them from umpiring games with a perceived conflict of interest.

Firstly good on you for starting the thread and I hope it serves it's purpose

Secondly, I'm not willing to buy into some presumptive analyses about Fisher or any other umpire for that matter when it comes to malign motives. Last month I went to watch my son play ammos and one of the umpires I recognised used to play for our club, the same one my son plays for, and he was umpiring the game. I made an off the cuff remark to him about remembering where he came from when it came to making the 50:50 calls. It was one of the stupidest things I've done in recent times. I swear every single bloody call he made went against us, he was trying so hard to make sure no one accused him of bias that it went the other way and he gave us stuff all. We hear on here about how Lyon is a nourisher of young men and his ex players are fiercely loyal. Maybe Fisher is still eternally grateful to Ross for giving him a chance and is trying hard to not favour him. Is his record because he is out to get Ross or out to protect himself from accusations of bias as an ex player? Probably neither, but if it is either way, it's most likely unconscious, not conscious bias. I made the point in another thread that it amazes me umpires don't undergo intensive training in recognising their own unconscious biases, which all humans have, and how to minimise their influence on decision making.

That leads to the third point, that I agree with you, about missed calls. The #1 problem is not corruption or overt bias, it's inconsistency, where some actions are penalised and seemingly identical ones are not. Some of us are old enough to remember games in the 70's or even 80's where it was not unheard of for there to be 100 frees paid a game. I can recall passages of play where teams moved the ball from the backline to kick a goal by a series of kicks to one on ones where the backmen infringed. Over time the public and AFL have demanded the umpires stay out of the game and let the game flow, all this means is that against the rules infringements occur hundreds of times per game and are not paid most of the time, before suddenly being paid. Umpiring complaints would be reduced by going back to the days of paying each infringement as a free, but do we want to go there?

 

[Cobbler]

Wouldn't be writing the Port game off just yet, we have had a good record against them and at Adelaide oval the past few years. And barring the finals last year, the Dogs are shizen at Subi, as they were when they played you a few weeks ago, wouldn't be surprised to pull off a win there too.

Yeah Dogs are bad at Subi except as you already stated when it mattered.

 

[salim malik]

Wouldn't be writing the Port game off just yet, we have had a good record against them and at Adelaide oval the past few years. And barring the finals last year, the Dogs are shizen at Subi, as they were when they played you a few weeks ago, wouldn't be surprised to pull off a win there too.

WC are the dogs bitches and good luck chasing Port butt all day.

 

[Ressies runner]

I made an off the cuff remark to him about remembering where he came from when it came to making the 50:50 calls. It was one of the stupidest things I've done in recent times. I swear every single bloody call he made went against us, he was trying so hard to make sure no one accused him of bias that it went the other way and he gave us stuff all.

Ha ha ha
In all seriousness trying not to be bias is probably the worst way of being biased. Ive seen a umpy ex team mate overturn a goal from 70m away after the goal ump had waved his flags, he came running in saying it touched the post and everyone just looked at him opposition as well thinking wtf. What made it worse it was my goal and i gave away a 50 plus we lost by 3 points.

 

[PurpleEyes]

I've watched the game a few times now (doesn't take long to watch the replay on the computer where you can fast forward most of the non-action).
What was most obvious with the umpiring was the massive inconsistency;
- if a West Coast player went for a mark and was spoiled, it often ended up as a Free Kick for interference (when slow replay showed there was none) ... different story for Freo.
- Freo players got pinged for blocking in a marking contest, but West Coast were doing it most of the night without penalty.
- Fyfe was being held and blocked at the stoppages all night, sometimes right in front of the umpire, but then Fyfe gets pinged for a push in the back that just didn't happen.
- less than 15m kicks allowed for West Coast.
- dubious marks paid to West Coast, but not paid to Freo in similar circumstances.
...
There's plenty more I could mention, but in summary, far to often, anything that was close to a 50/50 type call seemed to go West Coasts way and not given to Freo.

Like many here, I'm not saying Freo would have won if not from the umpires, but, I am saying we were robbed ... robbed of getting to see a fair game of football played on it's merits and that is what is so frustrating for so many of us.

 

[salim malik]

I'm waiting for the WC bitching next week when 53,000 screaming Port fans get's the umps attention and the dodgy kicks go to Port.

 

[Clems Knee]

Firstly good on you for starting the thread and I hope it serves it's purpose

Secondly, I'm not willing to buy into some presumptive analyses about Fisher or any other umpire for that matter when it comes to malign motives. Last month I went to watch my son play ammos and one of the umpires I recognised used to play for our club, the same one my son plays for, and he was umpiring the game. I made an off the cuff remark to him about remembering where he came from when it came to making the 50:50 calls. It was one of the stupidest things I've done in recent times. I swear every single bloody call he made went against us, he was trying so hard to make sure no one accused him of bias that it went the other way and he gave us stuff all. We hear on here about how Lyon is a nourisher of young men and his ex players are fiercely loyal. Maybe Fisher is still eternally grateful to Ross for giving him a chance and is trying hard to not favour him. Is his record because he is out to get Ross or out to protect himself from accusations of bias as an ex player? Probably neither, but if it is either way, it's most likely unconscious, not conscious bias. I made the point in another thread that it amazes me umpires don't undergo intensive training in recognising their own unconscious biases, which all humans have, and how to minimise their influence on decision making.

That leads to the third point, that I agree with you, about missed calls. The #1 problem is not corruption or overt bias, it's inconsistency, where some actions are penalised and seemingly identical ones are not. Some of us are old enough to remember games in the 70's or even 80's where it was not unheard of for there to be 100 frees paid a game. I can recall passages of play where teams moved the ball from the backline to kick a goal by a series of kicks to one on ones where the backmen infringed. Over time the public and AFL have demanded the umpires stay out of the game and let the game flow, all this means is that against the rules infringements occur hundreds of times per game and are not paid most of the time, before suddenly being paid. Umpiring complaints would be reduced by going back to the days of paying each infringement as a free, but do we want to go there?

Thanks for this reasoned response.
I don't know the motivation for the disparity between Fishers calls for and against Fremantle. You are right, it is presumptuous to suggest that is because Lyon sacked him. But it doesn't really matter. If there is a perceived conflict of interest, the umpire should be officiating another match. The AFL isn't the ammos. Somebody else suggested that umpire should be from another state from the ones they are officiating. Another person said that the umpire's childhood team should be excluded. I don't care, as long as there is no perceived bias.

About the 70s and 80s, the big difference I can see in umpiring is the free kick paid for push in the back. Many midfielders were able to draw that free kick as well as a Selwood. I am much happier with the way it's adjudicated now.

Until recently I haven't been an umpire basher (although I have been known to call them maggots occasionally). I think the AFL were too slow to correct the dangerous drawing of frees by ducking, shrugging the shoulder or driving head first. They happened because of the rule changes protecting the head above any other consideration.
Generally the umpires get the interpretation more correct than the commentators, players and especially more than the fans.
But the data is there to show that certain teams benefit more than others for no reason associated with the way they play.
And figures have been published where an umpire heavily favours or (in Fisher's case the opposite) a team over a series of games involving that team.
That is wrong. The game suffers as a result.

 

[Clems Knee]

I'm waiting for the WC bitching next week when 53,000 screaming Port fans get's the umps attention and the dodgy kicks go to Port.

But it won't happen to the same degree. Sure there will be a home town bias; that is real and has increased over the last 4 seasons, but there won't be the Eagles at home bonus. That only happens for West Coast, and to a lesser extent the Western Bulldogs.

Ha ha ha
In all seriousness trying not to be bias is probably the worst way of being biased. Ive seen a umpy ex team mate overturn a goal from 70m away after the goal ump had waved his flags, he came running in saying it touched the post and everyone just looked at him opposition as well thinking wtf. What made it worse it was my goal and i gave away a 50 plus we lost by 3 points.

So are you saying Margetts and Dalgliesh are ex-Freo supporters?

 

[Cobbler]

I've watched the game a few times now (doesn't take long to watch the replay on the computer where you can fast forward most of the non-action).
What was most obvious with the umpiring was the massive inconsistency;
- if a West Coast player went for a mark and was spoiled, it often ended up as a Free Kick for interference (when slow replay showed there was none) ... different story for Freo.
- Freo players got pinged for blocking in a marking contest, but West Coast were doing it most of the night without penalty.
- Fyfe was being held and blocked at the stoppages all night, sometimes right in front of the umpire, but then Fyfe gets pinged for a push in the back that just didn't happen.
- less than 15m kicks allowed for West Coast.
- dubious marks paid to West Coast, but not paid to Freo in similar circumstances.
...
There's plenty more I could mention, but in summary, far to often, anything that was close to a 50/50 type call seemed to go West Coasts way and not given to Freo.

Like many here, I'm not saying Freo would have won if not from the umpires, but, I am saying we were robbed ... robbed of getting to see a fair game of football played on it's merits and that is what is so frustrating for so many of us.

There were also a couple where we marked the ball, shifted our eyebrows and were called to play on. LeCras then takes a mark, takes 5 steps inside which the commentators pick up on and we get pinged.

The key word is inconsistencies.

The amount of blocking or 'body checking' that occurs is ludicrous. It's a contact sport, there's going to be jostling for position, yet we get pinged.

The Walters one on Yeo was just down right disgraceful, more so because Yeo appeals and flops. Walters? He couldn't knock over a 16 year old if pushed in the side, yet Yeo goes down? Come on.

Fyfe held all night. The HTB against him also a joke. Basically besieged upon, able to free an arm and tries to fend off 3 guys, then gets pinged for HTB? That one summed up the night and then the ensuing 50m was paid to complete the job. He had less then half a second and I dare say he was already being tackled before he even had the ball.

 

[Ressies runner]

So are you saying Margetts and Dalgliesh are ex-Freo supporters?

Ha ha nah there just shit

 

[Ressies runner]

ve watched the game a few times now

Was the opening play cams tackle, was that holding the ball?

 

[imperial_oz]

Well more confirmation about the intent of the umpires.

Its been announced that Fyfe will be investigated for striking Yeo. It seems while no free kick was given for Yeo holding onto Fyfe but umpire Margetts was watching and has messaged the reserve umpire to make a not of Fyfe striking Yeo for later investigation.

Ok fine, a strike should be investigated but continually holding a player off the ball is a free kick every day of the week not something to be ignored, Margetts. That was a dick move, in a game full of them

 

[PurpleEyes]

Was the opening play cams tackle, was that holding the ball?

For me the Cam McCarthy tackle on Yeo was a 50/50 decision.
Many here felt that was a shocker ... I don't.
Yeo had prior, but on slow replay, after being tackled, he did get a handball away (as pathetic as it was). So technically it was not a Free Kick.
I still say the decision was a 50/50 because typically you will see the umpires award these ... even when they see the player get a handball away ... if they have had plenty of prior and the handball is not obvious.

 

[Righteo]

Thanks Clem. 5 pages already suggests it wasn't the worst idea.

 

[Ressies runner]

For me the Cam McCarthy tackle on Yeo was a 50/50 decision.
Many here felt that was a shocker ... I don't.
Yeo had prior, but on slow replay, after being tackled, he did get a handball away (as pathetic as it was). So technically it was not a Free Kick.
I still say the decision was a 50/50 because typically you will see the umpires award these ... even when they see the player get a handball away ... if they have had plenty of prior and the handball is not obvious.

Yeah last night i thought easy free but on replay I'm thinking 50/50 but guaranteed if it was reversed eagles would of got the free. I dont mind losing the 50/50 its when its blatantly there it pisses me off

 

[Ressies runner]

Margetts was watching and has messaged the reserve umpire to make a not of Fyfe striking Yeo for later investigation.

Also means he didn't give fyfe a free against for striking yet he saw the hit so that's a win for freo yeah?