Roast ... The Umpiring

[Sharkey66]

Melbourne holding free, Melbourne holding free, was all i heard all night. Now i know the dogs hold on a few times, but for there never to be any paid the other way?
Bordering in the ridiculous.
Not talking just about this game either.

 

[fargy]

The standard has been woeful lately in every game.

 

[1961grandfinal]

An absolute joke, loved the way that the free kicks were not included in the stats on the scoreboard???

 

[Rocketsurgery]

I posted this in the vent thread but it's more appropriate here. Terry Wallace was trying to explain on radio why the free kick discrepancy was fair tonight. Bulldogs being the aggressors and tackling hard leading to more frees against for loose tackles. But what about the flip side to that, where the team tackling hard and being aggressive are rewarded for their effort with holding and dropping the ball decisions. That's supposed to even up the frees and the umpires weren't paying them tonight. That's what pisses me off!!

 

[VogonProsthetnic]

Wasn't happy with it, though you could say the questionable Crameri free kick balanced out the 23 odd Melbourne free's.

The rule is when the player in front is not able to get to the ball as a result of the contact. I know they suddenly decided not to pay that one (who knows why) but I thought it looked a fair decision.

 

[SuperMacPherson]

I'm seriously getting sick of our fans complaining about the umpiring the last 4 weeks. If we're not good enough to win games without the effect either way of umpiring decisions, then we're not good enough as a team.

I stopping blaming umpires years ago, when I grew up and learned some sense.

 

[Mingo]

There was an old lady Melbourne supporter lady on SEN having a whinge just before midnight. "We didn't receive a holding the ball all night and then THEY get one in the last quarter." News flash lady we didn't have one until then either.

 

[Leon]

It honestly felt like it was a Melbourne benefit game tonight.

Commentators were extraordinarily keen for the Demons to get over the line. They were able to justify every free that the Demons got but scrutinised any of ours to the Nth degree.

My god it was pissing me off.

The trouble is it also works BF posters into a frenzy who (of course) were desperate to see the previously pathetic Dee's chalk up another 4 points. They honestly believe the poor little Demons were robbed.

Conveniently ignoring the 3 quarters of crap we had to put up with.

Oh and the minor issue of an idiotic goal review decision.

Completely agree with all of this.

I remember a game in 2010 I think - the one where Griffen kicked the winning goal and it was wet, Dennis and Bruce barracking for Melbourne all night.

So nauseating.

The Crameri free was karma for three quarters of Melbourne being given an absolute armchair ride. Plenty of their frees led tonight which were rubbish led to goals for them.

 

[Buckingham]

I stopping blaming umpires years ago, when I grew up and learned some sense.

What's it like to grow up and learn sense?

 

[DognBones]

Apart from poor field umpiring, how can the AFL employ a boundary umpire that cannot throw the ball to the ruck contest? Back to the local comps for him.

 

[TheHoneyBadger]

Nobody is blaming the umpires for anything.
Whether or not they influenced the result doesn't make them exempt from criticism. They were ****ing awful tonight. Inconsistent with every possible applicable rule.

Couldn't believe the media saying the Dees were robbed because of the soft free kick to Crameri. Plenty of poor decisions around the ground that didn't go our way, that one was just late.

 

[the dog's kennel]

Umpiring was awful but I felt like we were the beneficiaries of a few of the worst decisions, so don't think we can complain.

Didn't really bother me to be honest - even the Dale Morris touched goal. I'm used to mediocre umpiring. I just try to ignore it.

Terrible decision-making tonight certainly wasn't restricted to the umpires.

 

[bulldoggies]

Crameri's free kick was a square up for the howlers they missed earlier in the game. And I thank them!

 

[David Schwarz]

The commentary was far worse.

Crameri's free for that Melbourne kid doing a star jump into his back was called "soft", for what? Since when were frees justified by the maliciousness of the incident?

 

[ossie_21]

Our game was probably the worst game yet for it, but the boundary umpires have to go back to how they have been doing it for years. I don't know why they have to face the play almost straight away anyway, don't the field umpires control the game?

 

[Ridley This]

Why have a goal review system at all? Laughable.

 

[immortalmike]

It was very similar to the other one that was called umpire's decision. So no.

Dude you're trying so hard to sound unbiased that you are starting to sound like one of those people who think they should teach Evolution and Creationism in science classes. Sometimes the truth is biased to one side.

 

[boydsno1]

For once I would like our forwards to be rewarded for being held. Happens to Jones every week and last night Williams and Crameri got held at every contest.

 

[G-Mo77]

Crameri's free kick was a square up for the howlers they missed earlier in the game. And I thank them!

Evened out nicely. Melbourne supporters will forget the arm chair ride they got ALL game and focus on one decision that apparently cost them the game. Never mind the amount of time they had left to square it up and missed chances, it was the bad umpiring. Wah wah wah.

Sooky Dee's supporters you're happy to get rubbish decisions your way, learn to live with ONE that bit you in the arse. Hahahahahahahaha

 

[threenewpadlocks]

It's funny how so many of us are be to even-handed about the umpiring, given we won.
Imagine how mad we'd all be had we lost.

Also, thread was created before the Crameri free

 

[dogwatch]

What's disturbing is how every few weeks we hear that "they have stopped (or started) paying those in recent weeks (or this week). As long as they are consistent, that's OK".

Well, no. It's not OK. How are supporters and those new to the game expected to understand what's going on and follow the play? How are players supposed to adapt their game to the umpiring panel's latest set of interpretations?
Take a look at soccer. There's an international standard that has to be maintained and generally it is. We all know what to expect.

It seems the AFL chooses to experiment with interpretation all the time and it makes the game an object of ridicule in doing so.

This is not a shot at the umpires but the rules committee, the AFL, and especially Wayne Campbell and the people who advise him. Just STOP dicking around with rules and interpretations FFS!!

 

[threenewpadlocks]

One thing that I hate about modern umpiring is how the fans complain about too many frees being paid, but then complain about the rugby/rolling maul footy that gets played.
It's because they aren't paying frees, it leads to the rolling maul. Maybe if you penalised bad tackles with in the backs at stoppages (I have heardly seen an in the back at a stoppage all year, the rare times they get paid nowadays is in an open one-on-one tackle), and actually penalised for throws/dropping it/no attempt to get rid of it, then we wouldn't have the rolling maul.

 

[Zgope1]

would love to see a GIF of the Morris "touched" called "not touched" event. I was certain the ball changed direction but the third umpire only used the slow mo so you couldn't see the direction change. The fact Chelsea didn't even review it did make me a bit twisted. Got me getting all conspiracy-ish.

Also thought the umps were soft all night on holding-the-man frees (mainly because Melbourne players were flailing their arms) and they got sucked in to paying everything.

 

[grassman75]

I reckon Nat jones got several off the ball holding frees, paid at the moment that griff was trying get the ball, making the play and also being held, scragged etc. it is that that gets my goat, not the fact that they got more frees. Nowhere in the rules does it say the free kicks need to be the same or even

Watching our jones get double teamed and held nearly every time the ball came in, I started to think that perhaps the game would be better if double teaming wasn't allowed. Not sure how it could be policed, or if it is even feasible. Perhaps if there is two players on one, only one can be making body contact?

Feel free to discuss or disagree with the idea

 

[Zgope1]

I reckon Nat jones got several off the ball holding frees, paid at the moment that griff was trying get the ball, making the play and also being held, scragged etc. it is that that gets my goat, not the fact that they got more frees. Nowhere in the rules does it say the free kicks need to be the same or even

Watching our jones get double teamed and held nearly every time the ball came in, I started to think that perhaps the game would be better if double teaming wasn't allowed. Not sure how it could be policed, or if it is even feasible. Perhaps if there is two players on one, only one can be making body contact?

Feel free to discuss or disagree with the idea

yeah saw just get infringed clearly at least twice and agree that it's ludicrous that our players seemingly don't get held onto. They're the type of decisions that show what the umps are looking for and in this case its melbourne getting free kicks