Umpire Bashing

[cormick]

Sorry to put a dampener on such a great win, but to all the pathetic whingers complaining about the umpire conspiracy to short-change Richmond each week, what was your assessment of today's game?

Seriously, last week at least two threads became sidetracked by the poor performance of the umpires against Essendon, including applause for Hardwick's umpire abuse. This week, as far as I've seen (albeit very briefly touched on some threads), there's very little discussion about the performance of the umpires.

You know why? Because Hawthorn were *** by the umpires today and we (massively) got an advantage from them.

How about we learn to take the good with the bad, realise the umps are a necessary evil in the game and get over ourselves every time we get less free-kicks than the opposition. The posters guilty of this do get quite repetitive and boring, and it definitely comes across as sour grapes and sore losers.

 

[Gak Attack]

I'll pass thanks.

 

[tugga]

Yes, the umpiring went our way.
How many times did Tuck throw the ball today and get away with it?

 

[Dustin Credible]

Only really noticed the umpires in the first quarter when they seemed to be going Hawthorns way. ( not paying high tackles when King copped it in the head, then paying a high tackle against Jackson immediately after, particularly annoyed me).

After that I didn't really notice them too much. A few hands in the back to both sides didn't get paid.

Which examples of Hawthorn getting the raw end of the deal are you thinking of?

 

[Filthy Sanchez]

This thrad is much needed. I completely agree we got the rub of the green. However it goes to show, if you're first at the contest and tackle hard you will be rewarded. Essendon were better than us at this so they won free kicks, today we went harder so we were rewarded.

Umpires weren't the reason we lost to Essendon and umpires weren't the reason we won today. The sooner people work that out the better. Focus on the real issues of the game. Not the scapegoats.

 

[scarecrow2k1]

I felt it was well umpired- first team at the ball gets more free kicks

 

[cormick]

The most obvious one was Roughead's mark early called play on, rushed through for a behind only for Griff to bomb it 20,000m from the kick out and result in a Martin goal. Was a great play from the Tigers clearing the defensive zone and all, but it should have been a Hawthorn set-shot from 20m out to score (IIRC) the first goal of the match.

Another is the deliberate out-of-bounds where (Shoenmakers?) fell over the boundary line and was penalised. Very iffy. Resulted in a Jack goal.

I can't remember any more specific instances, but throughout the game I noticed a bit of a pattern of th 50/50 calls generally falling Richmond's way. I'm not complaining, and nor should any of us be. However, if we don't whinge of poor umpiring when it benefits us, we shouldn't be whinging when it doesn't. Swings and roundabouts, as they say.

As usual, the umpiring didn't affect the result, we would have won comfortably regardless. As filthy said above, if you're first at the contest and tackle hard you will be rewarded. Essendon were better than us at this so they won free kicks, today we went harder so we were rewarded.

 

[Infamy]

Yes, the umpiring went our way.
How many times did Tuck throw the ball today and get away with it?

I haven't seen the full game yet as I had to go into the office today, but I'm not sure that's the best example of us getting the rub of the green with the umpiring. The legitimate disposal seems to have gone the way of the dodo. Seems like the only one left is the kick of the ball, you don't even have to dispose of it properly when tackled anymore.

 

[Dustin Credible]

The most obvious one was Roughead's mark early called play on, rushed through for a behind only for Griff to bomb it 20,000m from the kick out and result in a Martin goal. Was a great play from the Tigers clearing the defensive zone and all, but it should have been a Hawthorn set-shot from 20m out to score (IIRC) the first goal of the match.

Another is the deliberate out-of-bounds where (Shoenmakers?) fell over the boundary line and was penalised. Very iffy. Resulted in a Jack goal.

I can't remember any more specific instances, but throughout the game I noticed a bit of a pattern of th 50/50 calls generally falling Richmond's way. I'm not complaining, and nor should any of us be. However, if we don't whinge of poor umpiring when it benefits us, we shouldn't be whinging when it doesn't. Swings and roundabouts, as they say.

As usual, the umpiring didn't affect the result, we would have won comfortably regardless. As filthy said above, if you're first at the contest and tackle hard you will be rewarded. Essendon were better than us at this so they won free kicks, today we went harder so we were rewarded.

I thought that one was a good call.

 

[scarecrow2k1]

The most obvious one was Roughead's mark early called play on, rushed through for a behind only for Griff to bomb it 20,000m from the kick out and result in a Martin goal. Was a great play from the Tigers clearing the defensive zone and all, but it should have been a Hawthorn set-shot from 20m out to score (IIRC) the first goal of the match.

Another is the deliberate out-of-bounds where (Shoenmakers?) fell over the boundary line and was penalised. Very iffy. Resulted in a Jack goal.

I can't remember any more specific instances, but throughout the game I noticed a bit of a pattern of th 50/50 calls generally falling Richmond's way. I'm not complaining, and nor should any of us be. However, if we don't whinge of poor umpiring when it benefits us, we shouldn't be whinging when it doesn't. Swings and roundabouts, as they say.

As usual, the umpiring didn't affect the result, we would have won comfortably regardless. As filthy said above, if you're first at the contest and tackle hard you will be rewarded. Essendon were better than us at this so they won free kicks, today we went harder so we were rewarded.

Firstly, that was deliberate, the correct call and very smart play by Jack. He thought he was heading to the line so eased up on him and the umpire watched him run over the line. Secondly, I may be wrong but didn't he miss the ensuing kick at goal?

 

[tugga]

I haven't seen the full game yet as I had to go into the office today, but I'm not sure that's the best example of us getting the rub of the green with the umpiring. The legitimate disposal seems to have gone the way of the dodo. Seems like the only one left is the kick of the ball, you don't even have to dispose of it properly when tackled anymore.

I saw two that Richie McCaw would have been proud of and I was on level 2 behind the goals at the city end.

 

[cormick]

Firstly, that was deliberate, the correct call and very smart play by Jack. He thought he was heading to the line so eased up on him and the umpire watched him run over the line. Secondly, I may be wrong but didn't he miss the ensuing kick at goal?

From where I was, and on the replay too, it seemed like a genuine slip-up by the Hawk. Thinking from a Tiger point-of-view, if it had been paid against us in defence, I wouldn't have been too impressed.

He might have missed the shot, can't really remember.

I have previously been guilty as any of blaming the umpires for costing us games. I would often turn to the frees-for differential as the benchmark of good umpiring performance. If the ledger was 0 (i.e both teams finished with, say, 20 frees), it constituted a good umpiring performance. The problem with this is that it doesn't account for some teams playing harder at the ball, as we were today, and therefore earning more free kicks. Whilst we did this today, I still thought the umps were favourable to us. The Hawks sitting near me definitely shared this opinion (quite vocally).

 

[Spagman]

So we get one good one a year oh well.

 

[peejay]

We won easily partly because the umpiring was neutral. They have killed us all year and if i want to complain about them when we get done over by them then i bloody well will.

 

[fleabitten]

That deliberate call was totally correct. If Riewoldt had played him close, it would have been a throw in but Schoenmaker just expected the pressure from Riewoldt and strolled over the line. Deliberate for sure.

Other than that, i thought there were bad calls/non-calls both ways. The free against King when he gave away 50 was ridiculous. Riewoldt was being held a number of times with no call. I'd say the umpiring was fairly neutral overall.

 

[cormick]

The free kick count was 21-13. In previous years if this had been the case but reversed, I too would have been filthy. But realistically, over the last decade we have rarely been first to the ball, so the free-kick count would rightly be swayed against us. Now that we have some elite midfielders who do get first use of it, we'll probably start seeing more frees paid to us.

Admit it, if the Edwards free had been against Morris on Cyril up the other end (last week Morris showed he's not adverse to pushing his opponent in the goal square), you'd have been filthy with the umpire. Such a soft free kick, especially resulting in a shot 5m out from goal.

Regardless, if you're willing to pay out on umpires despite being obviously one-eyed and sitting 100m further from the ball than they are when they pay frees against us that you didn't think were there, games like today should open your eyes.

On a side note, after the Sydney game, despite a great win, people complained about Deledio not being paid a mark inside 50. Gieschen admitted is was an incorrect decision. Roughead held the ball for every bit as long as Lids today and should have started the Hawks' goalscoring but for a shocking umpire decision.

 

[Maroo]

I'm a firm believer that only the most ultimate umpiring mistakes can be blames for influencing matches (i.e. huge errors which DIRECTLY result in goals). Even then, I find it hard to seriously say that the umpiring cost a team the win because there were no doubt countless other decisions and skill errors / moments of bad luck that also influenced the match.

With that all said, I thought the umpiring was awful today (that's both from attending the game and now just finishing the replay of it). There were so many examples of incorrect disposal and holding the ball that went unpenalised. Two that stick out are for Newman and Houli not getting pinged in almost the exact same spot on the Southern side / City end flank.

I think the balance of the bad decisions went in our favour, but I still hate seeing the inconsistent interpretations and just plain bad decisions.

This is a league wide problem, not just for Richmond.

People really need to just suck it up when the Tigers get a few bum calls. We are not the only team that gets a bad call, we are not victimised or targeted and no-one is out to get us. It's a game officiated by humans so there will always be mistakes.

Shit happens.

 

[fleabitten]

On a side note, after the Sydney game, despite a great win, people complained about Deledio not being paid a mark inside 50. Gieschen admitted is was an incorrect decision. Roughead held the ball for every bit as long as Lids today and should have started the Hawks' goalscoring but for a shocking umpire decision.

Riewoldt held one for just as long and it wasn't paid. The Edwards free was soft but it was there. He didn't dive like Jetta did last week. It was just a dumb move right in front of the umpire by Guerra.

Generally, I agree that we're all biased and that umpires don't decide games but at the same time I have little doubt that they are influenced by reputations. When your team is considered to be crap and undisciplined, then you're gonna get more unfair calls go against you. The King decision is a prime example. That wasn't a free against, but because it was Jake King the whistle blew. There were bad calls both ways and we may have actually come out on top for a change, but over the last few years we've been on the receiving end of more crap calls than we've benefited from. Hopefully that will change as we establish ourselves as a decent side.

There's no conspiracy against Richmond and the umpires aren't to blame for our years of pain but I have no doubt that the umps have subconsciously given us a raw deal on many occasions.

 

[Frank Grimes]

I admit the umpiring was awful today for both sides with a slight bias in our favor. But it doesn't matter how you cut it, you can not blame the umpiring having a bearing on the result in a 10+ goal win or loss.

Obviously umpiring will come under more scrutiny on the close games because the umpiring decisions will then have a bearing on the result of the game. The players go through that too. In the close games a miss shot for goal, a fumble or failing to get to a contest will be highlighted more then if the team was 10+ goals behind or ahead.

Though, it's about time the umpiring was biased in favor of us instead of the other team. Just a shame it was not biased in favor of us in a close game.

 

[Jimmybob]

Another is the deliberate out-of-bounds where (Shoenmakers?) fell over the boundary line and was penalised. Very iffy. Resulted in a Jack goal.

I haven't seen a more obvious deliberate than that in a long, long time.

 

[TheProwler]

I thought it was another terrible day for greenies. I guess the fu.. ups were evenly spread today today or just slightly favouring us? Coincidence or message from AFL HQ to even the hell up on last weeks deplorable effort?

Gee where do I start....... a couple of marks not paid to Roughy and I recall one other which were really poor, king and vicks both taken high in the same contest and both missed by umpire metres away, cotch done for holding the ball when the player lying on his back had it, franklin got a few cheapies for jumper tugs but these were evened up by fanklins initial holding to try and get a break, tuck and mitchell had as many throws as each other and most were missed, ........ etc etc etc.........


I was surprised they didn't go upstairs for the Newman effort on the goal line but it was good to see them back the goal ump as he is in the best position to see


I think the standard of umpiring this year is well below that of last year where i watched many games and didn't really notice the umps which is how it should be

 

[TheProwler]

I haven't seen a more obvious deliberate than that in a long, long time.

You didn't see the Heath Shaw one last night then

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Sorry to put a dampener on such a great win, but to all the pathetic whingers complaining about the umpire conspiracy to short-change Richmond each week, what was your assessment of today's game?

Seriously, last week at least two threads became sidetracked by the poor performance of the umpires against Essendon, including applause for Hardwick's umpire abuse. This week, as far as I've seen (albeit very briefly touched on some threads), there's very little discussion about the performance of the umpires.

You know why? Because Hawthorn were *** by the umpires today and we (massively) got an advantage from them.

How about we learn to take the good with the bad, realise the umps are a necessary evil in the game and get over ourselves every time we get less free-kicks than the opposition. The posters guilty of this do get quite repetitive and boring, and it definitely comes across as sour grapes and sore losers.

They cheated us out of a win last week , in particular an ex player of the club , we where playing against.

Hardwicks comments to the emergency umpire was in regards to the treatment Cotchin was recieving.
" you must be ****ing useless if you can't get a gig before Bannister " was completely fabricated and light hearted humour .

 

[Dustin Credible]

They cheated us out of a win last week , in particular an ex player of the club , we where playing against.

Hardwicks comments to the emergency umpire was in regards to the treatment Cotchin was recieving.
" you must be ****ing useless if you can't get a gig before Bannister " was completely fabricated and light hearted humour .

Regardless of Bannisters' performance last week.

Allowing ex-players to umpire games involving their former clubs is very suspect. Would be happy if the AFL prohibited it.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

to all the pathetic whingers complaining about the umpire conspiracy to short-change Richmond each week, what was your assessment of today's game?

I for one reckon that the umpiring of late has been utterly woefull...inconsistent...and frustrating to comprehend...throw in garbage as well...

If I didnt know any better I would argue that their is an AFL agenda/direction to the AFL umpires to play the game a certain way...rather than the game itself..

All I can say about the Umpiring complaints of recent weeks...Totally warranturd...as can be seen by yesterdays reasonable non momentum and game changing arbitrary decisions...

If those maggots had served up another garbage effort like the previous weeks I'm tipping Hardwick would have copped more than just a $5000 fine in telling them and the AFL so...

Oh yes their's a duck...no i mean a head high tackle...FREE!...oh theirs another one! FREE!....how easy is this Umpiring caper!...