Roast Umpires are on the take

Remove this Banner Ad

JB1975 said:
How much of a contributing factor do you think it (umpiring) was? Was it in any way responsible for the result? Which decision or non-decision had the most influence on the result?
Click to expand...

How long's a piece of string.

Are you saying it had no bearing on the score or how we approached the contest?
 
Old Spice said:
How long's a piece of string.

Are you saying it had no bearing on the score or how we approached the contest?
Click to expand...

You suggested it was worthwhile to look at the umpiring as a factor, and so I admit that I thought you might have a more specific sense of how big a factor it actually was.

Umpiring always influences the play and the score, in every game of football. It's impossible for it to have no effect. The question for me is whether the officiating in any given contest has any significant bearing on the ultimate result, and the answer to that in relation to Sunday's game is an emphatic no.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

JB1975 said:
You suggested it was worthwhile to look at the umpiring as a factor, and so I admit that I thought you might have a more specific sense of how big a factor it actually was.

Umpiring always influences the play and the score, in every game of football. It's impossible for it to have no effect. The question for me is whether the officiating in any given contest has any significant bearing on the ultimate result, and the answer to that in relation to Sunday's game is an emphatic no.
Click to expand...

I'm at work so unfortunately I won't be able to pore over the footage and give you a 'scientific' score. But the fact remains it has an effect and when it does it's worth folding it into a breakdown of the result.

I would suggest we're not far off Geelong. If we had cleaned up our disposal and weren't on the end of some shitty umpiring, didn't get a few injuries, we would have been in it.

I'm not really sure what your point is if you say only some factors count and not others. Of course umpiring changes game to game, as do injuries, and skill. We seem to have noted the latter but apparently the former has no bearing whatsoever?
 
Old Spice said:
I'm at work so unfortunately I won't be able to pore over the footage and give you a 'scientific' score. But the fact remains it has an effect and when it does it's worth folding it into a breakdown of the result.

I would suggest we're not far off Geelong. If we had cleaned up our disposal and weren't on the end of some shitty umpiring, didn't get a few injuries, we would have been in it.

I'm not really sure what your point is if you say only some factors count and not others. Of course umpiring changes game to game, as do injuries, and skill. We seem to have noted the latter but apparently the former has no bearing whatsoever?
Click to expand...

My point is that the umpiring had no more or less influence on the result than it does in the majority of games, which is one-fifth of sweet **** all. My point is that focusing on the umpiring is, in the scheme of things, besides the point. My point is that we lost the game due to (a) how poorly we played in some aspects of the game and (b) how well Geelong played in other aspects of the game. And my point is that any suggestion of biased or corrupt umpiring (which you haven't made but others here have) is ludicrous.
 
JB1975 said:
My point is that the umpiring had no more or less influence on the result than it does in the majority of games, which is one-fifth of sweet **** all. My point is that focusing on the umpiring is, in the scheme of things, besides the point. My point is that we lost the game due to (a) how poorly we played in some aspects of the game and (b) how well Geelong played in other aspects of the game. And my point is that any suggestion of biased or corrupt umpiring (which you haven't made but others here have) is ludicrous.
Click to expand...

It played a greater role than usual in this game. If it had been a 4 point game people would be all over it, even though the decisions are identical.

The idea that the umpires don't get briefs and focus points I think is naive. We ourselves once sought clarity over some issues when Malthouse was coach. There's plenty of that and if the umpires get the scrutiny they deserve that's a good thing imv. A shot across the boughs can be clarifying.

The interstate effect is pretty well documented and evident to anyone watching games. Umpires makes dumb decisions and should feel the heat when they do because they can swing games and dictate how players attack the contest.
 
Old Spice said:
It played a greater role than usual in this game. If it had been a 4 point game people would be all over it, even though the decisions are identical.

The idea that the umpires don't get briefs and focus points I think is naive. We ourselves once sought clarity over some issues when Malthouse was coach. There's plenty of that and if the umpires get the scrutiny they deserve that's a good thing imv.
Click to expand...

I don't think I'm opposed to scrutinising the performance of umpires. As you say, it can only be a good thing.

However, such scrutiny needs to be rigorous. My sense is that there was no undue influence on the game from the umpires, but if someone thinks otherwise then they'll hopefully provide something which resembles a detailed analysis of their performance.
 
I can think of only one glaring error in our favour (when De Goey got away with dropping the ball) but many that went against us. Immediately prior to the Grundy mark error, a free kick against Geelong went unpaid. I would be staggered if the two were unconnected. (ie the umpire realized he had missed one and overcompensated on the next). We lost out in both cases. Many things were right - the 50m to Phillips and the downfield against Cox were similar decisions for equivalent actions. Cox didn't, however, get 50 when he was intentionally held up by (I think) Henry. These are errors, and unfortunately, we got the worst of them.
I was bewildered by the regularity with which Taylor was allowed to interfere with opponents when no other player on the ground got away with those tactics. Some players also get more time to dispose of the ball than others. Dangerfield gets lots. Treloar very little. Pendlebury gets lots as a balance but that was of no help this week.
In short, very inconsistent umpiring, and we got the worst of it. Enough to turn the game? I don't know, probably not, but enough to sour it that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
No SPIN said:
Treloar - easy set shot in 3rd qtr missed
2 other running goals with no tackling pressure - missed having kicked many similar goals
Crisp - easy running goal missed
Wells - set shot missed and snap miss from 5 meters
JDG - running goal straight infront - missed

These were not hard shots - and all in the last half of the game.
Click to expand...
Are you calling a shot from 50 on the run easy?
 
jonbe54 said:
biased umpiring is not bad???

and yes it was biased - not against collingwood but for geelong - a team that is coached to duck at every opportunity when not clear and especially for duckwood - actually a fine player but enough of a slag to dine out on the umpiring rubbish dished out to opposing teams for his advantage.

we certainly do differ let's leave it at that
Click to expand...

Sad little conspiracy theory. Take another break.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
cleomenes said:
I can think of only one glaring error in our favour (when De Goey got away with dropping the ball) but many that went against us. Immediately prior to the Grundy mark error, a free kick against Geelong went unpaid. I would be staggered if the two were unconnected. (ie the umpire realized he had missed one and overcompensated on the next). We lost out in both cases. Many things were right - the 50m to Phillips and the downfield against Cox were similar decisions for equivalent actions. Cox didn't, however, get 50 when he was intentionally held up by (I think) Harris. These are errors, and unfortunately, we got the worst of them.
I was bewildered by the regularity with which Taylor was allowed to interfere with opponents when no other player on the ground got away with those tactics. Some players also get more time to dispose of the ball than others. Dangerfield gets lots. Treloar very little. Pendlebury gets lots as a balance but that was of no help this week.
In short, very inconsistent umpiring, and we got the worst of it. Enough to turn the game? I don't know, probably not, but enough to sour it that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Ratugolea (excuse spelling) took a grab on boundary 20m out that ump decided was juggled over the line. Was clearly a grab and robbed cats of a shot on goal. Cats beat us and umpiring was fine.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

JB1975 said:
The umpiring was occasionally poor, but never biased. There's a big difference. Sometimes we've been on the happier end of poor umpiring, in which case we'd rightly laugh off any suggestion of biased umpiring by opposition fans, so on this occasion I think that we should have the good grace to accept that whatever mistakes were made last Sunday made no difference at all to our performance and we should then try and pretend that this thread never existed.
Click to expand...


Remind me when that was us getting the good run
Don't get it in afl

Don't get in vfl

Don't get it in aflw
Don't get in vwfl
Don't get it in netball

Tiddly winks or marbles?

Apparently we don't even get it in little league lol
 
I try to not want to see umpires suffer for their ineptitude....but fail constantly only reinforced by the blatant corruption of tonight's game.
Someone should pay the price for such bias.
 
Pie eyed said:
I try to not want to see umpires suffer for their ineptitude....but fail constantly only reinforced by the blatant corruption of tonight's game.
Someone should pay the price for such bias.
Click to expand...

The rules committee should for not being able to create rules that can be consistently fairly adjudicated in an incredibly short period of time. They're the real pathetic lumps. If the umpires had a consistent baseline with which to umpire to it'd be much easier to pursue the one's who more regularly provide us with the absolute howler's of decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Roverjg
Standard of Umpiring - Suggestions for change
10 11 12 13 14
Replies
348
Views
10K
Black_White
Black_White
jimmy35
There’s Only One Darcy Moore but…
Replies
9
Views
849
The Phantom
The Phantom
Jen2310
News Bri takes the reins in a new look leadership group
Replies
1
Views
463
Jen2310
Jen2310
John Greening
Taking the AFL to the next level !
2
Replies
25
Views
995
Countrypie
Countrypie
Markfs
I'd like to complain about the umpires...
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
204
Views
8K
HappyRed
HappyRed
Jen2310
VFL VFL Round 2 v Brisbane, Friday March 29 12:05pm @ Brighton Homes Arena.
14 15 16 17 18
Replies
425
Views
10K
Maggie5
Maggie5
domus
One Small Ray of Light
Replies
14
Views
549
domus
domus

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top