Roast Umpires thread

Bojangles17 · May 22, 2017

This Is Anfield said:
Yes, well! That's as...
View attachment 373397

enough to overturn a GOAL the campaigners

This Is Anfield · May 22, 2017

Bojangles17 said:
enough to overturn a GOAL the campaigners

Exactly, never enough evidence to overturn the goal.
When you put that with the 50 and the high hit...mind boggling.

Juke · May 22, 2017

The deliberate out of bounds interpretation ruined our gameplan from 2015 in 2016 (for a net benefit, I would argue), and we either haven't adjusted well enough to the new interpretation or the AFL likes using us as a guineapig to experiment on. I also remember when opposition posters would whinge relentlessly when we always won large amounts of frees due to our high possession game style, and due to Miles being sat on at every contest.

Now it seems that umpiring has no impact on the result, but only when it comes to the Tigers. Everyone else is allowed to complain as much as they like.

TiggerMan22 · May 22, 2017

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-22/league-ticks-off-no-50m-call-for-dusty

"We don't think it's a 50," the spokesperson said.
It is a reset at best. All Cameron tries to do is get away from Grigg, who tries to put a block on him."
The league does hate us.

Hes the man on the mark, hes supposed to be standing still. Why is he trying to "get away" from Grigg.
The ump ****ed up by letting Grigg stay there then ****ed up by letting Cameron run over the mark.
So there is 2 correct options, reset the kick or give 50m. Instead they picked do nothing which is the 1 wrong option and the league say it was right. ****ing cheats.

TiggerMan22 · May 22, 2017

Spanish_Fly said:
Robbo claimed on the radio this arvo that the Cameron running over the mark one was the worst umpiring decision of the year.

Can go with Jacks shepherd free against.
Shorts against the dogs would be up there but it was slightly hard to tell in real time.

Tiger4Ever · May 22, 2017

The umps are launching an OHS claim to the AFL to ban the bounce. According to Barrett on Footy Classified. They are blaming shoulder and back injuries on having to bounce the ball and want it eradicated.
My take is the bigger issue is that the vast majority of them can't execute this skill all that well and most of their attempts are farcical and need to be recalled and just thrown up. Trying to save face. Past generations of umpires seemed to have less trouble and the grounds were in far worse condition, remember the glue pots that were often found in the centre squares.

medusala · May 22, 2017

blackcat said:
I think abusing the umpires, and complaining about the umpires, is part of the pantomime of the football, it is not personal, so I see zero problem with calling them a white maggot or some such pejorative. half of them are lawyers for chrissakes, tells you everything, and nothing.

Didnt an ump have a go at a Hawthorn player a couple of years ago? IIRC quite a few hawk supporters on here got upset! Pathetic.

Wasnt it the bloke below who was known for giving it back to players just as good as they gave to him? Fair enough too.

Lacustrus · May 22, 2017

TiggerMan22 said:
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-22/league-ticks-off-no-50m-call-for-dusty

"We don't think it's a 50," the spokesperson said.
It is a reset at best. All Cameron tries to do is get away from Grigg, who tries to put a block on him."
The league does hate us.

Hes the man on the mark, hes supposed to be standing still. Why is he trying to "get away" from Grigg.
The ump ****** up by letting Grigg stay there then ****** up by letting Cameron run over the mark.
So there is 2 correct options, reset the kick or give 50m. Instead they picked do nothing which is the 1 wrong option and the league say it was right. ******* cheats.

Obviously the "Fonz" is running the umpire dept; can't admit fault under any circumstances...

PetterdHoisted · May 22, 2017

tigerT said:
yep, Id like to add the absolute shocker of a decision 5 mins before the caddy disallowed goal where edwards executed a perfect tackle inside 50, brought the player down and even fell sideways not to go into his back and despite being an absolute perfect example of executing a tackle to win a HTB decision, the umpire paid it in the back. I was still losing my shit over that decision that cost us a shot on goal when Caddys goal was disallowed by the same umpire.

Yep what a howler that was, I swear I saw the umpire signal too high for that one as well, not in the back, Walters was the beneficiary I think.

Robbed.

TiggerMan22 · May 23, 2017

PetterdHoisted said:
Yep what a howler that was, I swear I saw the umpire signal too high for that one as well, not in the back, Walters was the beneficiary I think.

Robbed.

He did call it too high.
Then on the reply you see Edwards got him mid bicep and the highest. Defs Robbed. Dusty also had the ball inside 50 when they called it back.

Groupie_ · May 23, 2017

Schwab came out and said the non 50 call was correct lol

no.11 · May 23, 2017

Groupie_ said:
Schwab came out and said the non 50 call was correct lol

Is Schwab the only person who thinks this was the correct call? Making up rules as they go.

smasha · May 23, 2017

Three weeks of cheating from the rorters in fluro.
I'm sure they will make up another rule for the Dreamtime game.

Richmond will be twenty ahead early in the last,Essendon get a goal and the rorters in fluro will not be able to contain themselves.

Every Richmond supporter will know one made up decision will come.

Neen · May 23, 2017

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-23/population-of-134-celebrate-giant-perryman-goal-review

AFL trolling us again.

Along with the Dusty "non 50M", and I'm sure there will be a story tomorrow that Nankervis was "staging" high contact.

blackcat · May 24, 2017

medusala said:
Didnt an ump have a go at a Hawthorn player a couple of years ago? IIRC quite a few hawk supporters on here got upset! Pathetic.

Wasnt it the bloke below who was known for giving it back to players just as good as they gave to him? Fair enough too.

the umpires, in their defense, a devil's advocate would be, they have some awesome waxed moustaches, that were prolly an antecedent to the hipster upper lip. they are very Village People, or blue oyster bar

Tiger Toffee · May 24, 2017

Just on that overturned goal, just saw some behind the goals footage, now this is my issue, the goal was awarded so the ball should've been put on the ground in the centre circle until a decision was reached, why as soon as the decision was made a behind could GWS kick it straight in, upon the goal being overturned the ball should've then been picked up by the umpire who then would run down and hand it over to the player kicking in.

Remember the original decision was a goal, the goal umpire didn't run out and say i'm not sure review it.

RFC_Official maybe something to hand over to the club and then to the AFL because IMO the ball should've been in the middle as the decision was being reviewed and not ready for a potential behind.

This Is Anfield · May 24, 2017

Tiger Toffee said:
Just on that overturned goal, just saw some behind the goals footage, now this is my issue, the goal was awarded so the ball should've been put on the ground in the centre circle until a decision was reached, why as soon as the decision was made a behind could GWS kick it straight in, upon the goal being overturned the ball should've then been picked up by the umpire who then would run down and hand it over to the player kicking in.

Remember the original decision was a goal, the goal umpire didn't run out and say i'm not sure review it.

RFC_Official maybe something to hand over to the club and then to the AFL because IMO the ball should've been in the middle as the decision was being reviewed and not ready for a potential behind.

And while you're at it RFC_Official get the four points back.
Cheers.

Tiges1229 · May 24, 2017

Tiger Toffee said:
Just on that overturned goal, just saw some behind the goals footage, now this is my issue, the goal was awarded so the ball should've been put on the ground in the centre circle until a decision was reached, why as soon as the decision was made a behind could GWS kick it straight in, upon the goal being overturned the ball should've then been picked up by the umpire who then would run down and hand it over to the player kicking in.

Remember the original decision was a goal, the goal umpire didn't run out and say i'm not sure review it.

RFC_Official maybe something to hand over to the club and then to the AFL because IMO the ball should've been in the middle as the decision was being reviewed and not ready for a potential behind.

LOL its AFL where Umps don't even know the rules from week to week.

HTT · May 24, 2017

smasha said:
Three weeks of cheating from the rorters in fluro.
I'm sure they will make up another rule for the Dreamtime game.

Richmond will be twenty ahead early in the last,Essendon get a goal and the rorters in fluro will not be able to contain themselves.

Every Richmond supporter will know one made up decision will come.

Players holding their arms up and letting the ball go across the line will be introduced as a new rule this week. Conveniently, with 30sec to go in the last quarter on Richmond's half forward line, against Richmond, leading to a 50m penalty for a player going over the mark to get around a sheperder that shouldn't be there that will really be a 75m penalty and Joe Daniher will kick a goal in the scrimmage at the top of the square that was actually touched but it won't be checked on score review because the siren has already gone.

Dunger · May 24, 2017

Tigerturbulance · May 25, 2017

Tiger4Ever said:
The umps are launching an OHS claim to the AFL to ban the bounce. According to Barrett on Footy Classified. They are blaming shoulder and back injuries on having to bounce the ball and want it eradicated.
My take is the bigger issue is that the vast majority of them can't execute this skill all that well and most of their attempts are farcical and need to be recalled and just thrown up. Trying to save face. Past generations of umpires seemed to have less trouble and the grounds were in far worse condition, remember the glue pots that were often found in the centre squares.

They want more female umpires that's why the center bounce will go and another unique aspect of our game will be discarded

Tony Stark · May 25, 2017

I tell you what, watching the Cats on home turf it's like it's a different game in the way in which it's umpired compared to our games. They can throw the ball in every tackle and it's play on, we get pinged every time it's a 50/50. They drop the ball when tackled and it's play on, pretty much get away with everything.

Also I have to say the Selwoods have mastered the art of milking frees, so annoying when you see Jack get mauled week in week out for no reward

popsikle99 · May 25, 2017

This game is fcked. I hate Port but cats really are being slurped on the pole tonight

Livonski · May 25, 2017

The maggots have done it again!

Bojangles17 · May 25, 2017

Refreshing to see a game spared from incompetent umpiring that conspires to Rort the result , no overturned goals from bs reasons , no 50m or deliberates missed , remarkable really felt like I was watching a different game

Log In or Create New Account

Guest - BigFooty Tipping 2026 - Get on! - $500 first prize - Weekly Prizes - Click to Join

NRL Tipping Competition 2026! - Open Now - Win a badge and a Platinum!

Roast Umpires thread

Hall of Famer

Cancelled

Club Legend

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Club Legend

Cancelled

Premiership Player

Norm Smith Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

time to return the traditional Richmond yellow

Senior List

It's Time!

????????????

Irving's godfather and handle

🏆🏆🏆🏆

Cancelled

🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆

B2B

Drug cheat but the AFL helped me evade WADA

245kg of Love Muscle

Club Legend

Team Captain

Norm Smith Medallist

Hall of Famer

Similar threads