Remove this Banner Ad

Roast Umpires

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

At the game and honestly did not think the umpiring was that bad overall. We got a good run early and they got a good run 2nd half.

The Jolly/Hardingham decision was very bad however. Those holding the ball decisions in the 3rd quarter were probably all there.

Move on to next week. We owe Sydney big time after losing earlier in the year because of 2 crucial umpiring decisions. The Crameri handball that was paid as holding the ball and the decision not to give Stanton a free kick 10 metres out from goal after he was sat on.
 
DTShowtime said:
You do realize that in the last 2 & 1/2 years, Collingwood are in the bottom 3 as far as free kicks given?



Once a defender takes his eyes off the ball & inteferes with the forward going for the ball, it's an automatic free kick. It has been all year. The only surprise of this decision is it took the umpire so long to pay it.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but in those dicey 50/50`s I`d back coll to get 8/10. Don`t sweat it DT, it`s called the top team affect. I`ve seen my team be the beneficiary of it and also on the back hand of it.
 
DTShowtime said:
You do realize that in the last 2 & 1/2 years, Collingwood are in the bottom 3 as far as free kicks given?



Once a defender takes his eyes off the ball & inteferes with the forward going for the ball, it's an automatic free kick. It has been all year. The only surprise of this decision is it took the umpire so long to pay it.
Click to expand...

Typical feral supporter. Can't even admit you got janded a goal when you won by 70 points. I so hope Geelong kick your asses in the finals. Now kindly piss off out of our forum. Cheers.
 
Noddy Holder said:
Typical feral supporter. Can't even admit you got janded a goal when you won by 70 points. I so hope Geelong kick your asses in the finals. Now kindly piss off out of our forum. Cheers.
Click to expand...

It would & has been a free kick regardless of whether it is or isn't a Collingwood player all year. Once the defender, who is running back with the flight of the ball, takes his eyes off the ball & impedes/interferes with the marking forward, the umpires will pay a free kick. It has been paid all year & is not an inconsistent ruling.

Denying it would be denying reality.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Noddy Holder said:
Typical feral supporter. Can't even admit you got janded a goal when you won by 70 points. I so hope Geelong kick your asses in the finals. Now kindly piss off out of our forum. Cheers.
Click to expand...

Hirdy is doing a great job isn't he? LOL :D
 
Antz said:
Hirdy is doing a great job isn't he? LOL :D
Click to expand...

Well considering we are still in finals contention with only a few weeks to go and we have had an extensive injury list all year I would say the answer would have to be yes.

Now kindly go and play on the freeway.
 
DTShowtime said:
You do realize that in the last 2 & 1/2 years, Collingwood are in the bottom 3 as far as free kicks given?



Once a defender takes his eyes off the ball & inteferes with the forward going for the ball, it's an automatic free kick. It has been all year. The only surprise of this decision is it took the umpire so long to pay it.
Click to expand...

my recollection was jolly had his back to the ball and eyes off the contest. Not sure how the ruling works against the forward, but i dont recall Hardy's eyes leaving the ball and the ch7 commentary also mentioned the same.
Still, one goal is a drop in the ocean of that loss.
 
citizen-erased said:
my recollection was jolly had his back to the ball and eyes off the contest. Not sure how the ruling works against the forward, but i dont recall Hardy's eyes leaving the ball and the ch7 commentary also mentioned the same.
Still, one goal is a drop in the ocean of that loss.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree.

They were both holding each other but the player with their back to the ball was jolly! If there was a free at all it wasn't jolly's!
 
mxett said:
Absolutely agree.

They were both holding each other but the player with their back to the ball was jolly! If there was a free at all it wasn't jolly's!
Click to expand...

Im my opinion the Jolly decision was a bad one but no worse than the Cloke decision in the first when Cloke was cannoned in to from the front and no free was paid. There were bad decisions both ways.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The Jolly one wasn't a free kick, should have been play on i reckon, both players were holding.

It was a shit call, but not the worst one today, that would have been when Myers went back with the flight of the ball and cannoned into Cloke, when not once did he look at the ball. How that was play on has me baffled.

Umpiring was shit today, but you lot had a golden run in the first half and we had it in the second half.
 
South of the Yarra said:
Im my opinion the Jolly decision was a bad one but no worse than the Cloke decision in the first when Cloke was cannoned in to from the front and no free was paid. There were bad decisions both ways.
Click to expand...
Totally Agree, and said so earlier. In fact we got the better run from the umps overall.

But specifically on the jolly free, I was right in line with the contest in the MCC members and jolly was in front and turned to try to move back towards the square. He was the player who turned to face his opponent, not the other way.
 
mxett said:
Totally Agree, and said so earlier. In fact we got the better run from the umps overall.

But specifically on the jolly free, I was right in line with the contest in the MCC members and jolly was in front and turned to try to move back towards the square. He was the player who turned to face his opponent, not the other way.
Click to expand...

Yep. Collingwood jokes, watch it again and note how Jolly takes his eyes off the ball and initiates body contact with Hardingham, not the other way around. Hardingham momentarily takes his eyes off the ball, but it was easily the lesser of the two evils in that case and was a shit call.

Also, the Cloke non-decision was on a tight angle from around 45m out. The Jolly massacre was 10m out, straight in front, and influential in the scheme of the game.
 
Jolly decision was horrible, and any Collingwood supporter that comes on here and says otherwise clearly has a teeth to IQ ratio greater than 1, but seriously... Why has this thread been revisited? Did the umpires have any bearing on this match?
 
Just like most matches the umpiring was ok (hard to do) but had no real effect on the match, it's just the inconsistencies that happen minutes apart that get to me a bit at the ground that we sometimes tend to remember which lead us to think it's bad.

Collingwood get a push in the back, a minute later Hille gets reemed into the ground from behind and nothing, but it happens to both teams.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Jolly free kick was very ordinary. They were terrible all day and the standard of umpiring across the league is decreasing at a rapid rate to the point where it's ruining the game.
 
Valve Bounce said:
Not True. Collingwood did beat Geelong, as the Umpire did admit after that game. I don't really care what the results say, or what the ladder shows: to me Collingwood is unbeaten this year so far, and that is how I will regard that team.
Click to expand...

No, the umpire admitted that Pendlebury's goal should have been allowed. In which case the ball goes back to the middle and history is created anew. To say that Pendlebury's goal being allowed automatically means that Collingwood would have won is complete balderdash. It's possible, sure, but so are any number of other possibilities. If it was after the siren, it would have been another story, but it wasn't.

...so, yes. Very true. Collingwood have been beaten this season. All that really matters is what's on the scorecard.

I mean, it's like taking Malthouse's comment that the injuries killed Essendon's chances today, and then using that as gospel, which would then allow you to say that "Oh, we actually won that game, except for the injuries."

Crap.
 
DaSawx said:
Just like most matches the umpiring was ok (hard to do) but had no real effect on the match, it's just the inconsistencies that happen minutes apart that get to me a bit at the ground that we sometimes tend to remember which lead us to think it's bad.

Collingwood get a push in the back, a minute later Hille gets reemed into the ground from behind and nothing, but it happens to both teams.
Click to expand...
Yep, zero effect on the match.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Roast Umpires

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top