Umpiring

[Kappa]

Pick a different mark next time.

In all my years on Bigfooty how often have I been mean to Dave?

I'm the 1001th person to ask him about umpires but now it suddenly turns sinister...

 

[jmac70]

In all my years on Bigfooty how often have I been mean to Dave?

Then don't start now.

 

[good4footy]

There has never been a worse decision than Jared Grant GWS having shot from 50, stuffing the kick and it going out of bounce 5m from the point post - only for it to be called deliberate- deliberate when having a shot for goal and missing, that takes the cake.

Even that was not cheating however.

 

[Somebody]

I've watched our last game again with particular attention to the officiating.
And I feel this is a game that we can put the men in green to the test, as we did win it.
All I ask is consistency in the interpretation of our, let's face it loosely written, rules.
How many times during the game were our players pinned for htb? The whistle was fast whenever we touched the ball and it spilled out of the contest. And ough it took more time, if we were tackled in the ground you just knew what the decision would be.
Compare this to the way htb was officiated for our opponents.
A player is spun 360, TWICE, the ball spills loose from a very dubious handball and it is called play on.
I have seen at least three incidences, where the WC player has dived at the ball effectively pulling it to themselves, yet the whistle is very quick not allowing the time that is needed for a htb decision, or for the ball to clear.
This is inconsistant, this is dead set cheating.
And I'm only up to 3/4 time!

well I think it is a very hard game to umpire. Umpires aren't (I don't think) paid all that handsomely so if suporters keep abusing them relentlessly it probably causes a lot more to quit the job. Then they are replaced by umpires many of whom are likely to be worse so it doesn't help much.
ITs hard especially when you lose, but I'd suggest try to give the umps some appreciation too and make the criticism more constructive.

 

[BPikkers]

Ok, if you know what my follow up question was then you post it.

Was it 'I love whores and bourbon'?

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Didn't notice the umpiring when watching the match, seemed fine

I was at the game and cheats is the word I used many many times.

You'd think we were playing West Coast at Domain the way the umpiring was. The inconsistency was some of the worst I've seen this year. I didn't think anything would top that North game, but yeah, they proved me wrong.

 

[Buckley is my hero]

I thought the umpiring was generally pretty good, but one howler I was filthy at came in the last quarter.

I can't make a gif because I can't find a youtube video of the last quarter less than 30 minutes, but it occurs at 1:46 of this link.
http://lon-cdn220-is-3.se.bponlinew...-07-30_07-41-36-8715/output_2400kbps_720p.mp4

Seriously can't understand how that can be called play on. If that's not holding the ball, then I've never seen a holding the ball decision.

Holding the ball is exactly that, holding onto the ball when you are tackled. Great tackle by Marsh but the ball was freed in the act of the tackle so play on seemed the correct call to me. Some umpires might have paid it but each free kick paid holds up play. Isn't it better from an entertainment point of view to watch fast flow on footy without the umpires having to intervene all the time?

 

[Anzacday]

Holding the ball is exactly that, holding onto the ball when you are tackled. Great tackle by Marsh but the ball was freed in the act of the tackle so play on seemed the correct call to me. Some umpires might have paid it but each free kick paid holds up play. Isn't it better from an entertainment point of view to watch fast flow on footy without the umpires having to intervene all the time?

I listen to the umpires at the game and they explained a couple of decisions to Pendles.
If you are tackled immediately, (no prior opportunity) upon receiving the ball and attempt a kick, (even if you miss it) it's play on - this harks back to years gone by where the umpires used to say "he tried" and I think is a good one.
If you have had prior opportunity, (running with the ball or even taken a few steps/try to fend off instead of disposing of the ball) and are tackled you must dispose of the ball correctly/legally.
That decision should have been a free kick to Marsh.

 

[jjsmitty8]

Holding the ball is exactly that, holding onto the ball when you are tackled. Great tackle by Marsh but the ball was freed in the act of the tackle so play on seemed the correct call to me. Some umpires might have paid it but each free kick paid holds up play. Isn't it better from an entertainment point of view to watch fast flow on footy without the umpires having to intervene all the time?

Okay, so "holding the ball" maybe isn't the right call, but illegal disposal is. Darling has had plenty of prior opportunity, he gets tackled and doesn't dispose of it legally. I don't care how much the umpire intervenes, pay the free kicks when they're there, otherwise we may as well have no umpires.

 

[Black_White]

I listen to the umpires at the game and they explained a couple of decisions to Pendles.
If you are tackled immediately, (no prior opportunity) upon receiving the ball and attempt a kick, (even if you miss it) it's play on - this harks back to years gone by where the umpires used to say "he tried" and I think is a good one.
If you have had prior opportunity, (running with the ball or even taken a few steps/try to fend off instead of disposing of the ball) and are tackled you must dispose of the ball correctly/legally.
That decision should have been a free kick to Marsh.

"Attempt a kick play on"
Now I don't remember the game, it may have been ours I would have to look, but there was a player who was had an airy a few metres out from the goal and the umpire called htb.
Even the commentators pointed out that the player was not even being tackled at the time!
I've seen players tackled, drop the ball and connect with their foot, being done for htb.
Inconsistency or cheating?
As it happens CONSISTANTLY I have to call cheating because even the umpires have coaches who would have coached these inconsistencies out years ago.

 

[legendstatus]

Then don't start now.

Lets face it, Dave deserves a good smacking sometimes... he ain't a protected specie is he??? if you're going to say stupid things and "Scumps" all the time then he gets what he gets

 

[Pie eyed]

Peace......find Jesus

He's behind the couch. Has been for eons.

 

[Jasper84]

"Attempt a kick play on"
Now I don't remember the game, it may have been ours I would have to look, but there was a player who was had an airy a few metres out from the goal and the umpire called htb.
Even the commentators pointed out that the player was not even being tackled at the time!
I've seen players tackled, drop the ball and connect with their foot, being done for htb.
Inconsistency or cheating?
As it happens CONSISTANTLY I have to call cheating because even the umpires have coaches who would have coached these inconsistencies out years ago.

Just because they make the wrong call, does not mean that they are cheats. Cheating is a deliberate dishonest action for personal gain. Do you really think the umpires stand to gain anything by making incorrect calls?

Apart from the big three (race, sexual orientation and religious beliefs) calling someone a cheat is one of the most offensive things you could say to a person involved in professional sport especially when it's completely unfounded.

 

[Anzacday]

Just because they make the wrong call, does not mean that they are cheats. Cheating is a deliberate dishonest action for personal gain. Do you really think the umpires stand to gain anything by making incorrect calls?

Apart from the big three (race, sexual orientation and religious beliefs) calling someone a cheat is one of the most offensive things you could say to a person involved in professional sport especially when it's completely unfounded.

Thanks I couldn't, (have said it better) be bothered replying.

 

[Jasper84]

Thanks I couldn't, (have said it better) be bothered replying.

People who call umpires cheats are the same ones who cry when they go out in backyard cricket.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

People who call umpires cheats are the same ones who cry when they go out in backyard cricket.

I still call bullshit!

Your dog shouldn't be allowed to be auto wicky. Every time you snick the ball he drops it, every time I snick it he catches the bloody thing!!!!

 

[CasuallyDressed]

The umpires are pretty shit for everybody.

 

[McGuanes Seven]

I still call bullshit!

Your dog shouldn't be allowed to be auto wicky. Every time you snick the ball he drops it, every time I snick it he catches the bloody thing!!!!

And Howe's dog will break your fingers if you don't walk when you are clearly out

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Umpires are not cheats. Pathetic thread.

 

[Gone Critical]

I was at the game and cheats is the word I used many many times.

You'd think we were playing West Coast at Domain the way the umpiring was. The inconsistency was some of the worst I've seen this year. I didn't think anything would top that North game, but yeah, they proved me wrong.

Ed if you reckon the umpires cheat that probably more reflects your lack of understanding of the rules and the umps interpretation. I would guarantee that most of the times we dispute a decision from the stands it is we who are wrong not the umps. As supporters we are parochial and are not meant to be balanced. We can't really objectively assess umpiring because we are too emotionally invested in our team. If you were calling the umps cheats repeatly it probalby means you were off tap. Nothing wrong with that when supporting the Pies.

 

[Kappa]

Umpires definitely favour one team over the other at certain times in the game, probably more subconscious than a conscious decision and not really cheating

 

[BPikkers]

I've watched our last game again with particular attention to the officiating.
And I feel this is a game that we can put the men in green to the test, as we did win it.
All I ask is consistency in the interpretation of our, let's face it loosely written, rules.
How many times during the game were our players pinned for htb? The whistle was fast whenever we touched the ball and it spilled out of the contest. And ough it took more time, if we were tackled in the ground you just knew what the decision would be.
Compare this to the way htb was officiated for our opponents.
A player is spun 360, TWICE, the ball spills loose from a very dubious handball and it is called play on.
I have seen at least three incidences, where the WC player has dived at the ball effectively pulling it to themselves, yet the whistle is very quick not allowing the time that is needed for a htb decision, or for the ball to clear.
This is inconsistant, this is dead set cheating.
And I'm only up to 3/4 time!

I think you might be onto something here.
I believe the umpires were Donlonchev, Schmittakov and Brownsnetsov.....definitely CHEATS!

 

[Black_White]

It's a pity so many are blind to the reality of the officiating of our great game.
These guys earn over 160K to do what they do, and if they make so many inconsistant decisions in real jobs they would be moved on. Quickly.
The problem starts at the top. The inconsistency has been evident for years, and not been addressed. That means the hierarchy are in on the fix.
No doubt dollars are made on these decisions, match fixing is rife in soccer, cricket and basketball. What makes us think our game is immune?
Unless there has been a rise in sales of rose coloured glasses, then we are not.

 

[Jasper84]

It's a pity so many are blind to the reality of the officiating of our great game.
These guys earn over 160K to do what they do, and if they make so many inconsistant decisions in real jobs they would be moved on. Quickly.
The problem starts at the top. The inconsistency has been evident for years, and not been addressed. That means the hierarchy are in on the fix.
No doubt dollars are made on these decisions, match fixing is rife in soccer, cricket and basketball. What makes us think our game is immune?
Unless there has been a rise in sales of rose coloured glasses, then we are not.

I thought it was weird that Sportsbet were offering 5 to 1 odds of a free kick being paid to West Coast at 23:46 minute mark of the second quarter.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

It's a pity so many are blind to the reality of the officiating of our great game.
These guys earn over 160K to do what they do, and if they make so many inconsistant decisions in real jobs they would be moved on. Quickly.
The problem starts at the top. The inconsistency has been evident for years, and not been addressed. That means the hierarchy are in on the fix.
No doubt dollars are made on these decisions, match fixing is rife in soccer, cricket and basketball. What makes us think our game is immune?
Unless there has been a rise in sales of rose coloured glasses, then we are not.

Agree, umpires should be removed from the game & put in jobs that suit them, machine operators.

Then all they have to worry about is which button to hit first, Start, Grey Area or Stop.