Umpiring

[Pie eyed]

All you umpire baggers out there, have you ever left a game thinking, "Gee, we really got the better decisions today." If not, there are three possibilities. 1. That just by sheer luck Collingwood has never gotten the better umpiring outcome. 2. That there is an umpiring conspiracy against Collingwood that has been going on for as long as you have been watching footy. 3. You can't see beyond your own bias to assess umpiring.

I am betting on 3.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

The umpiring was shit in the last quarter and the umpiring review will attest to it.
Having watched the replay twice since has done nothing to support your theory.
You forgot option 4. Umpires often influence the outcome of matches, as a result of the instruction given to them, each and every week, by the AFL in it's endless attempts to mould the game and even the sides.

 

[jonbe54]

The umpiring was shit in the last quarter and the umpiring review will attest to it.
Having watched the replay twice since has done nothing to support your theory.
You forgot option 4. Umpires often influence the outcome of matches, as a result of the instruction given to them, each and every week, by the AFL in it's endless attempts to mould the game and even the sides.

Can't convince them that don't want to hear PE, some people just listen to their own theme song playing endlessly in a loop.

 

[Sco80]

The umpiring was shit in the last quarter and the umpiring review will attest to it.
Having watched the replay twice since has done nothing to support your theory.
You forgot option 4. Umpires often influence the outcome of matches, as a result of the instruction given to them, each and every week, by the AFL in it's endless attempts to mould the game and even the sides.

Yes. I call it afl directive 101

 

[sideswipe]

The umpiring was shit in the last quarter and the umpiring review will attest to it.
Having watched the replay twice since has done nothing to support your theory.
You forgot option 4. Umpires often influence the outcome of matches, as a result of the instruction given to them, each and every week, by the AFL in it's endless attempts to mould the game and even the sides.

Not saying umps can't make mistakes, not saying bad decisions can't impact games and certainly not saying that the emphasis on certain decisions can change. I am talking about the fanboys who only see bad decisions when they go against their team. The users of terms like cheats and conspiracy. Your option 4 doesn't make sense in that context.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[jonbe54]

Not saying umps can't make mistakes, not saying bad decisions can't impact games and certainly not saying that the emphasis on certain decisions can change. I am talking about the fanboys who only see bad decisions when they go against their team. The users of terms like cheats and conspiracy. Your option 4 doesn't make sense in that context.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

This isn't about fanboy decisions. I've been watching footy - ALL footy - since 1964 - and the changes in umpire operations over around the last 20 years has been a slow and steady decline from independent and unobtrusive refereeing towards today's intrusive, match influencing grandstanding and has been there for all to see.

Two main goals present themselves for consideration.

1. The introduction of expansion teams, umpiring for them and against opposition is and will remain well established.

2. The 'level playing field' manifesto, no team is allowed to completely dominate a game, let alone the competition if it can be prevented - unless it conflicts with reason 1.

Likewise 3 reasons present for motivation.

1. The manifesto is bullshit window dressing to camouflage the forced success of expansion teams.

2. The insidious penetration of the sport at the highest level by gambling corporations.

3. The AFL climbing into bed with television executives - no match shall be allowed to be dominated by one team lest viewers switch off.

My personal opinions only but the fact is that umpiring HAS changed and for the worse. The best umpires have always been totally invisible but that is not allowed to happen anymore.

 

[sideswipe]

This isn't about fanboy decisions. I've been watching footy - ALL footy - since 1964 - and the changes in umpire operations over around the last 20 years has been a slow and steady decline from independent and unobtrusive refereeing towards today's intrusive, match influencing grandstanding and has been there for all to see.

Two main goals present themselves for consideration.

1. The introduction of expansion teams, umpiring for them and against opposition is and will remain well established.

2. The 'level playing field' manifesto, no team is allowed to completely dominate a game, let alone the competition if it can be prevented - unless it conflicts with reason 1.

Likewise 3 reasons present for motivation.

1. The manifesto is bullshit window dressing to camouflage the forced success of expansion teams.

2. The insidious penetration of the sport at the highest level by gambling corporations.

3. The AFL climbing into bed with television executives - no match shall be allowed to be dominated by one team lest viewers switch off.

My personal opinions only but the fact is that umpiring HAS changed and for the worse. The best umpires have always been totally invisible but that is not allowed to happen anymore.

You raise a few different points. I don't disagree with you on umpire visibility (the mics do make invisibility a bit harder) - and maybe umpiring has gotten worse in the face of a far different game (rules, speed and playing patterns) to that of 20+ years ago. That is pretty much unprovable, but I think there are a lot less free kicks awarded now compared with decades ago? So you like free kicks?

However, do you really believe there is an AFL-directed umpire-wide conspiracy (that is the only word to describe it) to award decisions which favour expansion teams? By expansion, do you mean just GWS and the Suns? Or are you including the Lions and Swans as well?

Forgive me, but that is well into tin foil hat territory.

As for Sunday, my view on the umpiring in the last quarter was that it was ok - we were tiring, and that can often result in giving away free kicks when second to the ball.

 

[Anzacday]

As for Sunday, my view on the umpiring in the last quarter was that it was ok - we were tiring, and that can often result in giving away free kicks when second to the ball.

The frustration for me is the ones that weren't/aren't paid more than those that are.

 

[jonbe54]

You raise a few different points. I don't disagree with you on umpire visibility (the mics do make invisibility a bit harder) - and maybe umpiring has gotten worse in the face of a far different game (rules, speed and playing patterns) to that of 20+ years ago. That is pretty much unprovable, but I think there are a lot less free kicks awarded now compared with decades ago? So you like free kicks?

However, do you really believe there is an AFL-directed umpire-wide conspiracy (that is the only word to describe it) to award decisions which favour expansion teams? By expansion, do you mean just GWS and the Suns? Or are you including the Lions and Swans as well?

Forgive me, but that is well into tin foil hat territory.

As for Sunday, my view on the umpiring in the last quarter was that it was ok - we were tiring, and that can often result in giving away free kicks when second to the ball.

Everything can be interpenetrated as tin hat theory or conversely rose coloured glasses theory. Taking a play or a quarter or a game or even a season into account is one thing but watching a period of 20 odd years with the same indicators cropping up again and again is another thing altogether.

In my humble opinion believing that a competition that has embraced gambling to such an extent that part of its income is dependent on it is untainted is being credulous indeed. The same goes for believing that media interests are ignored for the good of the game.

So forgive me but the fact ise that the AFL is connected with gambling on its own competition and where gambling is involved everyone has to be suspect.

 

[sideswipe]

Everything can be interpenetrated as tin hat theory or conversely rose coloured glasses theory. Taking a play or a quarter or a game or even a season into account is one thing but watching a period of 20 odd years with the same indicators cropping up again and again is another thing altogether.

In my humble opinion believing that a competition that has embraced gambling to such an extent that part of its income is dependent on it is untainted is being credulous indeed. The same goes for believing that media interests are ignored for the good of the game.

So forgive me but the fact ise that the AFL is connected with gambling on its own competition and where gambling is involved everyone has to be suspect.

So you are saying that umpys like to keep games tight so gambling income is maximised, subject to the expansion teams winning? Thus the Suns/GWS (Lions/Bears too?) get the decisions first, and then if they aren't playing or if they are winning comfortably, the team in deficit gets the benefit of decisions to get a close finish?

No wonder the umpys are making mistakes - they are too busy wondering who to favour.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

You raise a few different points. I don't disagree with you on umpire visibility (the mics do make invisibility a bit harder) - and maybe umpiring has gotten worse in the face of a far different game (rules, speed and playing patterns) to that of 20+ years ago. That is pretty much unprovable, but I think there are a lot less free kicks awarded now compared with decades ago? So you like free kicks?

However, do you really believe there is an AFL-directed umpire-wide conspiracy (that is the only word to describe it) to award decisions which favour expansion teams? By expansion, do you mean just GWS and the Suns? Or are you including the Lions and Swans as well?

Forgive me, but that is well into tin foil hat territory.

As for Sunday, my view on the umpiring in the last quarter was that it was ok - we were tiring, and that can often result in giving away free kicks when second to the ball.

Yes, tired is the perfect explanation for allowing Hawkins to push his opponent in the back 4 or 5 times and only pinging the most blatantly ridiculous over the top one. Collingwood being tired. That's it.

Sorry, but there's been times where I believed we actually had a good run with the umps and it stands out because it almost never happens. The scary part is, I personally feel that it's the free kicks that don't get paid that kill us more than the ones that do. That combined with the ridiculous inconsistencies I believe cost us at least 3 or 4 games per year.

It's hit the point where it can't just be a coincidence anymore.

The stats also show that over the last decade, we're always floating near the bottom in terms of frees for/against. Outside 2011 which was our best season (7th) and that's WITH the Premiership boost that all reigning premiers get from the umps.

 

[jonbe54]

So you are saying that umpys like to keep games tight so gambling income is maximised, subject to the expansion teams winning? Thus the Suns/GWS (Lions/Bears too?) get the decisions first, and then if they aren't playing or if they are winning comfortably, the team in deficit gets the benefit of decisions to get a close finish?

No wonder the umpys are making mistakes - they are too busy wondering who to favour.

In what universe to you construe I blamed the umpires in any way??
Comprehension is part of the language you know, to do it you may want to entertain reading without bias before criticising.
Not in any word or way did I blame the umpires individually or as a body.
The fault lays higher up the food chain.

 

[sideswipe]

In what universe to you construe I blamed the umpires in any way??
Comprehension is part of the language you know, to do it you may want to entertain reading without bias before criticising.
Not in any word or way did I blame the umpires individually or as a body.
The fault lays higher up the food chain.

In the universe where you said,

"The introduction of expansion teams, umpiring for them and against opposition is and will remain well established"

If that isn't blaming umpires, are you giving them a Nuremberg Defence?

 

[Darkyprotector]

In the universe where you said,

"The introduction of expansion teams, umpiring for them and against opposition is and will remain well established"

If that isn't blaming umpires, are you giving them a Nuremberg Defence?

Interesting discussion fellas
As mentioned in previous posts a couple of facts are relevant;
Team support is primary based on success ,it is the only way you build a strong club with lots of support = SUCCESS.
Collingwood in the 30s got every poor immigrant who come after ww1,why because we Won ,Carlton same with the Italians ww2 ,hawthorn Greeks ect, explains why Brisbane have a fair few dormant supporters now as the success was not sustained.Geelong s recent success (paying for a stadium) and Well hawthorn and their feable attempt to steal our record of course aided by the HAWTHORN AFL administration are more examples.
Bulldogs last year surprised ,but did they?i still think that there was a after wash of the peptide business.
My previous occupation required consultation with New Australian immigrants ,building houses (150 per .month 6 years, big sample size ) showed that over 80% backed a recent winner! or picked the winner when they got here!
That's why we don't get much , it's not in the afl interest to have us get bigger and bigger and bigger, offspring would create huge support anyway and TV money is King.
. Crap fixture every year designed to deny us momentum
.inconsistent mrp where our guys ALWAYS GET A raw deal and we then have to suffer FOOLS AND SYCOPHANTS telling us where being too precious. Leeter 2 years for ZIP , cost us 2 flags there ,TRY WINNING 6 In a row Hawks.
Inconsistent umpiring, where we seem to get a couple where and when it doesn't matter all the time.
Been going on since prior to my birth ( 63) as my late father explained.which is why we never take a win for granted any more
I don't believe in coincidences any more.
If you knew our history you would assume ,well the obvious
Leeter Collier, Make him a legend Now ( 9 flags 11 years) best player Dyer played against.why isn't he in

 

[mattys123]

Interesting to notice that we average the least total frees (for and against) of any team in the comp.

And in fact we are actually on average winning one more free then our opponents each week. We have the fewest free kicks paid to us, but also have the second least paid against us.

The best umpired game I've seen this year, and maybe in a long while was the Essendon game. The umpires were consistent all game. They simply let the game go and only paid 18 free kicks in total.

The umpire aren't the reason we are 2-4, that's for sure.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/fts_team_rankings?type=TA&year=2017&sby=8

 

[sideswipe]

Interesting discussion fellas
As mentioned in previous posts a couple of facts are relevant;
Team support is primary based on success ,it is the only way you build a strong club with lots of support = SUCCESS.
Collingwood in the 30s got every poor immigrant who come after ww1,why because we Won ,Carlton same with the Italians ww2 ,hawthorn Greeks ect, explains why Brisbane have a fair few dormant supporters now as the success was not sustained.Geelong s recent success (paying for a stadium) and Well hawthorn and their feable attempt to steal our record of course aided by the HAWTHORN AFL administration are more examples.
Bulldogs last year surprised ,but did they?i still think that there was a after wash of the peptide business.
My previous occupation required consultation with New Australian immigrants ,building houses (150 per .month 6 years, big sample size ) showed that over 80% backed a recent winner! or picked the winner when they got here!
That's why we don't get much , it's not in the afl interest to have us get bigger and bigger and bigger, offspring would create huge support anyway and TV money is King.
. Crap fixture every year designed to deny us momentum
.inconsistent mrp where our guys ALWAYS GET A raw deal and we then have to suffer FOOLS AND SYCOPHANTS telling us where being too precious. Leeter 2 years for ZIP , cost us 2 flags there ,TRY WINNING 6 In a row Hawks.
Inconsistent umpiring, where we seem to get a couple where and when it doesn't matter all the time.
Been going on since prior to my birth ( 63) as my late father explained.which is why we never take a win for granted any more
I don't believe in coincidences any more.
If you knew our history you would assume ,well the obvious
Leeter Collier, Make him a legend Now ( 9 flags 11 years) best player Dyer played against.why isn't he in

Weird post with an interesting non sequitur. Won't address anything other than your glaring error after writing "if you knew history", Collier won 6 flags not 9 (only Tuck has won more than 6 - 7). Collier over 14 years not 11 if wiki is to be believed. He isn't the worst suggestion but there are probably a few ahead. AFL hall of fame dinner is in Adelaide this year. That says a South Australian inductee. I say Blight...


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Helfarch]

Yes, tired is the perfect explanation for allowing Hawkins to push his opponent in the back 4 or 5 times and only pinging the most blatantly ridiculous over the top one. Collingwood being tired. That's it.

Sorry, but there's been times where I believed we actually had a good run with the umps and it stands out because it almost never happens. The scary part is, I personally feel that it's the free kicks that don't get paid that kill us more than the ones that do. That combined with the ridiculous inconsistencies I believe cost us at least 3 or 4 games per year.

It's hit the point where it can't just be a coincidence anymore.

The stats also show that over the last decade, we're always floating near the bottom in terms of frees for/against. Outside 2011 which was our best season (7th) and that's WITH the Premiership boost that all reigning premiers get from the umps.

I believe a not insignificant percentage of the issue is unconscious bias. People genuinely dislike Collingwood and most clubs know they will have a bad game with the umpires depending on who is out there.

I think the lack of visible accountability for shitty umpiring is an issue, at least in the NFL they will come out and say you did a bad job, pick it up or your crew will get the arse. AFL they look at a couple of contentions frees paid and say technically they were there while the entire AFL fanbase seethes at the four blatant frees not called leading up to it.

 

[Pie eyed]

I believe a not insignificant percentage of the issue is unconscious bias. People genuinely dislike Collingwood and most clubs know they will have a bad game with the umpires depending on who is out there.

I think the lack of visible accountability for shitty umpiring is an issue, at least in the NFL they will come out and say you did a bad job, pick it up or your crew will get the arse. AFL they look at a couple of contentions frees paid and say technically they were there while the entire AFL fanbase seethes at the four blatant frees not called leading up to it.

A lot of the problems stem from the AFL's continuous insistence on creating ambiguous rules and changing them too often, for ambiguous reasons.
Like being able to blatantly push in the back with your forearm, but not even put a little pinky on them with your hand, or get away with dangerously launching into a players back with a boot in a marking contest without even a hint of trouble.

 

[Black_White]

Anyone see the sling tackle on the Giant player?
Slung into the ground, looks like concussion....free kick Aints!
Need I say it?
Dead set......

 

[Alexander323bc]

Umps have been sh1t! This game.

 

[Black_White]

Another day, another inconsistent performance.
This time there's four of the maggots.

 

[Black_White]

New rule.
Player gets a free, ball spills 10 metres ahead of where free is called.
Player runs on and picks up ball.
Called "Advantage"?
In all my years of watching this game, the player has always been called back over his mark.
Let us call this new rule the Collingwood rule shall we.
DEAD SET CHEATS.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

New rule.
Player gets a free, ball spills 10 metres ahead of where free is called.
Player runs on and picks up ball.
Called "Advantage"?
In all my years of watching this game, the player has always been called back over his mark.
Let us call this new rule the Collingwood rule shall we.
DEAD SET CHEATS.

It's been a shocking day today.

 

[TradeDraft]

Scumps have money on Melbourne today.

Giving them everything and us Nothing.

Scumps are Corrupt

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Not the best effort today
All over the shop

 

[Black_White]

Two HTB against us.
This thread needs to be pinned.