Umpiring

[smasha]

I think he has been banned for life from the AFL …. To honest for AFL … and a TIGER MAN !!!….he calls the AFL out for the dirty dogs they are

He got the arse from On The Couch too or did he walk away?

 

[smasha]

I'm not arguing that it's poor umpiring as the umpires are calling the game as per the rules, the difference is that generally in finals when you've got the most experienced and/or best performed umpires from the season calling games they don't call the technical free kicks that get called during the season as they're more inclined to let the players play as they understand that nobody is there for a whistlefest, they're there for a good hard fought game of footy.

We don't get shafted by the umpires, we get shafted by our own style of play, which is built around being successful in finals footy. So you can say it's the umpires shafting us if it makes you feel better, but the truth is that if we didn't play on the edge like we do we'd be giving away much fewer frees, but unlikely to be receiving many more due to the fact we don't play for free kicks, we just get on with it.

Refer to Swans first goal ........

 

[Phar Ace]

And I quote:

"Michael delivered brave, pioneering, game-changing journalism that led to dramatic form at the AFL. Michael didn't just take a swing at the AFL mafia - he flattened them!"

 

[Tony Stark]

George did screw that up though.
He is often a selfish player and always goes for glory, which results mostly in OOTF or a behind...

Did George hear the advantage call, common sense should have been applied by the umpires.

 

[Phar Ace]

He got the arse from On The Couch too or did he walk away?

He says he walked a way - but while Eddie is still sitting with Gil at the footy, no concidence that Michael Warner didn't get a Xmas card from either!

 

[Groupie_]

Does anyone follow Mick Warner haven't herd him since his book release the only one in the media who took up to afl house.

last seen in guantanamo bay

 

[DoItForCaptBlood]

Simple solution to the absolute schemozzle that is the 50m penalty for dissent.

Anyone guilty of consent is given 2-minutes in the ‘sin bin’ and is fined. So the team has to play the next 2-mins a man short. And the fines go up in increasing increments. $500 first offence. $1,000 2nd etc….

So it doesn’t give up an immediate goal from a 50m, but the team is still penalised. And if the game is ‘over’ so in theory the player doesn’t care about being sent off, they cop a financial sanction.

Then the problem will be self governed, as how long will a coach tolerate players dissenting and leaving the team a player short. And players hate being off the ground and hate losing cash … it will stop it in its tracks.

And all fines go towards junior umpire development programs.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Guilty of consent????... So the opposite of what happens in the bedroom?

 

[Wooden Robot]

He says he walked a way - but while Eddie is still sitting with Gil at the footy, no concidence that Michael Warner didn't get a Xmas card from either!

With respect .. who the f*** sends Christmas cards anymore?
I haven't sent one since about '97.

 

[Phar Ace]

With respect .. who the f*** sends Christmas cards anymore?
I haven't sent one since about '97.

Mate, it's a phrase these days - I wasn't being literal!

 

[_RT_]

Refer to Swans first goal ........

It was a legitimate free kick that occurred well off the ball and was called by the umpire in the middle of the ground. When you see the vision from behind the goals, you can't quite see the contact, but it happens just before they come into the screen and by time the free is relayed to the controlling umpire down the ground it made it look like that it happened in the marking contest which had everyone confused and upset about how 'soft' the free kick was.

 

[Antzzz]

He got the arse from On The Couch too or did he walk away?

I’m not sure … he sort of just disappeared and nothing was said … smacks of AFL MAFIA at work

 

[Nobby]

 

[SunshineBoy]

yep no grey area in that rule, controlling umpire deemed it a 50 as well, no need to check if his colleagues had a bet on the Swans to win by 12 or under.

You’ve hit the nail on the head Sportsbet like this

 

[SunshineBoy]

Refer to Swans first goal ........

Was paying $30 bucks for first goal

 

[SunshineBoy]

It was a legitimate free kick that occurred well off the ball and was called by the umpire in the middle of the ground. When you see the vision from behind the goals, you can't quite see the contact, but it happens just before they come into the screen and by time the free is relayed to the controlling umpire down the ground it made it look like that it happened in the marking contest which had everyone confused and upset about how 'soft' the free kick was.

Still paid $30

 

[Groupie_]

this campaigner should be our ceo

only campaigner with the balls to say shit and sue everyone

 

[Nobby]

this campaigner should be our ceo

only campaigner with the balls to say shit and sue everyone

His normal posts aren't too positive when talking about Richmond from memory.

He doesn't hold back though, and sounds quite bitter about losing his media job because he wouldn't "tow thw party line"

 

[Noidnadroj]

I cannot ever recall seeing that before, advantage paid when the ball is not even in possession. It was insane.

It’s why Dimma tweeted ‘Common Sense… Sorry, what?’ … there would have been 20 times during that match when common sense was not used by the umpires. It’s laughable. But then a heap of media hacks trumpet ‘Good to see them use common sense and not apply the technical application of the 50m rule at the end to get the right outcome’. As those with any semblance of intelligence said post game …. you can’t adjudicate based on technical rulings and not apply common sense for 120-minutes (Rioli arm nudge, Reid non-free, Buddy push in stomach, reverse free against Swans player on Vlastuin, free against Bolton for throwing ball a foot to the left of player…) then change the way you umpire after the final siren by using ‘common sense’.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[TheOptimum18]

It was a legitimate free kick that occurred well off the ball and was called by the umpire in the middle of the ground. When you see the vision from behind the goals, you can't quite see the contact, but it happens just before they come into the screen and by time the free is relayed to the controlling umpire down the ground it made it look like that it happened in the marking contest which had everyone confused and upset about how 'soft' the free kick was.

But it's a technical free kick, while common sense would say that the pull from Tarrant was so insignifacnt, it didn't impact Reid's ability to contest for the ball. Reid didn't mark the ball cause of Grimes spoil, not cause of Tarrant's hold or pull.

And this isn't down to the way we play or anything like that. That's just umpires being incompetent.

 

[Mr Unbelievable]

It’s why Dimma tweeted ‘Common Sense… Sorry, what?’ … there would have been 20 times during that match when common sense was not used by the umpires. It’s laughable. But then a heap of media hacks trumpet ‘Good to see them use common sense and not apply the technical application of the 50m rule at the end to get the right outcome’. As those with any semblance of intelligence said post game …. you can’t adjudicate based on technical rulings and not apply common sense for 120-minutes (Rioli arm nudge, Reid non-free, Buddy push in stomach, reverse free against Swans player on Vlastuin, free against Bolton for throwing ball a foot to the left of player…) then change the way you umpire after the final siren by using ‘common sense’.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I agree with a lot of what you say campaigner

 

[Nobby]

Thommo followed up with this gem

 

[smasha]

Thommo followed up with this gem

CFL owe us 2 points the cheats.
Still think the Swans first goal was a rort so that’s 4 points and a spot in the 8 cheated by the CFL to go with the 20 plus free fiasco against the Crows and the all you can eat 50 metre experimentation r1.

12 points rorted by the CFL,should be well inside the 8 at this stage.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Thommo followed up with this gem

That is nail on the head from Thomas, even forgetting our allegiance to Richmond.

Siren goes, the player with the ball is expected to check the umpire has signalled the end of the game before roosting it 50 metres over the fence. The umpires clearly had not signalled he end of the game because a free kick had been paid. Therefore it is obviously a 50m penalty by the rules.

This idiotic stuff that Kane Cornes and Whately and others have come up with is irrelevant. It also shows how stupid the mainstream media has been in dealing with this. How tough would it be for any of them to look up the rules and consider them rationally as Thomas has done?

It doesn’t matter whether Warner understands a free has been paid or not. It doesn’t matter if he has or has not heard the whistle. The game is still alive because the umpires hadn’t signalled the end of the game, that is all that matters. So his action of kicking the ball away was foolish and something all players should be instructed not to do unless they have actually seen an umpire signal the game is over.

The AFL stating the umpires made the correct decision is mystifying in light of these rules Thomas has shown.

It would have been a shit way for the Swans to end up not winning the game, but players do stupid technical infringements all the time that cost their teams. Ours certainly have done in recent times.

 

[SunshineBoy]

But it's a technical free kick, while common sense would say that the pull from Tarrant was so insignifacnt, it didn't impact Reid's ability to contest for the ball. Reid didn't mark the ball cause of Grimes spoil, not cause of Tarrant's hold or pull.

And this isn't down to the way we play or anything like that. That's just umpires being incompetent.

Still paid $30

 

[_RT_]

But it's a technical free kick, while common sense would say that the pull from Tarrant was so insignifacnt, it didn't impact Reid's ability to contest for the ball. Reid didn't mark the ball cause of Grimes spoil, not cause of Tarrant's hold or pull.

And this isn't down to the way we play or anything like that. That's just umpires being incompetent.

Tarrants initial hold, which the free kick was paid for, happened 10-15m away from the contest, not the insignificant pull that was caught on the broadcast and had everyone scratching their head. Had Tarrant not impeded him like he did, it's quite possible that Reid marks it easily with a clear run at the footy.

And it is to do with how we play, we try and impede opponents from having a clear run at the footy, the same as every team does, the issue is that when you've lost half a step like some of our older guys have, you grab a little longer which gives the umpire a little more time to see the jumper stretch, which results in the free kick being easily picked out, from non controlling umpires up the field.

The one thing I've noticed this year is we've given a lot more frees away that are initially called by the non controlling umpire, than we have in previous seasons and I'll say it again it's because of the way we play and nobody is going to change my mind on that unless they have some hard evidence to prove that it's a conspiracy from the umpiring department.