Why is this not surprising?

[tribey]

Apologies if this overall statistic has been brought up recently, and given our catalogue of matches and marked displeasure with the umpiring thus far (hell, even Point Break Biggles noticed!) this really should come as no surprise, but feast your eyes on this:

Free Kicks For - After 17 Rounds

1. St. Kilda 315
2. Carlton 311
3. Richmond 310
4. Collingwood 307
5. Western Bulldogs 295
6. Kangaroos 294
7. West Coast 291
7. Geelong 291
8. Hawthorn 289
8. Fremantle 289
9. Port Adelaide 285
10. Sydney 282
11. Melbourne 279
12. Brisbane 270
13. Essendon 269
14. Adelaide 256 (10th in FK Against)

We are 14 freekicks behind Essendon as stone motherless last on the free kicks received tally for 2005 despite the fact we're clear second on the table with 12 wins and 5 losses (and for the most part close losses too) - going by the old adage that we have been first to the ball for the vast majority of our games you'd assume we should have received a fair few more freekicks than we have.

So how the hell does this compute?

In previous successful years we have enjoyed the rub of the green with the umpiring fraternity as far as being awarded frees goes but have more or less copped it in equal measure the other way:

1998 3rd For, 3rd Against (+2 disparity)
2002 3rd For, 2nd Against (-37 disparity)
2003 3rd For, 6th Against (+18 disparity)
2005 16th For, 10th Against (-27 disparity)

So what gives? Like the rest of the country do the umpires still assume us to be a crap side and aren't awarding us freekicks accordingly? I'm dumbfounded.

Discuss.

 

[Portia]

The fact that you're bottom eight in both categories implies that your games aren't overumpired. I'd say thats a good thing.

 

[tribey]

The fact that you're bottom eight in both categories implies that your games aren't overumpired. I'd say thats a good thing.

I dunno Porthos, if Fremantle had've got up in that last quarter I reckon there would've been a Royal Commission conducted to investigate the bananas officiating that one.

The Richmond game was another tribute to excess alcohol consumption/corruption/severe malpractice (take your pick) - and these are games we won.

 

[GoSarge]

Could be a number of things.

If a team has clean skills, then you could possibly be first to the ball and then have disposed of it before the opposition has had a chance to infringe.

Another thing could be a loose unaccountable way of playing. This way the game would be open, and again, there would be less chances of giving away free kicks

Just throwing around ideas.

The fact that you're bottom eight in both categories implies that your games aren't overumpired. I'd say thats a good thing.

Perhaps. But why our games in particular ?

 

[marvin]

One factor surely has to be that of our two ruckmen, one is inexperienced in AFL terms, and the other has, shall we say, had his football brain questioned in these parts. The bigfellas tend to draw free kicks disproportionately.

Our midfield is also physically one of the bigger units going around - Goody, Thommo and Roo are not easily knocked off the ball, and have drawn 14, 17 and 10 frees respectively this year. In much the same vein, M. Voss has only had 4 frees this year, and C. Ling 6. If a player tries to hold or illegally hit a player like these, they don't tend to get knocked off the contest, but a player like Krakouer or a Gilbee may get taken out by the same contact. Umpires tend to like to see a player fall over before they blow the whistle, and unfortunately for Roo, he doesn't fall over too easily.

 

[- PC -]

What are the stats for Thompson?

We are tackling more as well and the way the interpretation goes its a 50/50 deal I reckon

 

[tribey]

What are the stats for Thompson?

Thompson = 17 for, 25 against

We are tackling more as well and the way the interpretation goes its a 50/50 deal I reckon

Adelaide 1993 tackles: 762 (1st) @ 33.13 tpg
Adelaide 1994 tackles: 660 (10th) @ 30.00 tpg
Adelaide 1995 tackles: 595 (12th) @ 27.04 tpg
Adelaide 1996 tackles: 635 (13th) @ 28.86 tpg
Adelaide 1997 tackles: 868 (1st) @ 33.38 tpg
Adelaide 1998 tackles: 917 (1st) @ 35.20 tpg
Adelaide 1999 tackles: 469 (16th) @ 21.31 tpg - how soft is that for a reigning premier? Geez.
Adelaide 2000 tackles: 669 (12th) @ 30.40 tpg
Adelaide 2001 tackles: 837 (7th) @ 36.39 tpg
Adelaide 2002 tackles: 1095 (3rd) @ 43.80 tpg
Adelaide 2003 tackles: 1092 (3rd) @ 45.50 tpg
Adelaide 2004 tackles: 922 (14th) @ 41.90 tpg
Adelaide 2005 tackles: 731 (7th) @ 43.00 tpg

If these statistics are correct [source] then it's very interesting to see the incidence of tackling skyrocket over the past decade or so.

 

[Portia]

Perhaps. But why our games in particular ?

Perception of your club, I reckon. If you've ever been in the top 4 free kicked against, I'll be surprised. Even now most of your frees against would be because Biglands mucked up in the ruck.

 

[marvin]

Perception of your club, I reckon. If you've ever been in the top 4 free kicked against, I'll be surprised. Even now most of your frees against would be because Biglands mucked up in the ruck.

Surprise....

2002 - 2nd in league in Frees against; 1998 3rd in league.

Oh, and Rhett Biglands has only given away 15 frees this year.

 

[Crowked]

Adelaide 1993 tackles: 762 (1st) @ 33.13 tpg
Adelaide 1994 tackles: 660 (10th) @ 30.00 tpg
Adelaide 1995 tackles: 595 (12th) @ 27.04 tpg
Adelaide 1996 tackles: 635 (13th) @ 28.86 tpg
Adelaide 1997 tackles: 868 (1st) @ 33.38 tpg
Adelaide 1998 tackles: 917 (1st) @ 35.20 tpg
Adelaide 1999 tackles: 469 (16th) @ 21.31 tpg
Adelaide 2000 tackles: 669 (12th) @ 30.40 tpg
Adelaide 2001 tackles: 837 (7th) @ 36.39 tpg
Adelaide 2002 tackles: 1095 (3rd) @ 43.80 tpg
Adelaide 2003 tackles: 1092 (3rd) @ 45.50 tpg
Adelaide 2004 tackles: 922 (14th) @ 41.90 tpg
Adelaide 2005 tackles: 731 (7th) @ 43.00 tpg

Very, very interesting stats, these.

I think its pretty safe to say tackling is critical to our success, and everyone elses for that matter. We need to improve it a little in this area if we are going to get to the big dance.


On the thread topic, I dont think there is much in it really. The disparity between our fors and againsts isnt too bad, although you probably would expect the second placed team to have a positive balance as has been suggested. My gut feeling is the Vic clubs have always had a bit of subconcious favouratism from umpires. So its not a huge surprise most of the top 8 are Victorian clubs.

 

[macca23]

Oh, and Rhett Biglands has only given away 15 frees this year.

Yeah, but Porthos has never let facts get in the way of making a point against the Crows.

DT poses the question why, and my personal theory is that it's all related to mindset:

When we play in Victoria, the home ground factor seems to come strongly into play via pressure from a parochial local crowd. That means that under pressure the umps seem to give the Vic team the benefit of the majority of the 50-50's, because that's the easy way. Also they seem to conveniently not see our frees on the basis of that's easier again with the crowd.

At Footy Park, a new set of rules comes into play. The mind set of the umpires appears to be determinedly made up and appears to be "Those bastards can hoot scream and yell all they like, they're NOT going to intimidate ME into giving them free kicks or giving the visiting Vic team thei frees.

So the more they yell in Victoria, the more they get and all's well. They go home and think "The crowd was happy with me today"

So the more we yell in South Oz, the more the little white (yellow, red) maggots with their 31 inch chests ponce around Footy Park giving us less. And fly home to Vic saying "We showed 'em we can't be intimidated"

Just my theory.

 

[Portia]

2002 - 2nd in league in Frees against; 1998 3rd in league.

Interesting. Of course, even in those years there's not a lot of disparity. 3rd in Frees For both years.

Oh, and Rhett Biglands has only given away 15 frees this year.

Is this because of better discipline or less game time in ruck? By the way, I mention Rhett because I am implying that your frees against are mostly for just for stupid/clumsy football, not scragging and stupid stuff off-the-ball. Clearly Rhett wouldn't be 100% of your frees against.


Edit: Just on the tackle stats, do they correlate with the Frees Against?

 

[Mad Dog]

At the risk of repeating myself, and offending the umpires here

These nancy boys need a disproportionately high level of guidance with their craft given their genetic predisposition to be vindictive recalcitrants.

I think the AFL are negligent in not recognising this and need to install "Umpiring" as the #1 issue requiring attention .....(once the MCG thingo is signed off)....

 

[rooboy]

This subject is my pet hate. There will never be fairness in umpiring until the AFL promote more umpires from outside Victoria. I realise that the competition is a club comp. and not a state one however ,how many times do you all watch a game and think, gee aren't the umps giving the non Vic side a bloody good go? My guess is not too many times.
So DT, in response to your thread, the umps are biased against non Vic sides, not just us. Well that's my thinking anyway
Off my soap box now.

 

[marvin]

Is this because of better discipline or less game time in ruck? By the way, I mention Rhett because I am implying that your frees against are mostly for just for stupid/clumsy football, not scragging and stupid stuff off-the-ball. Clearly Rhett wouldn't be 100% of your frees against.


Edit: Just on the tackle stats, do they correlate with the Frees Against?

Biglands has never really been a sole #1 ruckman in the way a Jeff White or a Peter Everitt is - he's always shared duties, either with Hudson or Clarke.

In his good years, he gives away about 1 free / game; in his bad years, the umpires penalise him about once a game. He's just not smart enough to drape his shoulder under the trailing arm of the other ruckman and hence draw all the over-the-shoulder frees he could.

Edit: Just on the tackle stats, do they correlate with the Frees Against?

No correlation whatsoever. To give you an indication, Port are ranked #16 this year in tackles, and are #1 in frees against, while Sydney are #2 in tackles, and #2 in frees against.

 

[Portia]

No, I meant specifically for the Crows with the correlation.

 

[dA Crow]

Surprise....

2002 - 2nd in league in Frees against; 1998 3rd in league.

Oh, and Rhett Biglands has only given away 15 frees this year.

The secret is to complain , whine and claim that the rules have been developed to stop your style of game...


Season Stats - FREES FOR - 1. Matthew Primus Port Adelaide 37
Source : AFL Website.

 

[Tas]

When we play in Victoria, the home ground factor seems to come strongly into play via pressure from a parochial local crowd. That means that under pressure the umps seem to give the Vic team the benefit of the majority of the 50-50's, because that's the easy way. Also they seem to conveniently not see our frees on the basis of that's easier again with the crowd.

I think it has more to do with the new rule interpretations, they are more prone to ridiculously bad decisions. People that make the play tend to give away a lot of free kicks because you tend to be over the ball a whole lot more.

But, it can turn around and bite you on the nuts as a high tackling side if your execution is poor on the day. In some of the games I saw the Crows play where they racked up a lot of frees against the tackling lacked the normally high quality, while most are technical it is hard to complain when hands go over the shoulders, etc.

I do not think much can be taken out of the free kick stats, the vast majority of frees are well and truely paid while the supporters are scratching their heads and wondering who gave away a free kick and for what. The only ones that are prone to crowd manipulation are holding the ball decisions and they generally only pay those if you are sitting on the ball.

In our two games Adelaide had 21 frees for and 11 against up in Adelaide and had 16 for and 18 against here in Melbourne. A total of 37 vs 29 doesn't suggest you are getting hard done, at least not against us.

While the number of tackles is something to look at you also should factor the tackle difference number. Adelaide have had 1103 tackles compared to 1155 to their opponents (-52 difference)

Adelaide has laid more tackles than us (we have 1095 vs 975 for a +120 difference) we are tackled a lot less frequently and has probably a direct relation to free kick counts.

Adelaide has had 309 frees for compared to our 312 and has 321 against compared to our 288. I would imagine the difference has a lot to do with the difference in the number of tackles against.

Umpires are prone to shocking decisions, bias, etc but i think over a season they do even out overall, the difference in the end is how the teams play.

 

[PrideOf]

Yeah, but Porthos has never let facts get in the way of making a point against the Crows.

DT poses the question why, and my personal theory is that it's all related to mindset:

When we play in Victoria, the home ground factor seems to come strongly into play via pressure from a parochial local crowd. That means that under pressure the umps seem to give the Vic team the benefit of the majority of the 50-50's, because that's the easy way. Also they seem to conveniently not see our frees on the basis of that's easier again with the crowd.

At Footy Park, a new set of rules comes into play. The mind set of the umpires appears to be determinedly made up and appears to be "Those bastards can hoot scream and yell all they like, they're NOT going to intimidate ME into giving them free kicks or giving the visiting Vic team thei frees.

So the more they yell in Victoria, the more they get and all's well. They go home and think "The crowd was happy with me today"

So the more we yell in South Oz, the more the little white (yellow, red) maggots with their 31 inch chests ponce around Footy Park giving us less. And fly home to Vic saying "We showed 'em we can't be intimidated"

Just my theory.

It's more than a theory. In previous seasons, I've been in the umpires rooms before one of our matches and heard them say exactly what you've suggested.

 

[marvin]

In our two games Adelaide had 21 frees for and 11 against up in Adelaide and had 16 for and 18 against here in Melbourne. A total of 37 vs 29 doesn't suggest you are getting hard done, at least not against us.

While the number of tackles is something to look at you also should factor the tackle difference number. Adelaide have had 1103 tackles compared to 1155 to their opponents (-52 difference)

Adelaide has laid more tackles than us (we have 1095 vs 975 for a +120 difference) we are tackled a lot less frequently and has probably a direct relation to free kick counts.

Adelaide has had 309 frees for compared to our 312 and has 321 against compared to our 288. I would imagine the difference has a lot to do with the difference in the number of tackles against.

Umpires are prone to shocking decisions, bias, etc but i think over a season they do even out overall, the difference in the end is how the teams play.

I'd love to know where you get your stats from, Tas - they don't seem to agree with anything I've seen published.

For starters, the frees from the two Kangas v Adelaide games this year were 14-9 (Aami) and 13-17 (Docklands) making it 27-26.

And as stated at the start of this thread, the stats for the year have us with 256 frees, well short of the 309 you attribute to the Crows.

 

[marvin]

No, I meant specifically for the Crows with the correlation.

A weak correlation - the more tackles the Crows have applied, the less free kicks they concede. The opposite of what you are postulating, I suspect.

 

[Tas]

I'd love to know where you get your stats from, Tas - they don't seem to agree with anything I've seen published.

For starters, the frees from the two Kangas v Adelaide games this year were 14-9 (Aami) and 13-17 (Docklands) making it 27-26.

And as stated at the start of this thread, the stats for the year have us with 256 frees, well short of the 309 you attribute to the Crows.

They are all from http://www.pro-stats.com.au as it is the only stat site that is free to the public that I know of.

The adelaide team is: http://www.pro-stats.com.au/ps/web/ft_team_home?tid=101

 

[DaveW]

The adelaide team is: http://www.pro-stats.com.au/ps/web/ft_team_home?tid=101

That says we've had 321 frees against. Whilst our opponents have had 323 frees for.

 

[marvin]

They are all from http://www.pro-stats.com.au as it is the only stat site that is free to the public that I know of.

The adelaide team is: http://www.pro-stats.com.au/ps/web/ft_team_home?tid=101

Pro-Stats is good to a point, but there's a fair discrepancy between their stats and the official AFL stats.

The Round 6 Adelaide v Kangaroos game according to the official AFL stats has the frees as 14-9, not 21-11 as counted by Pro-Stats.

The accumulated, "official" AFL stats are at http://stats.rleague.com/afl/afl_index.html, and the summed stats for 2005 are at http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/2005s.html.

 

[Mong]

Someone has to be last in Free Kicks for.

I guess I'm just not a conspiracy theorist. These things don't bother me.