Ian4 said:
What about the high contact on maric in the ruck contest just after wards?
And the post deliberate?
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!
- Thread starter iLoVeNeWmAn
- Start date
What about the high contact on maric in the ruck contest just after wards?
And the post deliberate?
Worst decision I've seen in a long long time was the holding the ball decision against martin where he clearly disposed of the ball by foot in the tackle absolute disgrace responding to crowd noise
rensman said:
I don't even think it was th worst decision of he game. What about he deliberate out of bounds in Fremantle's forward pocket? Joke.
I actually think one of the things that consistently gets us in to trouble is the play on calls as the player goes back to take a kick. I can't figure out what the umpires use to determine if it's play on or not. Most of our guys don't respond well when kicking to the early play on call. Happened quite a few times today.
Big Country said:
Think the play-on calls were probably all legit. Our players tend to get the wanders when an option is slow to present.
Have long believed we get just that little bit less leeway compared with the opposition when kicking out after a behind, kicking after a mark or free, or taking a set shot at goal.
"When I watch the football today I see the same players, Ablett, Swan, Pendlebury, Mitchell, Selwood, Priddis, Thompson and Dangerfield."
- Darren Goldspink
Cotchin a bit ho-hum, Darren?
- Darren Goldspink
Cotchin a bit ho-hum, Darren?
How much do they love Pavlich? Knocked up getting frees. Yet when he slung the Richmond player after the ball has gone out of bounds, nothing. If it had been the other way around, it would have been a free kick, 50m penalty and a 2 week suspension.
Just watching the replay and at 18:29 in the second quarter the ump pays a free to Essendon for a throw. The only problem was that Gumbleton was the player who threw it! :
Wonder if No1 spud McBurney gets a second gig at trying to let Port Adelaide beat Richmond in 2012.
WesternTiger said:Just watching the replay and at 18:29 in the second quarter the ump pays a free to Essendon for a throw. The only problem was that Gumbleton was the player who throw it! :
I saw that as well. And in true style it wasn't picked up by the commentary team.
Rocklea Tiger said:
Umpiring is all about interpretation of rules. Some interpret rules differently to others but the umpires seem to be programmed to over adjudicate therefore are nit picking tiggy touchwood frees that otherwise would be interpreted as "play on "
WesternTiger said:Just watching the replay and at 18:29 in the second quarter the ump pays a free to Essendon for a throw. The only problem was that Gumbleton was the player who threw it! :
This is one of the things that really gets me. They need to be instructed to ONLY pay a free if they saw it. If there is any doubt AT ALL then leave the whistle alone. Too often they pay what the think happened. It is obvious sometimes from the stands because you know the ump is on the wrong side to pay the free. They certainly shouldn't be paying "holding the ball" if they lose sight of the ball at any stage because they can't know for sure that the player they saw with the ball still has it.
KnightersRevenge said:
see my earlier post. overadjudiating. making calls for the sake of making calls. interpreting it wrong becauase they have to make calls.
clearly this is an AFL/Geichen mandate - umps get involved more than they should. way more.
irritating.
A
acatman
Guest
The old cliche "commonsense" comes to mind YET AGAIN for me. In last nights game in the SAME passage of play 2 umpires called for different frees to the 2 teams ( quite hilarious really).Now instead of saying " we both saw different infringements" ( not forgetting it was the SAME passage of play), "lets admit it all confusing and have a ball up".... NO they decide to "pluck" one of the frees and call that particular one.
