Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute! | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • 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!

acatman said:
As a nuetral observer (although wanting the tiges to win), most if not all the 50/50 wnet freos way...NOW, thats happens ALL the time to every team that comes over here. Its even worse when someone plays the Eags, believe it or not. What i find even more mind boggling is (asis always the case here) the crowd booed the umpires off cos THEY reckon they get a raw deal!!..GO FIGURE
Click to expand...

They also cheered when Cotchin got hurt. Quality spectators.

Goal umpire should be made to wear a netball bib with GK on it.
 
To be honest, we need to accept that this farce will never end!

I don't know if its my bias, Geish, bad luck, bad technique or corruption, we will get the raw end of the sick from these pricks 9 times out of 10 this year and beyond!!
 
Jason King said:
The slide rule was for feet first slides, now its any sliding at all. They want to reward the player who doesn't go in hard for the ball.
Click to expand...
It was never the slide rule! It is FORCEFUL contact below the knees. Umpires really need a dictionary to look up the word forceful because they really struggle with the definition
 
bowden4president said:
It was never the slide rule! It is FORCEFUL contact below the knees. Umpires really need a dictionary to look up the word forceful because they really struggle with the definition
Click to expand...

The Lindsay Thomas slide caused it! but the interpretation is mind boggling.
 
In theory the rule is actually ok. the problem lies with the Umpires. If it was paid for FORCEFUL contact i.e. contact that is dangerous with a good chance of causing injury, then it would be fine. But we have umpires that, for a professional Billion dollar industry, are truly embarrassing it will never ever work.
 
bowden4president said:
In theory the rule is actually ok. the problem lies with the Umpires. If it was paid for FORCEFUL contact i.e. contact that is dangerous with a good chance of causing injury, then it would be fine. But we have umpires that, for a professional Billion dollar industry, are truly embarrassing it will never ever work.
Click to expand...

Having players whose first instinct is to win the ball and they get penalised for it doesn't sit well with me and I am confused as to why the ex-afl players who recommended the rule did so. Do we really want a team full of wait and see players?
 
I've mentioned a few times about the three ruck contests prior to Freo's winning goal. Watching it was doing my head in. To me all three were free kicks to Ivan and instead what happened was no free kick allowing Freo to keep pushing the ball forward where all we needed was to lock the ball up or get possession and run out the clock.

It was no doubt a set play by Freo to have Hannath as the ruckmen preventing Ivan from geting to the contest while Griffen did the actual ruck work. This is supposed to be a free kick every time. And for it to happen three times in less than a minute with no free kick astounds me no end.

While I thought the umpiring in general was pretty ordinary I thought we had our chances to win the game and didn't. However for me the umpiring in the last part of the game was atrocious and while the goal keeper, I mean goal umpire, didn't do us any favours it was the umpires failure to pay a free kick during the last three ruck contests that allowed Freo to kick the winning goal.

Here's what I'm talking about:

1:50 left. Ball up just forward of center for Freo. Ivan shepparded out by Hannath and Griffen punches the ball forward allowing Freo to get it into their forward 50.

111secondsleft_zps5eb1e2f8.jpg


1:38 left. Ruck contest Freo forward pocket. Ivan shepparded out by Hannath and Griffen comes over the top again.

98secondsleft_zpsb8bbef2f.jpg


1:31 left. Ruck contest that leads to goal. Maric up against Hannath and Griffen again.

91secondsleft_zps71d8c2f2.jpg
 
Is this not in effect cheating? Playing outside the rules? One would have to think if it wasn't for these 3 rucking duels we would have most likely won the match.
 
Really interesting stuff BC. Thanks for pointing that out. I heard one of the commentators (might of been mathews) mention that when it was down in their forward pocket at the end of the game but was too busy yelling at the TV for us to get players goal side of the throw in.
 
WesternTiger said:
Great work BC. Hope this gets raised with the AFL during the week.
Click to expand...

Super work BC, this is the type of analysis which puts PRE a couple of notches above the run of the mill fansites. Keep up the good work. :clap
 
What is the rule? you are allowed to have a second man up but not when opposing ruck is shepperded out? I'm unclear
 
Big Country said:
I've mentioned a few times about the three ruck contests prior to Freo's winning goal. Watching it was doing my head in. To me all three were free kicks to Ivan and instead what happened was no free kick allowing Freo to keep pushing the ball forward where all we needed was to lock the ball up or get possession and run out the clock.

It was no doubt a set play by Freo to have Hannath as the ruckmen preventing Ivan from geting to the contest while Griffen did the actual ruck work. This is supposed to be a free kick every time. And for it to happen three times in less than a minute with no free kick astounds me no end.

While I thought the umpiring in general was pretty ordinary I thought we had our chances to win the game and didn't. However for me the umpiring in the last part of the game was atrocious and while the goal keeper, I mean goal umpire, didn't do us any favours it was the umpires failure to pay a free kick during the last three ruck contests that allowed Freo to kick the winning goal.

Here's what I'm talking
Click to expand...
Good work but just playing devils advocate in the last pic Petterd is clearly holding *smile*(?) jumper. That's a free kick to Freo.
 
Just advised from a friend AFL admitted an error occurred on the goal umpiring farce. Should have been awarded a goal.

Little comfort though.
 
Great stuff, the focus should be put on all these ruck contests by the media. Also look at the centre bounce prior to these (after White's goal). The Freo player took the ball out of the ruck and was caught which is an automatic free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
< Gather Round Needs To Be Dumped | Welcome to the Tigers Mate Colina >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom