Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
jonesy wrote:***k Hawthorn and there spoilt brat kids of the 80's supporters,all the follow the leader types who jumped onto the winning team of the era,and grew up to be arrogant a**holes!
Go Freo!
I'm with you jonesy.
Seriously I know so many kids born in the late 70s and early 80s who jumped on the hawks in the mid and late 80s as kids.
Screw em. Most have seen a few flags already.
jonesy wrote:***k Hawthorn and there spoilt brat kids of the 80's supporters,all the follow the leader types who jumped onto the winning team of the era,and grew up to be arrogant a**holes!
Go Freo!
Lyon lover alert.
lol
Not really, though it would settle an argument with a good mate who thinks Lyon is the worst coach in history....
I just hate Hawthorn supporters,being a kid of the 80's,grew up with these spoilt pricks winning flag after flag whilst we finished last. I hope they go back to back losses
gringo wrote:Anyone watching the Hawks Cats? Terrible umpiring and bizarre one sided decisions. i thought it was just us.
Corrupt umpires? What are you suggesting.. That they are beetling on games, match fixing etc? Can you elaborate as your suggestion that they are corrupt is an extremely serious one.
No, maybe not corrupt, maybe compromised when they know that their employer and the tv network would prefer a close contest. I'd say definitely corrupt if their is a directive from Geish passed onto him by AD for umps to try and even things up on the scoreboard (e.g. that 50 m paid against Lewis in the 1st quarter which got Geelong their first goal was laughable).
Scollop wrote:No, maybe not corrupt, maybe compromised when they know that their employer and the tv network would prefer a close contest. I'd say definitely corrupt if their is a directive from Geish passed onto him by AD for umps to try and even things up on the scoreboard (e.g. that 50 m paid against Lewis in the 1st quarter which got Geelong their first goal was laughable).
These types of poats are laughable. So the umpires cheat to make the contest close but no one has ever come out after being sacked as an umpire and told the public it is a directive. That story would be worth plenty of money but alas its never neeb published.
I thought Cyril played on, not sure if he heard the whistle or nog but definitely hand balled from off the deck! Out on the full wasn't paid incorrectly as such, it was a case of no decision has been made, neutral ball, if they don't know who kicked it then that's the best decision to make IMO!
Would have been tough for the umps, both teams usually get a good run with them in my eyes!
Scollop wrote:No, maybe not corrupt, maybe compromised when they know that their employer and the tv network would prefer a close contest. I'd say definitely corrupt if their is a directive from Geish passed onto him by AD for umps to try and even things up on the scoreboard (e.g. that 50 m paid against Lewis in the 1st quarter which got Geelong their first goal was laughable).
These types of poats are laughable. So the umpires cheat to make the contest close but no one has ever come out after being sacked as an umpire and told the public it is a directive. That story would be worth plenty of money but alas its never neeb published.
Every decision isn't black and white, so interpretation means that there'll always be debates about the legitimacy of frees or 50's paid...and anyway, I didn't say that 'the umpires cheat to make a contest' - you did.
The umps are human. The subconscious can play strange games.
Oh and Sorry, I forgot that no one has ever come out after being sacked as an umpire..... but have they come out while serving as an umpire?
Scollop wrote:No, maybe not corrupt, maybe compromised when they know that their employer and the tv network would prefer a close contest. I'd say definitely corrupt if their is a directive from Geish passed onto him by AD for umps to try and even things up on the scoreboard (e.g. that 50 m paid against Lewis in the 1st quarter which got Geelong their first goal was laughable).
These types of poats are laughable. So the umpires cheat to make the contest close but no one has ever come out after being sacked as an umpire and told the public it is a directive. That story would be worth plenty of money but alas its never neeb published.
gringo wrote:Anyone watching the Hawks Cats? Terrible umpiring and bizarre one sided decisions. i thought it was just us.
i'm not really sure.....certainly they are human...make mistakes...have their likes (selwood) and dislikes(milne and scneids)...they also all grew up supporting a team.......so would be influenced by that...
some also have personality problems.....(that litle turd, whose name escapes me).. also could have gambling addictions...and also be subject to corruption...think we will be hearing more about this in the future...........the hawks certainly got done over by the maggots...but were still good enough to get a win...so i guess , the anser ..afaic..is yes....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
Scollop wrote:
...and anyway, I didn't say that 'the umpires cheat to make a contest' - you did.
You may not have said it directly, but your post implied that it happens.
OK point taken. It was accidental that my post implied it rather than intentional. I should have put the bracketed thought after the first sentence rather than the second.
Re the Out on the Full.
The footage shown on the scoreboard showed the ball clearly came off a Geelong leg.
The umpire was touching his earpiece so it was beyond me how they decided to throw it in.
Re the Lake touch.
It was a PRELIMINARY final.
Why wasn't there a goal post or side on camera available?
The AFL still have a lot to learn.
The rest of Australia can wander mask-free, socialise, eat out, no curfews, no zoning, no police rings of steel, no illogical inconsistent rules.
They can even WATCH LIVE FOOTY!
Enrico_Misso wrote:Re the Out on the Full.
The footage shown on the scoreboard showed the ball clearly came off a Geelong leg.
The umpire was touching his earpiece so it was beyond me how they decided to throw it in.
Re the Lake touch.
It was a PRELIMINARY final.
Why wasn't there a goal post or side on camera available?
The AFL still have a lot to learn.
I agree with you that the technology needs to be improved. But in the Cats/Hawks game there was the Lake/goal review, which I thought went the right way and the goal line camera clearly showed the whole ball behind the posts before Lake touched it.
But the out on the full - that resulted in a Geelong goal with 6 seconds on the clock. It was clearly, on replay, off a Geelong boot. Why is there not a procedure to allow for video review of decisions like that. The technology in this case, was available, but no process to use it to get the right decision on field.
