Special Message to Curly

[saint6709]

I have been reluctant to get involved in the debate about the free kick against Hayes last week.

However, as I saw it, the player was brought to ground with his arms completely pinned, which is always a dangerous tackle (albeit nothing bad happened on this occasion), and certainly should be against the rules. And indeed, I thought that umpires had been directed to stamp this sort of tackle out of the game.

Sure, the commentators thought it was a dud decision. So what: the commentators often get it wrong.

Anyway, I’ve said it now: anyone who wants can have a go at me.

[saint6709]

There’s some weird stuff going on on this forum - I don’t really know the curly agenda other than he gets pissed when the frees for and against are bad - which unfortunately is most weeks

I’m pretty sure most recent years back him up re the stats of our ‘frees for’

Does he think there’s an afl conspiracy against us ? Maybe - I’ve not read all the posts so don’t know - I’ve only seen him complaining re specific games so not sure whether or not he is a conspiracy theorist - so as devil’s advocate will assume he is not

So I’m not sure why anyone would have a go at him because the Dogs had a ridiculous’for and against’ the other night or on a night when we get the VERY RARE rub of the green in our favour ???

I was just saying to my son tonight that because we are so used to getting on the wrong side of the ledger we are constantly analyzing the decisions when the night goes our way - West coast, Dogs etc only think about it when the unthinkable happens and they are not well up on the nights free kick count

[saynta]

Not often we appear,to get the rub of the green. What were the frees for and against stats?

27 ...19

[Mr Magic]

Just curious
If the free kick against Hayes last week for a dangerous tackle was correct, then where was the free kick for a dangerous tackle on Jack Higgins which resulted in him being subbed out of the game?

[Ghost Like]

Just curious
If the free kick against Hayes last week for a dangerous tackle was correct, then where was the free kick for a dangerous tackle on Jack Higgins which resulted in him being subbed out of the game?

The very definition of "sling" I would have thought.

[saynta]

Just curious
If the free kick against Hayes last week for a dangerous tackle was correct, then where was the free kick for a dangerous tackle on Jack Higgins which resulted in him being subbed out of the game?

My thoughts too.

[Saints58]

Richmond have been hacking forwards and holding leading players for years its just that finally umps paid it that is why the Richmond supports are annoyed they are not getting away with the holding of jumpers impeding the guy leading to the ball and pushing guys off the ball and in the ruck yesterday.
Good job umps thank goodness no razor ray we would have only got a handful of frees he hats us.

[Sainter_Dad]

Just curious
If the free kick against Hayes last week for a dangerous tackle was correct, then where was the free kick for a dangerous tackle on Jack Higgins which resulted in him being subbed out of the game?

My thoughts too.

LOL - Over to The_Dud

[saynta]

Just curious
If the free kick against Hayes last week for a dangerous tackle was correct, then where was the free kick for a dangerous tackle on Jack Higgins which resulted in him being subbed out of the game?

My thoughts too.

LOL - Over to The_Dud

He doesn't know s*** from sugar if you ask me.

[CURLY]

If we had the game umpired like it was yesterday v Collingwood we win by a few goals. Amazing that people still think umpires don't influence games.

[meher baba]

After last night, we can clearly conclude that the umps must hate Brisbane even more than they hate St Kilda.

BTW, the incident last night indicates once again how the umpires don't do themselves any favours with their stupid culture of trying to become pally with the players. The outburst by Andrews should have led to a 50 metre penalty to Geelong from the centre bounce, or at least a warning about his behaviour. Instead, the ump tried to talk man on man to Andrews, producing an utterly unconvincing explanation of what supposedly happened.

He'd have done better simply to say: "I'm sorry, but I didn't see any push." Which was the truth. Like many other full forwards, Hawkins has learnt that, if all the umps are a reasonable distance away and his direct opponent is screening him from their view, he might get away with a last minute push in the back. And, of course, defenders also sometimes use the same situation to their advantage, by stumbling forward after minimal or no contact to try to make it look as if they were pushed. Personally, I'd rather the umps always called what they saw - even if this means that forwards are going to be able to get away with the occasional push - rather than try to deduce illegal contact that they haven't clearly observed.

Umpires are going to get these decisions wrong from time to time, and it's no use umpires trying to concoct stupid explanations about players holding their ground, etc, etc.

So, to sum up, I think the ump made the right call last night, but then let himself down in a stupid conversation with the player. The less umps talk to the players the better, IMO.

[Ghost Like]

The decision was the wrong decision every day of the week. Scott would still be squealing in the press conference if it happened against Geelong.

You make a good point about umpire positioning which lends to a theory that 3 central umpires do not work and perhaps boundary & goal umpires should intervene when a central umpire has their view impeded. Offers a 360 degree view & less guessing.

Agree, umpires should not speak to players. Why open their mouths and confirm they guessed or got it wrong.

[The_Dud]

Just curious
If the free kick against Hayes last week for a dangerous tackle was correct, then where was the free kick for a dangerous tackle on Jack Higgins which resulted in him being subbed out of the game?

My thoughts too.

LOL - Over to The_Dud

He doesn't know s*** from sugar if you ask me.

Did you say something Stinger?

[The_Dud]

If we had the game umpired like it was yesterday v Collingwood we win by a few goals. Amazing that people still think umpires don't influence games.

So are you agreeing the only reason we beat Richmond is because the umps cheated for us?

Why would they all of a sudden cheat for us in direct contrast to the AFL backed umpiring conspiracy against us??

[Yorkeys]

And the year 7 logics teacher wept.

[D.B.Cooper]

After last night, we can clearly conclude that the umps must hate Brisbane even more than they hate St Kilda.

BTW, the incident last night indicates once again how the umpires don't do themselves any favours with their stupid culture of trying to become pally with the players. The outburst by Andrews should have led to a 50 metre penalty to Geelong from the centre bounce, or at least a warning about his behaviour. Instead, the ump tried to talk man on man to Andrews, producing an utterly unconvincing explanation of what supposedly happened.

He'd have done better simply to say: "I'm sorry, but I didn't see any push." Which was the truth. Like many other full forwards, Hawkins has learnt that, if all the umps are a reasonable distance away and his direct opponent is screening him from their view, he might get away with a last minute push in the back. And, of course, defenders also sometimes use the same situation to their advantage, by stumbling forward after minimal or no contact to try to make it look as if they were pushed. Personally, I'd rather the umps always called what they saw - even if this means that forwards are going to be able to get away with the occasional push - rather than try to deduce illegal contact that they haven't clearly observed.

Umpires are going to get these decisions wrong from time to time, and it's no use umpires trying to concoct stupid explanations about players holding their ground, etc, etc.

So, to sum up, I think the ump made the right call last night, but then let himself down in a stupid conversation with the player. The less umps talk to the players the better, IMO.

Good post, clearly a howler of a decision.
Agree Andrew’s should have been penalized in accordance with the new rule.

The fact he was not probably means the umpire knew he had missed a shocker.

Funny part of this for me is that if it was a Saint not a Lion on the receiving end it would be referred as blatant cheating

[B.M]

Woeful mistake by the umpire

Not the only howler by that umpire. And all his poor decisions went one way

Crowd pleaser

Dodgy

[saynta]

Woeful mistake by the umpire

Not the only howler by that umpire. And all his poor decisions went one way

Crowd pleaser

Dodgy

Yep, the maggots got the home team over the line. Surprised no one.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/ ... f28d2c6c5d

[Sainter_Dad]

And the year 7 logics teacher wept.

And the crowd wept

[Sainter_Dad]

Funny part of this for me is that if it was a Saint not a Lion on the receiving end it would be referred as blatant cheating

No - the funny part is that this argument rages on the Forum and both camps believe in Absolutes

The One - 100% Umpires are infallible
The Other - 100% Umpires Cheat

The Grey area tells us that umpires can be incompetent and under perform and can raise the ire of supporters - by possibly changing the outcome of a game that should have been put to rest.

[Scollop]

Woeful mistake by the umpire

Not the only howler by that umpire. And all his poor decisions went one way

Crowd pleaser

Dodgy

Where’s the governance for our sport? Can a club take it outside the AFL?

If an official complaint is lodged about an umpire that may have been compromised or someone who seems to be dodgy and perhaps there is tangible evidence or suspicious circumstances or links to people connected to a particular club…how is it followed up?

Can you appeal the AFL’s internal integrity commission (if and when they launch any official investigations) and…

Does Australia have a government body that can investigate corruption in sport?

….edit. I googled a few things and came up with quite a few links that refer to Sport Integrity Australia, including the recent Wood Review which was claimed to be the most comprehensive examination of sports integrity arrangements ever undertaken in Australia… I wonder if they have any teeth

https://www.health.gov.au/contacts/spor ... -australia

[The_Dud]

Funny part of this for me is that if it was a Saint not a Lion on the receiving end it would be referred as blatant cheating

No - the funny part is that this argument rages on the Forum and both camps believe in Absolutes

The One - 100% Umpires are infallible
The Other - 100% Umpires Cheat

The Grey area tells us that umpires can be incompetent and under perform and can raise the ire of supporters - by possibly changing the outcome of a game that should have been put to rest.

I’d love to see you point out anyone claiming the umps are infallible SD.

[Sainter_Dad]

Funny part of this for me is that if it was a Saint not a Lion on the receiving end it would be referred as blatant cheating

No - the funny part is that this argument rages on the Forum and both camps believe in Absolutes

The One - 100% Umpires are infallible
The Other - 100% Umpires Cheat

The Grey area tells us that umpires can be incompetent and under perform and can raise the ire of supporters - by possibly changing the outcome of a game that should have been put to rest.

I’d love to see you point out anyone claiming the umps are infallible SD.

LOL @ The Dud - maybe it is just the Vibe - but at least you are not trying to get rid of players who are the heart and soul of St Kilda

[CURLY]

If we had the game umpired like it was yesterday v Collingwood we win by a few goals. Amazing that people still think umpires don't influence games.

So are you agreeing the only reason we beat Richmond is because the umps cheated for us?

Why would they all of a sudden cheat for us in direct contrast to the AFL backed umpiring conspiracy against us??

We got a good run first for a long long time.

[Scollop]

Razor Ray was looking at breaking records for frees to the home side tonight. He definitely broke the back of GWS and any chance they may have had on hostile territory. Freo were getting all the frees in that last quarter.

I think Freo ended up with 42 frees and GWS only 16. Freo got the last 6 goals of the game and won it by 34

What these little yellow phlegm don’t realise is that there are clubs competing with Freo for a spot in the finals and the last 10 minutes of that game helped Freo bang on extra percentage.