Umpiring decisions...?

[footyhead]

geischen has always been a bad coach, no matter wether he is coaching players or umpires. Get rid of him.

[tez]

I would be interested in the opinions of others in relation
to the kneeing of the ball OOBOTF as happenned to BGBH
yesterday. In my
playing days I scored, what I thought was a goal from my
knee only to be awarded a point. I questionned the umpire and
was told that the ball must come from the foot or part of the
leg below the knee with any contact with the ball above this
as being deemed as off the body. If this ruling was applied,
BGBH should not have been penalised.

[GoBloods]

umps need guide dogs

yet no suprises with 2 of the all time swans favourite umps kennedy and goldspink. we seem to cop some bad decisions when these two umpire our games.
i thought b.hall decision was fair .out of bounds. , but then kennedy running in from over 50m to pay a free kick against barry when goldspink was jolly on the spot and choose to ignore it was infuriating. As were the throwing frees paid against micky o and saddo . they were a bit red hot. very ordinary decisions.
yet in the last quarter in front of the ump a freo player seemed to give the ball to a teammate by handing it straight to him, did anyone else notice that or just me ?

[NMWBloods]

Re: umps need guide dogs

Originally posted by GoBloods
yet in the last quarter in front of the ump a freo player seemed to give the ball to a teammate by handing it straight to him, did anyone else notice that or just me ?

Yep - I noticed that and it happened once earlier in the game too. The commentators also noticed it.

[Rizzo]

The 'holding the ball' decisions have been pretty bad of late in Sydney.

Willo foul in the goal square was definitely a free kick.

What happen with Nicks and Saddo though was just daft.

Can the umpires actually see that Barry Hall has a back? There were about 3 free kicks that he should have got yesterday. Hally has shown an amazing amount of self control this season in the face of pure bias.

[swan_song]

I think also that maybe those first three frees were there, but opposition multiple goals from free kicks is a regular occurrence now. Three of Freo's first four goals from frees... it was similar against carlton and the boozers -- if we could cut down on giving away free kicks in front of goal, the opposition would hardly ever score in the first quarters..!!!
However, nothing will ever convince me that all the sinning occurs by the swans in front of the goal they are defending. It is simply not logical to assume that. Our problem is that an even standard of consistency is not applied across the ground. How many frees does Lloyd get as opposed to say Plugger or BBBH...Lloydy even did an oscar winning one on friday night and got a free about 10 metres out. I am probably biased, but I do feel our forwards get a rough deal from the umps, while the backs seem to be penalised quite harshly.... why was kirk penalised for HTB in a pack, when it happens a 100 times a match, and only a handful are paid.
Remember last year that the schwatta was penalised when he ran over the line with the ball...same thing yesterday by medhurst I think it was, no free for us...very strange.
It's my biggest grumble about australian rules football -- that so many of the 'rules' are open to interpretation...and different interpretation by different umpires...
I don't mind us being penalised if it is deserved, but would like the sme consideration in return.

Goldspink has just made my A list too....

[sharp9]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Willo tripped and knocked the Freo player. Unfortunate but a free.

True...just unlucky.

An amazing run of line ball calls goinf their way all day. Only good one was Willo in the back when he was holding the ball (but then they've been paying that all year)

Just after Micky's "throw" a Freo player did the same (with no opponent around and was alowed to pick it up and continue.

Beautiful Freo Rugby Union hand-off missed in our forwrd fifty - Stevens problem was that he tried to play the ball after being fouled instead of throwing himself to the ground. Umpires are so used to staging now that they assume if you don't "milk it" it wasn't there.

Hate those soft around the neck frees when a player ducks or slips and the tackler puts his hand on the shoulder trying to reach for the ball. Kirk got one in front of goal and they got a few as well. Dumb, Dumb rule.

[BAM_BAM]

each time there was a suss free awarded, my nephew took to scriblling over the umps faces in my record. By the end of the match there was an ink blot Freud would have been proud of.

[swan_song]

LOL @ BAM_BAM....
My daughter does that too in the Record...usually also drawing horns and a tail on the opposing coach pics and umps!!!

[penga]

Originally posted by tez
I would be interested in the opinions of others in relation
to the kneeing of the ball OOBOTF as happenned to BGBH
yesterday. In my
playing days I scored, what I thought was a goal from my
knee only to be awarded a point. I questionned the umpire and
was told that the ball must come from the foot or part of the
leg below the knee with any contact with the ball above this
as being deemed as off the body. If this ruling was applied,
BGBH should not have been penalised.

daniel kerr did this about two weeks ago and it was awarded a point, therefore knee is not a kick!

[swan_17]

you are absolutely correct penga. My grandfather, apart from being a former player, was later a goal umpire and an umpires observer (meaning he reported back to the league on the umpires performance) and talking to him the ball must come from below the knee to score a goal or be deemed out of bounds on the full. This was a particularly glaring error as it lead directly to a Fremantle goal.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by swan_17
This was a particularly glaring error as it lead directly to a Fremantle goal.

I agree it was annoying, but let's not say 'it lead directly to a goal'. The ball was after all on our HFF, hence they had to get it up the other end and kick a goal, which is our own fault.

[Nico]

Originally posted by Cheer Cheer
I am not an umpire basher - i.e. - their against us , they have no clue, blah, blah, blah - however one decision I found very interesting was the one where Nicks had a free kick and the umpire called advantage when there was clearly no advantage and the umpire wouldnt bring the kick back to nicks, and thus the umpire not admiting he made a mistake and bounced the ball.

I believe the advantage rule is strictly only where another player takes possession and takes off. In Nick's case he propped on his mark and then ran off. If he had gone say 5 metres forward of the mark in the momentum of the tackle, the umpire would have pulled him back. Correct decision I think.

[Nico]

Originally posted by tez
I would be interested in the opinions of others in relation
to the kneeing of the ball OOBOTF as happenned to BGBH
yesterday. In my
playing days I scored, what I thought was a goal from my
knee only to be awarded a point. I questionned the umpire and
was told that the ball must come from the foot or part of the
leg below the knee with any contact with the ball above this
as being deemed as off the body. If this ruling was applied,
BGBH should not have been penalised.

Gee I thought on the replay it was just below the knee, therefore correct decision.

My query is the rule, where in this case it was clearly accidental, but then again it could dummied up to look accidental.

[Cheer Cheer]

Originally posted by Nico
I believe the advantage rule is strictly only where another player takes possession and takes off. In Nick's case he propped on his mark and then ran off. If he had gone say 5 metres forward of the mark in the momentum of the tackle, the umpire would have pulled him back. Correct decision I think.

Well you are entitled to your opinion, but there was a small article in melbournes herald sun today repeating and supporting what I said in my earlier post which you quoted.