Naughtiest team in the league?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • dimelb
    pr. dim-melb; m not f
    • Jun 2003
    • 6889

    Naughtiest team in the league?

    I worked out the percentages of FF and FA from The Age this morning, and it made interesting reading. Just running straight down the current ladder (excluding today's games) it goes:
    WC 97.54
    Adel 94.99
    StK 111.68
    Syd 82.98
    Kang 112.20
    Gee 99.73
    Freo 100.30
    Bris 95.93
    Bulldogs 104.39
    Mel 90.65
    Rich 118.45
    PA 84.95
    Ess 94.49
    Coll 114.64
    Haw 86.24
    Carl 128.18

    Is it our style of play? And is there some way of finding out what they were for and breaking them down into categories? As well, as someone mentioned on another thread, which were merited and which weren't?
    Everyone sees us as a hard-working team with a very physical but clean approach to the game, but why are we getting caned like this?
    He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)
  • monopoly19
    Senior Player
    • Aug 2003
    • 1098

    #2
    I think it's probably got something to do with the fact that our games involve alot of contested footy, in close. It's very easy to give away frees in that situation. Also, we have undisciplined backs, and a full-forward that has a reputation that no longer is applicable but the umps seem to have missed that boat.

    The Bulldogs are at the other end of the scale, and their game is much more free flowing than ours, with less stoppages and more reliance on running and hitting targets.

    I was suprised to note that Brett Kirk was at the top of the FF list on AFL.com. He also has a fairly high FA count. We have four players in the top 14 for FA. That's a fairly high percentage. The offenders are, in order, Leo Barry (7th), Bazza (8th), Kirk (9th) and Buchanan (14th). Not many surprises there.

    Also, the umpires hate us, and are unreasonably biased against us

    Comment

    • NMWBloods
      Taking Refuge!!
      • Jan 2003
      • 15819

      #3
      Originally posted by monopoly19
      Also, the umpires hate us, and are unreasonably biased against us
      Lucky you included that. Otherwise we might consider banning you from this site!!
      Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

      "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

      Comment

      • giant
        Veterans List
        • Mar 2005
        • 4731

        #4
        Originally posted by NMWBloods
        Lucky you included that. Otherwise we might consider banning you from this site!!
        LOL! Quite rite Bloods! NO place for reasoned rational debate on umpiring on this site!!! They're just maggots, ok?

        Comment

        • Go Swannies
          Veterans List
          • Sep 2003
          • 5697

          #5
          Originally posted by giant
          LOL! Quite rite Bloods! NO place for reasoned rational debate on umpiring on this site!!! They're just maggots, ok?
          Not always - only when they are maggots.

          This weekend they discounted high tackles (Leo in the goal square - he had to concede the behind when it wasn't paid), ignored clear deliberate OOBOTF and had to decide that contested marks were no longer allowed (Lucas) to make sure that the Bombers had almost twice the number of frees that the Swans had. That's a fair weekend's work.

          Comment

          • Thunder Shaker
            Aut vincere aut mori
            • Apr 2004
            • 4198

            #6
            Originally posted by Go Swannies
            Not always - only when they are maggots.
            Maybe we should appease the maggots. I'm taking raw meat to the next game I attend.
            "Unbelievable!" -- Nick Davis leaves his mark on the 2005 semi final

            Comment

            • NMWBloods
              Taking Refuge!!
              • Jan 2003
              • 15819

              #7
              Originally posted by Go Swannies
              This weekend they discounted high tackles (Leo in the goal square - he had to concede the behind when it wasn't paid),
              I watched again yesterday, and I don't think that was a free.

              ignored clear deliberate OOBOTF
              Fletcher's wasn't really and Peverill's clearly was, but only from the outside angle - probably not clear from the inside.

              and had to decide that contested marks were no longer allowed (Lucas)
              Ridiculous free.

              to make sure that the Bombers had almost twice the number of frees that the Swans had. That's a fair weekend's work.
              There were some shocking decisions, but it didn't seem as bad as everyone makes out.
              Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

              "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

              Comment

              • barry
                Veterans List
                • Jan 2003
                • 8499

                #8
                This is a serious issue, that could cost us a final easily. Its cost us at least a couple of games already this year which is the difference between battling for 4th and battling for 2nd.

                Roos needs to get the umpires up here at a few training sessions, to analyse what exactly they dont like about our style of play, and the players to know whats acceptable.

                Comment

                • Go Swannies
                  Veterans List
                  • Sep 2003
                  • 5697

                  #9
                  I know, in the heat of battle, it often seems that we are being ripped off, only to watch the tape later and think the umpiring was better than I thought. But I did watch the tape again and think that (even ignoring the Lucas free) there was a bias against the Swans. It doesn't have to be much - even 5-10% (2-3%) going against us to (as Barry says) decide our season.

                  It happens often enough that I think if we were a Victorian team it would be subject to a lot of media scrutiny. And it's not every week but I think the overall stats show it's there. Yes, there may be more frees because of our style of play. Buy you can watch quite a few games when we are penalised for something that the other team isn't. Can you remember the last time the "luck" ran the other way?

                  Comment

                  • Rizzo
                    On the Rookie List
                    • Jan 2003
                    • 655

                    #10
                    We seemed to get the run in Tadelaid.

                    Comment

                    • Sanecow
                      Suspended by the MRP
                      • Mar 2003
                      • 6917

                      #11
                      Re: Naughtiest team in the league?

                      Well, to explain:

                      Teams with more FF than FA are from Melbourne:

                      Carl 128.18
                      Rich 118.45
                      Coll 114.64
                      Kang 112.20
                      StK 111.68
                      Bulldogs 104.39

                      Approximately even:

                      Freo 100.30

                      Teams with more FA than FF are primarily non-Melbourne teams:

                      Gee 99.73
                      WC 97.54
                      Bris 95.93
                      Ess 94.49
                      Adel 94.99
                      Mel 90.65
                      Haw 86.24
                      PA 84.95
                      Syd 82.98

                      In essence it represents Victorian Football's ideal end of season ladder with only one interstate team making the finals.

                      Simple, really.
                      or ?

                      Comment

                      • giant
                        Veterans List
                        • Mar 2005
                        • 4731

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Go Swannies

                        It happens often enough that I think if we were a Victorian team it would be subject to a lot of media scrutiny. And it's not every week but I think the overall stats show it's there. Yes, there may be more frees because of our style of play. Buy you can watch quite a few games when we are penalised for something that the other team isn't. Can you remember the last time the "luck" ran the other way?
                        I believe we have not been in front on the frees scoreboard since Round 7 this year - that's pretty staggering given we have won most of those games.

                        The stats have supported our anger now for at least the last couple of yrs - & not just selected stats, virtually any metric you care to mention. Something is definitely awry....

                        That said, I don't think there has been a game this year for the Swans decided by the umpires. The only game where they might have influenced the result was the Pies game & in the end Justice was Done. The worst games for us umpiring wise were prob the Saints & the Tigers & in both those cases we played ****e footy & deserved to lose.

                        So in the end, we'd be better off dealing with our own game & kinda just accept we're gonna be ***** by the maggots each week. Doesn't help my enjoyment of the game however....

                        Comment

                        Working...