Umpiring!

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by Glenn
Got some bad calls no doubt, the "mark" to Goodes not paid comes to mind

You'd like to think that the cub-committee looking at how to bring high marks back into the game would look at that.

One thing I did object too was hearing the umpire (on the TV) telling Leo that the punch was an accident.
Not quite elling him not to be a sook, but close. I think it suggested a piss poor attitude from the umpire.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Ruckman
One thing I did object too was hearing the umpire (on the TV) telling Leo that the punch was an accident.
Not quite elling him not to be a sook, but close. I think it suggested a piss poor attitude from the umpire.

I assumed he was saying it was an accident to stop any remonstrations by the other players. Without the benefit of a replay, it could have been considered an accident.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

I agree with an affort of will it could have been considered an accident, the clue of course was the clenched fist.

[SimonH]

The match-day committee will have to cite Chapman (if I remember the culprit rightly) for that, won't they? If you can whack someone in the face with a fist, in circumstances where you have no reason to be using a closed fist (i.e. you're not trying to spoil, and in theory you're trying to tackle the player), and not get done, then we might as well shut the disciplinary stystem down.

Umpiring generally dodgy, but if anything favoured us more than them. About 3 incidents I can think of where either a soft free, or a free against us that should have been paid but wasn't, led to a Sydney goal. The only thing that really riled me was multiple free kicks against Crouch on G. Ablett, including one for legit body pressure and an excellent spoil, 10 metres out from goal. The attitude was clearly, 'Crouchy is a tagger, so anything he does to SOG to stop him getting the ball that involves body contact, must be illegal scragging'.

Has no-one realised yet that the supposedly brand new approach of 'cutting down on scragging and taggers' is the same thing as the long-since-abandoned policy of 'paying lots of tiggy-touchwood frees, especially in the forward line, and therefore making the umpiring disproportionately important in each team's ability to score'? Hint: the defenders are out there on the park to tag the forwards. It's not just a legitimate tactic; it's an integral part of the game.

Having said that, one thing that was very good and generally favoured us (as the team with a better midfield on the night) was that they didn't blow the whistle for a ball up as soon as the ball got locked in, but gave the players an extended period to get it out.

[Casey36]

Yeah The Umpires Weren't Too Bad Actually. They Let Some Things Go, That Should Of Been Pulled Up.. But Anyway In The End We Won So Cant Complain!

[floppinab]

Originally posted by Ruckman
I agree with an affort of will it could have been considered an accident, the clue of course was the clenched fist.

This above all things is making lose more and more respect for the umps.

How in the hell did he think he knew it was an accident??? It was a guess pure and simple. You see far too much guessing at decisions based what they think is happening instead of what they see is happening.

For @@@@s sake, stopping guessing at things you don't see and umpire the bloody game as you see it, not how you think you see it. There was no need for any comment at all. You've paid the free, if you didn't think it was reportable, fine, the video will take care of that, just shut the @@@@ up and get on with the game.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by SimonH
The match-day committee will have to cite Chapman (if I remember the culprit rightly) for that, won't they? If you can whack someone in the face with a fist, in circumstances where you have no reason to be using a closed fist (i.e. you're not trying to spoil, and in theory you're trying to tackle the player), and not get done, then we might as well shut the disciplinary stystem down.

Indeed yes, however having been reported on occasions during my playing days I can honestly say that I would love to have been able to claim that "the umpire said it was accidental" in defence.

Originally posted by SimonH
The only thing that really riled me was multiple free kicks against Crouch on G. Ablett, including one for legit body pressure and an excellent spoil, 10 metres out from goal.

We're in the forward pocket at Telstra and I thought I saw crouch's left had grabbing jnr's jumper as his right was punching the ball too

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by Ruckman
We're in the forward pocket at Telstra and I thought I saw crouch's left had grabbing jnr's jumper as his right was punching the ball too

I was unhappy at first, but when you see the replay it seems that he did grab him. I think the camera from the other side (where the umpire was standing) showed it clearly as a hold.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by Ruckman
We're in the forward pocket at Telstra and I thought I saw crouch's left had grabbing jnr's jumper as his right was punching the ball too

Maybe - but imagine if our Bazza was given anywhere near that level of assistance?

[Nico]

I think the umps looked after Gary Jnr because at times it looked like Crouchy was humping him. I dont know if humping is in the spirit of the game.

[dimelb]

Gives a different take on AFL...

[giant]

Umpiring was fine in terms of your average Swans' game - the number of crap soft free kicks our guys gave away was much less fine. Poor even by our over-excited standards.

[dread and might]

To be fair to GAJ he gets a fairly rough deal from the umps usually. Doesn't help that he likes to have a whinge about taggers etc.

Having said that, SOS would not have been FB of the Century if frees were paid like that back in the day.

[ScottH]

Originally posted by Nico
I think the umps looked after Gary Jnr because at times it looked like Crouchy was humping him. I dont know if humping is in the spirit of the game.

Doing a tango, might be a more polite term.