Most overtly biased umpiring I have seen

[Doctor J.]

And anyone who thinks Commissioner Warren handed down the correct decision in the Kennedy assasination would also believe this piece of garbage from the umpires department.

This is why Geischan must go. He has no idea about the rules of the game, let alone trying to interpret correctly any of the new rules.

I actually blame him for the existence of the HITB rule in the first place. If the umpires had been more skilled at picking what was a genuine push in the back rather than a placement of the hands on an opponents back, this rule would not exist in the first place.

[Legs Akimbo]

This is just like 1984 - black is white, night is day. Move along here, nothing to see, what you saw was not what happened.

[goswannie14]

The real problem with this is that if Geischen had admitted to possibly one error, eg the OOB non-call, he could take some heat off the umpires, but he appears to not even have the brains to do that.

As for claiming that the hip and shoulder was correct, as BBB pointed out, the signal was for a push in the back not shepherding whilst the ball was over 5 metres away, also looking at the TV footage, you could not know where the ball was when Michael fell over, so how the @@@@ can this dickhead say it was a correct call.

[Industrial Fan]

This is just like 1984 - black is white, night is day. Move along here, nothing to see, what you saw was not what happened.

On the bright side, chocolate rations have increased.

[NMWBloods]

Even the boundary umpire's failure to blow the whistle after Adam McPhee clearly went over the boundary was considered technically correct because the umpire was deemed not to be in a position to make a call

What a joke - the umpire got it right because he was wrong! On that basis they can say they get every call right - the ones that they don't they just say the umpire didn't see it hence he is not in position to make the call and hence is technically correct not doing so!

[Dave]

This latest serving of bull from Geischen has really got me p'd off again after taking two days to calm down after Sat night.

This guy needs to go into politics the way he spins the issues.

Let's hope the boys are as fired up as the rest of us and start by taking it out on the Hawks. I want to see blood being spilt...

[hammo]

This is the biggest arse covering exercise since the LRT dacking.

Well done AFL and well done umpires.

[giant]

This is the biggest arse covering exercise since the LRT dacking.

Well done AFL and well done umpires.

Surely the LRT Fiasco was an arse uncovering exercise?

I think the fact that they can say the McPhee incident didn't involve a mistake probably puts the rest of their analysis in context. Given the Barry bump on Michael was illegal, I look forward to 975 similar free kicks being paid this weekend.

[nat]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21856386-2722,00.html

Asked if he felt like joining in the booing, Everitt joked: "I did, I think.

"It (the booing) was amazing. I've never witnessed or been in anything like that at any time in my life.

[Industrial Fan]

Was it caught on the tv coverage?

I have no desire to watch the game again, but I wouldn't mind seeing how the booing appeared to the tv audience.

[cruiser]

I'm beginning to wonder whether I want to continue attending AFL matches after this garbage from Geischen.

[hammo]

Wary that the AFL is sensitive to criticism of its umpires, Everitt has attributed some of his strongest words to a mystery acquaintance.

"It's funny, going on the umpires, I was talking to a friend of a friend during the week and he believes the umpires are probably getting a bit too big for the whole game itself," he said.

"He's seen them interviewed on television. He hears them from the boundary line calling players by their nicknames, and he reckons they should only be there to umpire and facilitate.

"He believes the umpires are trying to get bigger than the actual game itself.

"He was there booing on the weekend and he was very frustrated. He believes the umpires are there to make a decision and leave it at that.

That's hilarious

Very clever, Spida.

[ugg]

Full explanations of all queried decisions:

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21855929-5006065,00.html

[liz]

Would love to have known what justification they'd have come up with for the most blatant missed free - the one where Bolton put his hand in Goodes' face. Even if there hadn't been head high contact that should have been a free since Bolton moved front on into Goodes with no eyes on the ball but the hand to the face should have made it extremely easy for the umpire to spot and decide upon.

[EMJ]

I feel all rules need clarifying. They are too "airy fairy". Too open for umpires to rule on, on their own. They need to be "black and white" as they say easier to discern and less rules.

NRL rules are straight forward - anyone can tell you the rules as they easily explained.

Demetriou and Anderson need to clean their act up and umpires need to be brought to a meeting and told off when they are wrong - interpretation of the rules is all up in the air.

Umpires should not be protected.

Get rid of the essendon people who write on this site - not interested - they took over this discussion and no one got to the point - except arguing with them.