The Umpiring Delusion - RWO Bombers Match Report

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • liz
    Veteran
    Site Admin
    • Jan 2003
    • 16733

    The Umpiring Delusion - RWO Bombers Match Report

    Run out of plasticine models of Sheedy, umpires or Swans players to stick needles in? Struggling to maintain the rage before facing your work colleagues tomorrow?

    Well if you need firing up again but can't face actually watching a replay, try reading Ugg's RWO match report and see if that does the trick.



    Pictures courtesy of Norris Lurker.
  • ScottH
    It's Goodes to cheer!!
    • Sep 2003
    • 23665

    #2
    The umpires sucked, but not as bad as our general play.

    Have you ever noticed how the bombers seem to play in bursts at the beginning of most qtrs. My BIL pointed that out a few years back while watching the bombers play at the 'G. Must be a Sheedy trait.

    Comment

    • giant
      Veterans List
      • Mar 2005
      • 4731

      #3
      Must say I'm surprised at the response to the field umpiring. I didn't think it was any worse that I've seen in other games this year (& appreciably better than say the Saints game) & I didn't think it had any impact on the game as such.

      Which of course is not to say it didn't suck.

      Comment

      • goswannie14
        Leadership Group
        • Sep 2005
        • 11166

        #4
        Good read, but I can't understand why Monty wasn't listed in the best players. IMO BOG.
        Does God believe in Atheists?

        Comment

        • giant
          Veterans List
          • Mar 2005
          • 4731

          #5
          Originally posted by goswannie14
          Good read, but I can't understand why Monty wasn't listed in the best players. IMO BOG.
          His 2 OOBOTFs which could have won us the game might be a good start.

          Comment

          • goswannie14
            Leadership Group
            • Sep 2005
            • 11166

            #6
            Originally posted by giant
            His 2 OOBOTFs which could have won us the game might be a good start.
            He did more than any other player on the night, he had more of the ball and did more with it. Yes if he had kicked 3 goals instead of 1 point we would have won, but is that good enough reason to exclude him considering the performance of the other players on the night. He was clearly better than 18 others out there at least.
            Does God believe in Atheists?

            Comment

            • ugg
              Can you feel it?
              Site Admin
              • Jan 2003
              • 15961

              #7
              I didn't include him because I thought many of his kicks were pretty ineffective. Plus, those 2 shots on goal were absolutely woeful.
              Reserves live updates (Twitter)
              Reserves WIKI -
              Top Goalkickers| Best Votegetters

              Comment

              • goswannie14
                Leadership Group
                • Sep 2005
                • 11166

                #8
                Originally posted by ugg
                I didn't include him because I thought many of his kicks were pretty ineffective. Plus, those 2 shots on goal were absolutely woeful.
                I can understand that, but I'm not changing my TLM votes.
                Does God believe in Atheists?

                Comment

                • undy
                  Fatal error: Allowed memo
                  • Mar 2003
                  • 1231

                  #9
                  Originally posted by giant
                  Must say I'm surprised at the response to the field umpiring. I didn't think it was any worse that I've seen in other games this year (& appreciably better than say the Saints game) & I didn't think it had any impact on the game as such.

                  Which of course is not to say it didn't suck.
                  I think that the Swans were woeful, Essendon were as bad (whilst playing closer to their potential), but the umps had the worst game and the effect of their mistakes was unevenly distributed between the two teams.

                  You would have to be a fanatical one-eyed fan of the yellow team to claim that the net effect of their mistakes was less than a one-point leg-up to Essendon, so the impact on the game was that the result was wrong.
                  Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way you'll be a mile away and he'll be shoeless.

                  Comment

                  Working...