Ray Chamberlin is a ******* ****** who agrees?

[giant]

There was one Hands in the Back against I think it was White today that was ridiculous in my opinion. White literally put his hand up to balance, the Fweo player seemed to touch it for a millsecond, it made no difference to the play, Jesse took the mark and then had a free kick paid against him. To the absolute letter of the law its a free kick, but what sport do the boys play- netball or afl? Saying that Jesse looks like he'd excel at Netball, he seems to like to avoid all contact where possible.

The rule was changed no doubt to counter our tactics and screw us over, which is has royally done. To this day, I still don't think we've adapted well to the new rule.

You could have lived with the Jesse decision as technical but soft if not for the fact there had been three absolutely blatant shoves in the back in the preceding THREE MINUTES leading up to that decision. Not little "I'll rest my hands here while I balance", but completely taking the player out with two hands forcibly into the back.

And then came the 50m penalty.

[bloodsbigot]

Edit: Probably not appropriate for this site.

[top40]

No way known can the AFL shut down a privately run website in a supposedly free country. However nor do we want to go to the lengths the Hawks website did. We are better than that. These threads are terrific to let off steam after a frustrating day.

Your last point is spot on. We are a democratic country where freedom of speech is permitted. The day there is censorship from not just the State, but from a private sporting administration (!!) is the day we can no longer claim to be a free, democratic country.

[Big Al]

The frustrating thing about yesterday is that the 3 blind mice took the focus away from football and placed it squarely on themselves. Ray and his posse should watch the 05 Grand Final to see how to umpire a game that lets the players decide the contest. Not sure Rays ego would ever allow him to take a back seat in games and let the players be the focus. As I said, frustrating

[Big Al]

(MOD EDIT - Frog : Quotes deleted post)

I stand by my opinion.

It was funny Primms, when the game was gone the Umpires starting giving frees to us and when we looked like winning the 80 metre free kick was pulled out. It's at least a roll eyes, scratch your head going wtf is going on moment if nothing else.

[Nich]

Fell asleep last night singing this song. Woke up at 3am having a nightmare.

I'd do a youtube clip of Ray screwing up with this song as the backdrop but decided we already give him enough oxygen.

[BigD]

Firstly, can I just say it's a good thing I waited until this morning to post as with the mood I was in last night I probably would have posted something that would have got me Thrown off this site or got the site shut down.

I have never been so disgusted with an umpiring performance in all the time I have closely followed AFL. Granted we did not play well but if not for the yellow filth we might have gotten away with a win. Since when is the rule book followed to the absolute letter of the law for one team only while the other is allowed to get away with murder.

[SPC]

Originally Posted by mcs on game day thread
It was certainly a throw, however its not the decision there that riles me, its the 1,365 instances of exactly the same thing happening in a game that don't get pulled up that annoy me. Every 2nd player throws the ball in tight contested footy like that, and imo it either should be pinged every time, or not at all (I prefer the second for the reason that at least the players would decide the result not the umpires). Tadgh was stupid to give away the 50, but it was a ridiculously harsh call , and as everyone has said it was more like an '80'. The other call that really riled me amongst others was the Teddy dragging the ball in free. Sure by the letter of the law it was a free kick- but what else is Teddy suppose to do but try and gain possession. There was no way he could kick it out in that pack or get a legal handball away, and if he had of left it there was a good possibility of a freo goal from it- so what exactly is Teddy suppose to do. Very harsh call and to a point a stupid rule.

Spot on mcs! And this is the point that will be missed when Geishen comes out and defends the individual 'contentious' decisions like he does every week. Its the plucking a technically correct decision out when they have been let go all day that sends everyone to the brink on days like yesterday. One thing that should be taken up is Rays offer to the Swans players to point out the ones he got wrong. It was in commentary while BT was praising Ray for giving it back to the players (BTW he has to be the biggest Muppet of any commentator, of any code of footy I have every seen, but I digress) and made us listen to how Ray was asking the Swans players who were blowing up about another one of his decisions. The Swans should not let the opportunity pass, because its one of the few times you get invited to give feedback on umpire performance. You would need to put in some work & go thru the whole game to highlight every decision that was technical but didnt get paid, then compare to the ones he paid. And the 12 point goal for holding the angry ant at bay while he was swinging like a dunny door, please!!! How many frees should be paid every week if that was one?

[Frog]

People, various of the RWO members are using copyright images. We, as in the RWO admins, are allowing this and the AFL chooses to turn a blind eye. As was the case with the Hawthorn side, they WERE shut down by the AFL at the time with heavy handed solicitor letters, some of which we were, at the time, privvy to. The Hawks supporter website has since been re-started (which is why it looks like it was temporary). The site is new (run by the same people) but extremely restricted.

I say again, umpires think the game is about them. They are useless in most decisions. I DO NOT have to see the game to get the gist of what happened yesterday. Get that through your skulls!!!! Especially those of you that keep accusing me of not having seen the match and therefor I cannot comment here. I DO NOT CARE about the match. I CARE ABOUT THIS THREAD getting out of hand and some AFL officianado seeing this and taking offence. It doesn't take much in today's day and age. Last request. Settle. Please.

[top40]

People, various of the RWO members are using copyright images. We, as in the RWO admins, are allowing this and the AFL chooses to turn a blind eye. As was the case with the Hawthorn side, they WERE shut down by the AFL at the time with heavy handed solicitor letters, some of which we were, at the time, privvy to. The Hawks supporter website has since been re-started (which is why it looks like it was temporary). The site is new (run by the same people) but extremely restricted.

I say again, umpires think the game is about them. They are useless in most decisions. I DO NOT have to see the game to get the gist of what happened yesterday. Get that through your skulls!!!! Especially those of you that keep accusing me of not having seen the match and therefor I cannot comment here. I DO NOT CARE about the match. I CARE ABOUT THIS THREAD getting out of hand and some AFL officianado seeing this and taking offence. It doesn't take much in today's day and age. Last request. Settle. Please.

I say again, Frog, what is the legal basis for a private, sporting administration shutting down a website? However you care about this thread, I would like to know the answer! Simply threats from solicitor's letters as what occurred with Hawthorn in the past is NOT a legal basis.

I say again, in a democratic nation that up holds freedom of speech, we have a RIGHT to state what we want. Even with the laws of civil defamation, (save and except that your words do not promote illegal actively such as violence), the RIGHT still exists.

Yes, you have a perfect right to comment about the umpiring even if you did not see the game. (It is just that there is no weight that one could possibly give to such an opinion)

[jono2707]

Hi Frog - thanks for doing the work you do to keep this site going - I appreciate it and I'm sure everyone else does too. I think its important that we heed warnings such as yours and tone things down a bit. Post-match yesterday was for letting off steam but I agree that we should be careful not to go too far....

[laughingnome]

Okay guys, it's Monday Morning and time to take a deep breath and move on. We can't change history, we can't get an umpire sacked and we have to win against the Bulldogs this weekend. Time to look forward to Saturday.

[top40]

Hi Frog - thanks for doing the work you do to keep this site going - I appreciate it and I'm sure everyone else does too. I think its important that we heed warnings such as yours and tone things down a bit. Post-match yesterday was for letting off steam but I agree that we should be careful not to go too far....

Why?

[Triple B]

I say again, Frog, what is the legal basis for a private, sporting administration shutting down a website? However you care about this thread, I would like to know the answer! Simply threats from solicitor's letters as what occurred with Hawthorn in the past is NOT a legal basis.

I say again, in a democratic nation that up holds freedom of speech, we have a RIGHT to state what we want. Even with the laws of civil defamation, (save and except that your words do not promote illegal actively such as violence), the RIGHT still exists.

Yes, you have a perfect right to comment about the umpiring even if you did not see the game. (It is just that there is no weight that one could possibly give to such an opinion)

With respect top40, Frog's position the whole time has just been to ask people not to set a foot over the line.

The possibility of anything legal coming of any umpire/AFL bashing thread is so minimal it is barely measurable, but you know what, if it happens it won't be me or you having to answer any case, it will be the owners, Frog and Scott.

I really don't believe there was anything in the thread which could reasonably cause a problem. I reckon the title of the thread is as defamatory as anything written. Mind you, if Frog ended up in court about the title, he'd have no end of witnesses prepared to swear on the bible that the title is correct. It's just that he doesn't care to end up in court, that's all.

As for your last sentence, I don't believe Frog at anytime offered a comment on the performance of the umpires, not sure what you're on about there.

[Sauce]

You are kidding me Frog? It's bad enough the fat Cyprian bastard controls the media and tries to engineer the code and the media how he thinks it should be run, much like some kind of dictatorship, but now you are fearing reprisal from the AFL, who happen to be just a sporting organisation who hold no power nor can uphold the law, just because we dare to question the integrity of the code, the umpires and this @@@@ty code in general?

Your reaction is typical of how the AFL wants it's supporters and those working within the AFL to react. With fear.

Are you seriously scared that a mock letter from Australian Farcical League asking you to tell members of this site to stop slagging and being negativity towards the stupid code? Are you really that worried? Do you see them as some quasi Gestapo?

Seriously Frog you must live a very sedated and restrictive life if you are scared of the AFL.

Sheesh.