The umpires need to be investigated.

[Doctor J.]

Someone highlighting the ankle tap of Nankervis has got me even madder. I'd forgotten about this one no doubt its a free kick to Nank. Puopolo didn't tackle him, he dived at him and caught his ankles, clear free kick and the umpire is right there with a clear view of it and waves play on. Further evidence that we should be sitting on top of the ladder. I walked out of the Dogs game disappointed but I knew it was us who stuffed that up. This game we were ambushed.

Did not watch a single game of AFL over the weekend, watched NRL Friday night and Swans Reserves on Saturday arvo. I frankly don't care about the whole thing at the moment. Its being run by a Victorian centric administration who desperately don't want interstate success and the only real genuine chance of Vic success is to gift another flag to Hawthorn.

And for what its worth, the favouritism of the umpires extends down to the VFL team, the Box Hill hawks. Played Essendon on Saturday, Essendon won by 3 points despite the free kick count going at 25-11 in the Hawks favour.

So in 8 quarters of football this club who invented "unsociable football" has transgressed a total of 20 times. And that includes skill errors such as OOB on the full. Amazing!!!

[Sandrevan]

Geez I thought us Swans fans were better than whining and moaning about umpiring but apparently not. We didn't deserve to win that game last night and to blame umpiring 'conspiracies' is pathetic.

Did you watch the game?
The umpire bias is so blatant. How could you miss it? eg. Hodge sling tackles Sinclair whose head hits the ground and it's play on. If the Hawks won by 50 points your post would be relevant. In a very close game non-decisions do affect the result. eg Hill running >15 m before Burgoynes goal. McEvoy holding the arm of Aliir which allowed Rioli to mark uncontested - then kick a goal. If the umpiring was even the Swans would have won comfortably.
You may have noticed a lot of bitterness about the result from the posters on this thread - sore losers, a coincidence - I don't think so.

[jono2707]

Did you watch the game?
The umpire bias is so blatant. How could you miss it? eg. Hodge sling tackles Sinclair whose head hits the ground and it's play on. If the Hawks won by 50 points your post would be relevant. In a very close game non-decisions do affect the result. eg Hill running >15 m before Burgoynes goal. McEvoy holding the arm of Aliir which allowed Rioli to mark uncontested - then kick a goal. If the umpiring was even the Swans would have won comfortably.
You may have noticed a lot of bitterness about the result from the posters on this thread - sore losers, a coincidence - I don't think so.

Yes I was there - haven't watched the replay yet although I'm sure I will be aggrieved at some of the decisions.

I would expect that the club has moved on and aren't obsessing over any real or perceived umpiring issues, but are instead focusing on how to improve for the run in to the finals, especially in close pressure-filled games. I also think there might be one or two other distractions around this week.....

[Sandrevan]

Well more than 24 hours has elapsed and I am STILL bitter....Never usually lasts THAT long....Something different about it this time....

I know what you mean - I feel the same.

[crackedactor]

Exactly my sentiments Sandrevan. Whoever said blaming the umpiring was pathetic must be a hawks supporter. Its also the first time I have ever heard Longmire has a go at the umpiring. That alone says plenty.

[jono2707]

Exactly my sentiments Sandrevan. Whoever said blaming the umpiring was pathetic must be a hawks supporter.

That would be me. And no.
But I do have a begrudging admiration of a) how they've played on a number of occasions this year (inc last Thurs) to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, and b) whatever it is they are doing to be on the right side of the umpires at moments when it's mattered.

What has Longmire or anyone else involved with the club said about the umpires since Thurs night? Nothing.

[Industrial Fan]

What can they say about the umpires without being fined? Nothing.

Longmire made his point clear in the post match and it was best left there (in public at least)

[crackedactor]

What can they say about the umpires without being fined? Nothing.

Longmire made his point clear in the post match and it was best left there (in public at least)

What can Longmire say without copping a $50,000 plus fine? Though I doubt if will never see it in my lifetime, I want to see the Swans have 13 free kicks and a Victorian team have just 3 at 3/4 time and see the outcrying for all the Melbourne Papers. Trust me they will be a full investigation and please explain session.

[RogueSwan]

What can they say about the umpires without being fined? Nothing...

Well, he should have had a quick check with his boss and then said what he wanted to say. A $20-30 grand fine is nothing if it gets you a fair run through the finals, isn't it?

[Maltopia]

Well, he should have had a quick check with his boss and then said what he wanted to say. A $20-30 grand fine is nothing if it gets you a fair run through the finals, isn't it?

I thought similarly at first, but now I think the public comment would only have helped the supporters feel the club was doing something (it might be behind closed doors, but we don't know this).

I think the AFL too weak to ensure an equal playing field. Unfair/biased umpiring, COLA removal, trade ban last two years etc., are all due to there being many more members of Victorian clubs than NSW clubs, which won't really change for years to come. Even when Sydney won the flag in 2012, the increase in members was only 10,000 or so? Look at Essendon's membership numbers with all their drug related woes. Much easier to look after the VFL clubs as they have all the money.

[RogueSwan]

I thought similarly at first, but now I think the public comment would only have helped the supporters feel the club was doing something (it might be behind closed doors, but we don't know this).

I think the AFL too weak to ensure an equal playing field. Unfair/biased umpiring, COLA removal, trade ban last two years etc., are all due to there being many more members of Victorian clubs than NSW clubs, which won't really change for years to come. Even when Sydney won the flag in 2012, the increase in members was only 10,000 or so? Look at Essendon's membership numbers with all their drug related woes. Much easier to look after the VFL clubs as they have all the money.

But doesn't the tv deal need national audiences? Surely, ha!, the AFL see the need to grow the game beyond Victoria.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[Maltopia]

But doesn't the tv deal need national audiences? Surely, ha!, the AFL see the need to grow the game beyond Victoria.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

The AFL want the northern clubs to be successful, but not too muchly so. Happy for the Swans to be perennial finalists, but winning two flags in 5 years, no, get back in your box!

[jono2707]

The tin foil hats are out tonight....

[Plugger46]

One of the more laughable threads in RWO history. The whole world is out to get us clearly.

[Maltopia]

The tin foil hats are out tonight....

Hey jono2707. I am not claiming any master conspiracy. It just the odds are against us and some of the officials and umpires are unconsciously swayed and then take biased actions against the Swans unknowingly due to all the noise.

My rationale?

Many more Victorian followers who have followed the game over generations on talk back radio, in the industry etc. If something goes wrong for the Swans, who in Melbourne screams about it? But if something goes wrong for one the Melbourne clubs that benefits a northern club - it goes on and on and the AFL even if they say they are immune to bias, some will be swayed by the repeated baying that the Swans are cheaters and rorters of the COLA etc.

Victorian followers see Brisbane win three premierships in a row due aided by salary cap concessions. What happens? Victorian clubs scream blue murder, it isn't fair etc. Brisbane loses the concessions starting a decade long decline.

They see Sydney win two premierships with with COLA. The see us get Franklin and Tippett despite being near top of the ladder. They (and McGuire has publicly said this) think the system is unfair because traditional clubs like St Kilda and Melbourne are decades away from a premiership due to the help being given to the non-Victorian clubs. What happens? COLA gets phased out. We get a trading ban despite losing Mummy and Malcieski to make room for Franklin and Tippet, and also losing White, Everitt and Membrey.

We get Heeney after spending years and hundreds of thousands developing him. What happens? Victorian clubs and supporters scream and they introduce a points based system.

We get Mills after trading away our highest pick for other picks - that other clubs were willing to give us for the higher pick - to get more points to allow us to get him and some other players. Victorian clubs and supporters still not happy. What is happening? Ruminations of removing the 20% discount - though this is partly due to GWS success as well.

Let's look at just the rule changes/penalties. How many have been to the detriment to the Swans (ignoring start up concessions for GWS/GC) and how many have been to the detriment to Victorian clubs?

Now the umpiring. I am not silly enough to think the umpires are cheats. But all that noise about the Swans being rorters of the COLA, doing underhand secret deals to get Buddy and Tippett. Some of that mud sticks and I think some of the umpires are unknowingly more willing to pull up a Swans player for something than a Hawks player.