Rnd 22 Swans v Kangaroos Aug 20 Hobart

[Primmy]

Im always relieved when Umpire Schmidt is not on deck. He just loves his little nigglies.

However if Ump Jordan Bannister is in the mix, its a woohoo from me. He at least is impartial and balanced, and understands the flow of a game.

[crackedactor]

But we won Dosser, and we are still smelling a rat.

Since we won, we have just blown that theory away!! The 21 to 9 free kicks discrepancy appears far too often for my liking. I can never remember it being the opposite. Of course it only happens in the close games. According to the laws of average, it should appear in our favour one day. Maybe against Hawthorn in our first final at ANZ stadium. OK sorry if I have anyone in stitches with laughter!!

[Industrial Fan]

We had 23-13 our way against Port.

But pretty sure that even after that game we had one of the worst free kick differentials for the comp.

[Plugger46]

The umpiring is generally ok if we win, but if we lose then the umpires obviously have a mandate from the AFL and twirl their moustaches while giving free kicks against us. Fair dinkum guys, let's get our tinfoil hats on.

Well said. Every single supporter base carries on about biased umpiring.

[Triple B]

Well said. Every single supporter base carries on about biased umpiring.

The penny dropped for me when I started going to a lot of 'neutral' games not involving the Swans and sitting back pissing myself laughing at both sets of opposition supporters complaining about the most obvious of free kicks. Somewhere along the line I thought, 'Gee, maybe I'm a bit like that at a Swans game' and have certainly toned things down in the past 10 years or so.

That said, you can't convince me Stevic is not a biased @@@@@ towards Hawthorn, his record of only umpiring one side in 3 successive PF's along with the 2012 GF speaks for itself...

[Jewels]

That said, you can't convince me Stevic is not a biased @@@@@ towards Hawthorn, his record of only umpiring one side in 3 successive PF's along with the 2012 GF speaks for itself...

Yep. I actually think he is one of the better umpires when not umpiring Hawthorn. He must have grown up a Hawks fan and just sees things their way, much like I think I'd be if I were an umpire in a Swans game.
Interestingly, just having a quick look, it doesn't appear that he has done a Hawks match at all this season so I wonder if someone at HO has noticed something.


Or maybe they're just saving him for all the Hawks finals matches

[Beerman]

The penny dropped for me when I started going to a lot of 'neutral' games not involving the Swans and sitting back pissing myself laughing at both sets of opposition supporters complaining about the most obvious of free kicks. Somewhere along the line I thought, 'Gee, maybe I'm a bit like that at a Swans game' and have certainly toned things down in the past 10 years or so.

It was the Bulldogs game last year that was the wake-up call for me. Like most of the crowd at the ground I was incensed that they called play-on against pyke in the dying minute. Watched the replay at home and the ball was clearly (but remarkably) touched off the boot.

Made me think that maybe the umpires do know more and see more than I do and I should just keep my mouth shut.

[CureTheSane]

Well said. Every single supporter base carries on about biased umpiring.

True, but some of us are more pragmatic than that.
I rarely complain about umpiring, even when I feel it's against us. I get that supporters generally notice only the ones pertinent to their club.
This is made worse by the inconsistent way the games are umpired, both within the game and between games.

Every now and then it is over the top though. Probably 3 or 4 times this year I've felt that we were pretty hardly done by.
Every now and then it could be said that poor decisions have cost us games. I don't generally subscribe to that unless there have been 3 or so decisions which have directly cost us goals, as losing by less than a goal and blaming it on a poor decision (even if it's there) is kind of lame.

I don't follow which umpires are good and bad and which are said to be biased against the Swans or in bed with the Hacks.

The rest of the rhetoric about umpiring will never go away., It's a part of the game.
Imagine gong to a match and not having people around you rip in to umpires?

[Meg]

From MRP statement today. I must have missed the incident - what happened?

"Heath Grundy, Sydney Swans, has been charged with engaging in rough conduct against Lindsay Thomas, North Melbourne, during the fourth quarter of the Round 22 match between the Sydney Swans and North Melbourne, played at Blundstone Arena on Saturday August 20, 2016.

In summary, he can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea."

[Mel_C]

From MRP statement today. I must have missed the incident - what happened?

"Heath Grundy, Sydney Swans, has been charged with engaging in rough conduct against Lindsay Thomas, North Melbourne, during the fourth quarter of the Round 22 match between the Sydney Swans and North Melbourne, played at Blundstone Arena on Saturday August 20, 2016.

In summary, he can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea."

I didn't notice the incident either and you would think anything involving Lindsay would have been replayed as he would have tried to milk a free kick.

I noticed that a Hawthorn player (Lewis) was cleared again after punching someone in the chin. Whereas Sloane was suspended for 1 week when you could argue he was trying to spoil.

Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk

[dejavoodoo44]

From MRP statement today. I must have missed the incident - what happened?

"Heath Grundy, Sydney Swans, has been charged with engaging in rough conduct against Lindsay Thomas, North Melbourne, during the fourth quarter of the Round 22 match between the Sydney Swans and North Melbourne, played at Blundstone Arena on Saturday August 20, 2016.

In summary, he can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea."

I suspect that we all missed it??

[Triple B]

I missed it.

I didn't miss Harvey punching Papley in the face when he ran him down when Paps took that silly bounce. Anybody else see it???

[Meg]

Rnd 22 Swans v Kangaroos Aug 20 Hobart

Whereas Sloane was suspended for 1 week when you could argue he was trying to spoil.

Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk

The MRP didn't classify this as intentional so they haven't said Sloane was not trying to spoil. But the spoil attempt was late and hit Ebert in the head causing a quite severe facial injury, resulting in Ebert being off the ground for some time getting treatment (including stitches I think). Therefore I think the MRP's classification of the incident as "careless conduct with medium impact to the head" is justified.

That classification is automatically a two-match sanction down to one match with an early plea.

[Triple B]

They can classify it whatever they like, but if JPK or Hanners who play the game identical to Sloane, very hard and very fair got two weeks for that this board would be in meltdown. And rightly so, shocking decision...

[dejavoodoo44]

The MRP didn't classify this as intentional so they haven't said Sloane was not trying to spoil. But the spoil attempt was late and hit Ebert in the head causing a quite severe facial injury, resulting in Ebert being off the ground for some time getting treatment (including stitches I think). Therefore I think the MRP's classification of the incident as "careless conduct with medium impact to the head" is justified.

That classification is automatically a two-match sanction down to one match with an early plea.

Actually, in regards to Lewis being let off, the wording seems a touch bizarre.

"Contact between Hawthorn?s Jordan Lewis and West Coast?s Scott Lycett from the fourth quarter of Friday?s match was assessed. Contact was initially made to the shoulder of the West Coast player, before high contact was made. Lycett had already been awarded a free kick and it was the view of the panel the force used was below that required to constitute a reportable offence. No further action was taken."

Without watching it again, I was pretty sure that it was a straight punch to the head: but even if it wasn't, what are they saying? That if you throw a punch towards the head and it glances off the shoulder, then it's okay then? Or that it's not intentional striking if it misses the body part that you were apparently going for? In that case, how do they know that he wasn't really going for the head, but accidentally hit the shoulder?
And in regards to, "Lycett had already been awarded a free kick": what has that got to do with it? Are they implying that if someone has got a free kick, then it's okay to get angry and hit them? Or are they saying that because you punched someone and they got a free kick, then that is a mitigating circumstance when it comes to the Tribunal process?
Ahhh, it's with things like this, that conspiracy theories are born and maintained.