That's it. I'm giving up Australian Football.

[cruiser]

Over the four finals that the Dogs played in they led the free kick count in every game, for a total 79-48 in their favour over the four games.

[Blue Sun]

Over the four finals that the Dogs played in they led the free kick count in every game, for a total 79-48 in their favour over the four games.

That is an absurd ratio. I assume Sydney had a negative for/against ratio?

[liz]

How many of those frees has Toby McLean been responsible for, I wonder.

If there is one change to umpiring I hope they make over the off-season, it is to give the umpires the discretion NOT to award a free kick for high contact where they believe the player has substantially contributed to it themselves. At the moment I think it is only a blatant head duck that they are instructed to ignore (or sometimes penalise). I think they are obliged to pay the rest, if they see high contact. While there are many different ways some players have perfected to draw unfair free kicks, the Toby McLean / Rhys Mathieson vertical arm raise is the method I find most galling. With other methods, players might try to argue they are trying to break the tackle (like the Selwood shoulder shrug), but the vertical arm raise can in no way be a valid method to do anything other than draw a completely unfair free kick.

I don't have a problem with the umpires continuing to give the benefit of the doubt to the tackled player, where it's a combination of lowering the head / body and poor tackling technique. But please let's rid the game of the blight of the cheating vertical arm raise. If they have time to do that, they have time to dispose of the ball and it should be deemed to be prior opportunity.

[Mug Punter]

Hey guys. I'm not sure if this has already been posted but someone has started a petition for an AFL enquiry into the umpiring for the grand final. I'm not sure if any good will come from it but if you feel like action must be taken then by all means go ahead and sign up.

Attention Required! | CloudFlare

We really are coming across as a bunch of sooks here....

[giant]

I'm from the school of thought that, while the umps completely stuffed us for three qrs, with 10 mins to go the game was there to win and we weren't good enough to win it. It is interesting though to see that even the AFL's own voice-piece are calling out the umps performance - I don't think I've seen that before. And a huge number of neutral supporters being very vocal about how badly we were shafted.

But in the end, Horse is right, we just had too few trying to do too much. It reminded me somewhat of 2012, where notwithstanding the game was tight, we had a much greater number of good players - the Dogs were the same yesterday.

[mcs]

How many of those frees has Toby McLean been responsible for, I wonder.

If there is one change to umpiring I hope they make over the off-season, it is to give the umpires the discretion NOT to award a free kick for high contact where they believe the player has substantially contributed to it themselves. At the moment I think it is only a blatant head duck that they are instructed to ignore (or sometimes penalise). I think they are obliged to pay the rest, if they see high contact. While there are many different ways some players have perfected to draw unfair free kicks, the Toby McLean / Rhys Mathieson vertical arm raise is the method I find most galling. With other methods, players might try to argue they are trying to break the tackle (like the Selwood shoulder shrug), but the vertical arm raise can in no way be a valid method to do anything other than draw a completely unfair free kick.

I don't have a problem with the umpires continuing to give the benefit of the doubt to the tackled player, where it's a combination of lowering the head / body and poor tackling technique. But please let's rid the game of the blight of the cheating vertical arm raise. If they have time to do that, they have time to dispose of the ball and it should be deemed to be prior opportunity.

Completely agree liz - it is a very cynical ploy solely designed to try and milk a free.

Whatever the dogs do, the umps like it and the other 17 clubs should be working out what it is so they can replicate it next season.

I havent seen comparative stats for previous years, but i would not be suprised if their free kick ledger is right up there with those at the top in previous.

What is clear at the moment is that teams are not getting a lot of rewards for being good tackling teams. Look at us yesterday and the hawks 2 weeks ago. Like clarkson said after their loss to the dogs, we need to work out what has changed in the game and adapt to it.

[mcs]

I'm from the school of thought that, while the umps completely stuffed us for three qrs, with 10 mins to go the game was there to win and we weren't good enough to win it. It is interesting though to see that even the AFL's own voice-piece are calling out the umps performance - I don't think I've seen that before. And a huge number of neutral supporters being very vocal about how badly we were shafted.

But in the end, Horse is right, we just had too few trying to do too much. It reminded me somewhat of 2012, where notwithstanding the game was tight, we had a much greater number of good players - the Dogs were the same yesterday.

The difference between 2012 and yesterday was in 2012 we had several periods of the game where we were dominant and had the game on our terms. With the exception of the 4 goals in the 2nd q, i felt we never really had the game on our terms, but were really hanging on for grim death.

It really is a tribute to our team that we were still in it with so little of the game to go, when really not a lot went our way.

[MadCanuck]

I'm from the school of thought that, while the umps completely stuffed us for three qrs, with 10 mins to go the game was there to win and we weren't good enough to win it. It is interesting though to see that even the AFL's own voice-piece are calling out the umps performance - I don't think I've seen that before. And a huge number of neutral supporters being very vocal about how badly we were shafted.

But in the end, Horse is right, we just had too few trying to do too much. It reminded me somewhat of 2012, where notwithstanding the game was tight, we had a much greater number of good players - the Dogs were the same yesterday.

After 24 hours to think about it, I agree with this analysis.

[liz]

I, too, was waiting for one last push to try and wrest back control, ala 2012. There was a mini sign when a fluent passage of play ended up with that McGlynn mark. When he missed his shot, I knew we were no chance.

I don't question their desire. I just don't think we had enough players with anything left in the tank. Buddy was hobbled, quite probably Parker too. Mills and McVeigh were rusty (though I don't think their selections were a mistake). JPK would have been justified in being exhausted by that point, and we had a few young bodies at the end of long seasons for which they are not quite hardened for, especially when their senior colleagues were running on empty. The knee injury to Hanners was the final blow, as he is one player we could have counted on to run himself to a standstill.

[mcs]

I, too, was waiting for one last push to try and wrest back control, ala 2012. There was a mini sign when a fluent passage of play ended up with that McGlynn mark. When he missed his shot, I knew we were no chance.

When McGlynn missed that kick, I knew it was all over - if he had of nailed that, the boys would of got around him and maybe there might have been one final push that could have made it interesting.

But that miss was so deflating for all in the crowd, and I'm sure for the other boys in the team - let alone poor Benny.

Sadly, he looks like he will end up as one of those players definitely good enough to be a premiership player in a team that has been challenging for flags, but through soawful misfortune in 2012, and then it not going right in 2014 or 2016, he will be denied what would of been a richly deserved medallion around his neck.

[stevoswan]

We really are coming across as a bunch of sooks here....

Mug, give us a break and let us vent. Some of us obviously don't possess such self calming rationale as you. We're not 'sooking', we are pissed off and we are venting, it's our right and good for the soul.

[Ludwig]

I spoke to my friend who was driving the car that killed the cat before the Prelim final against Geelong. He was in a coffee shop in Bangkok 2 hours before the GF when a dog came over and sat down beside him. Recalling the cat incident and after giving it some careful thought, he decided to kick the dog, but apparently not hard enough. He was born in England and as we know the Premier League premiership is basically what we call the minor premiership, but he feels that's the one which really should count as to which team was best for the season.

I too think far too much emphasis is placed on winning one game. It's promoted as nirvana for the winner and all the other 17 clubs are losers, so it leaves the losing team gutted and a vast majority of fans feeling empty after a long season. If the siren had gone off with 12 minutes to go with the score 67-66, given the umpiring decisions on the day, I certainly would have felt that the cup had been stolen from us. I think the losers of such games shouldn't have to feel gutted as if they had failed in the biggest test of their lives. Games are decided by many factors and it's not such a big deal to lose a game which can be influenced by injuries and poor umpiring.

I'm annoyed that the umpiring on the day was such a poor standard. Besides the many incidents already mentioned, I felt that the Dogs encroached on the mark many times, taking an extra metre or so when they could, but were never called back by the umpires, let alone penalised. If I weren't a Swans' fan, I would probably also get on the Bulldogs 'miracle' year bandwagon. I'm ready to move on to next year and look forward to another top 4 finish and a challenge for the cup. I think the Giants and Bulldogs will be the teams to beat.

[paper_rival]

Never would have thunk it, but the swans BigFooty board has calmed me a great deal. Fair few neutral supporters come over to reassure us they saw the umpiring imbalance too, makes me feel like this definitely isn't just heartbreak and sour grapes.
One poster summed how I feel about it quite well:

As for the actual outcome of the game, would we win the match with our gameplan and amount of passengers we took into the game, or would the bulldogs have actually been good enough to kick a winning score without the influence of the umpires? We simply will never know and that is what possibly pisses me off the most.

In all my years of watching and playing sport, I've tried to never entirely blame the umps. There's a million possibilities that branch out from every decision made, it's impossible to tell. I've also always said that if the umpiring must be bad, then let it be at least consistent, and on Saturday it wasn't. There were no swings and roundabouts, just an inexplicable sway to advantage Dogs.

[barry]

My mood had cheered a little after being able to side with the popular underdog and watch it win a close gf. Well done sharks.

Notice in NRL the umpires have little influence on the result.

[Jewels]

Notice in NRL the umpires have little influence on the result.

My many NRL fans would disagree with you, with most saying that even the implementation of The Bunker has not fixed the poor standards. I've not heard anyone saying anything about the officiating at last nights game, but maybe that's because it was the fairytale result the whole state wanted, just as Saturday's was for Victoria.