Match Thread. Swans v Geelong.

[joeykanga]

The man who’s always attacking so called cancel culture predictable telling us to cancel our views on the past ...yawn

- - - Updated - - -

The man who’s always attacking so called cancel culture predictable telling us to cancel our views on the past ...yawn

[Blue Sun]

I have watched/listened to the non mark a million times and like others I can hear the umpire say "touched play on", however just before Cameron marks it I can also hear the umpire say "Not 15 play on not 15". So I'm really confused. And when Nicholls speaks to Cameron he doesn't do the "touched" signal.

Doesn’t matter anymore. Mark wasn’t paid, we win, happy days! Good to finally have a decision go our way.

[Sandridge]

I really hate this trend of 'sorry we got that wrong' being said about one isolated decision.

If they want to create accountability in that way, sure. But it should be done that the same process is done for an entire match, not one isolated incident. All we will hear now is how they were 'robbed' blah blah blah, which overlooks the multitude of dreadful other calls in the game (the Selwood 'demand a free' in the 4th quarter', the absymal call against Lloyd that directly led to a goal, plus a few others - and that's before the 3,501 holding the ball/incorrect disposal calls that should been made.

Either do it properly and transperantly or don't do this nonsense at all.

You make an extremely good point. Just because the decision happened seconds before the end in a very close match doesn't mean it was the only umpiring mistake that produced a goal/cost a team a goal during the game. Look at, evaluate and explain all the contentious decisions, not just the ones that happened at critical times.

[Sandridge]

Doesn’t matter anymore. Mark wasn’t paid, we win, happy days! Good to finally have a decision go our way.

True!! We win, Scott has to pretend he's fair minded because he knows a controversial umpiring decision brought him a win earlier in the year and Joel Selwood embarrasses himself by having the audacity to complain about not getting a free kick!

Go you mighty Bloods!

[Legs Akimbo]

You make an extremely good point. Just because the decision happened seconds before the end in a very close match doesn't mean it was the only umpiring mistake that produced a goal/cost a team a goal during the game. Look at, evaluate and explain all the contentious decisions, not just the ones that happened at critical times.

I watched the replay today and we got the rough end of the stick consistently. The one that really grates is Stephens for deliberate in Geelong's forward line then Geelong player not penalised for a more obvious deliberate minutes later in our forward line. We won despite the obviously inconsistent adjudication. We have 4 points. Bank it.

[neilfws]

I hope the umpires boss watches the match highlights. You can clearly hear "Play on" as Cameron closes on the ball.

I was starting to wonder if people were making this up, just watched it and yes - you can hear "touched play on" clear as day. Twice, I think.

Not sure what the second umpire calls when Cameron takes it, maybe "not 15", maybe not. Doesn't matter though does it, if touched was called.

Kind of funny, watching the media work themselves into a frenzy over the wrong thing.

[TheBloods]

Best night ive had at the footy in years. Had a sneaking suspicion it would come after seeing JL's spray at 1/4 time. Holy heck it was was a good'n.

Mccartin, What a player he has become. Twice hes done a number on Tomahawk. No small feat. Made no secret my views on Hayward and Melican but both were great in the air. Dont like to see anyone injured. Young Stephens grew into the game and he will be better. Florent class and bog for us. He is better on the outside. Leg speed breaking lines is what we lack. Chad is a total bull and Jmac silky as. Excellent goals from both. Papley and Heeney were total let downs !

Dont rate Mclean but credit where its due he was a mammoth. Headed to the Bradman stand expecting the Hawkins and Cameron show - didnt think i'd be seeing the Mclean show !

Kennedy once again a class above , especially late. Game on the line - some of his efforts were extraordinary. Concur with those saying Hick is our most important player. You cant beat a ruckman when they are at full flight. Joy to watch. Filthy umpiring from those green maggots and the constant ducking of that grub Selwood aside , fantastic night. Fantastic win. This group have got plenty of life in them to make an impact this season

- - - Updated - - -

Why did this repeat a post i had already made

I meant to edit this to say that Sinkers looked sore along the boundary line late in the game. Dont know why or what with but he was moving very gingerly

[Ludwig]

Every close game is almost certain to be decided by an umpiring decision. A combination of the AFL Rule, the umpire, the crowd and the situation on the ground presents a range of possibilities of potential outcomes. Football is as much a game of chance as it is a game of skill. I can't say if it's for the better or for the worse. It's just the way it is. It produces controversy and frustration at times.

Near identical situations are officiated differently, not only from week to week, but from game to game within a given round and within any given game. It's a job creator (for journalists) and a conversation starter.

One solution for the fans is not to take winning and losing too seriously. I can't say that I follow this principle, but I'm working on it.

[stevoswan]

Maybe a Hickey fan club? The Tom Tom Club?

The Tom Tom Club could be an appreciation society for a number of our players.....Hickey, Paps, McCartin.....but Hickey is a dead set revelation at the moment! Recruit of the Year so far.

[MattW]

Every close game is almost certain to be decided by an umpiring decision. A combination of the AFL Rule, the umpire, the crowd and the situation on the ground presents a range of possibilities of potential outcomes. Football is as much a game of chance as it is a game of skill. I can't say if it's for the better or for the worse. It's just the way it is. It produces controversy and frustration at times.

Near identical situations are officiated differently, not only from week to week, but from game to game within a given round and within any given game. It's a job creator (for journalists) and a conversation starter.

One solution for the fans is not to take winning and losing too seriously. I can't say that I follow this principle, but I'm working on it.

Again, I genuinely don't understand how/why a credible journalist wastes time on umpiring decisions, when game analysis is far more interesting and telling re a team's prospects.

[mcs]

You make an extremely good point. Just because the decision happened seconds before the end in a very close match doesn't mean it was the only umpiring mistake that produced a goal/cost a team a goal during the game. Look at, evaluate and explain all the contentious decisions, not just the ones that happened at critical times.

Its just part of the issue with the AFL's broader approach to umpiring. I've long talked about the absurdity that umpires in our game aren't full time professionals. That in itself would be a worthwhile step.

But if we are going to go down the path of minutely looking at 'big calls' that are decided have called a game, then why not have a systematic, consistent approach, where steps are taking every week to review decisions across all games. I'm sure they do a lot of this internally to begin with - but if they want true transperancy, and invariably to also reduce the outrage from fans when 'one big call' goes against a team, then that for mine is the way to do it.

The fairypuppies might not like it however, but I think it would be a welcome change.

A fulsome review of last night's game would show we may or may not have been lucky with that Cameron call, but that there were several dreadful calls across the rest of the game that favoured Geelong. I.e. you show the call within context of the broader game. Helps reduce the focus on one decision alone - by showing that mistakes happen in every game, multiple times - that is the nature of umpiring. Also would present a way of supporting umpires more generally, by demonstrating they overwhelmingly get most calls right.

But that overall approach would create greater scrutiny on the umpiring standard in the AFL, and again bring into question head office's ongoing deliberate position of not wanting to make umpires fully professional.

[TheBloods]

Umpiring was @@@@@@ all night

[stevoswan]

Sorry to rain on the parade, gang. This just in:

AFL umpires boss Dan Richardson has conceded Jeremy Cameron should have been given the chance to take a dramatic shot to win Saturday night’s contest against Sydney.

But the AFL has backed in the decision not to penalise James Rowbottom for holding the ball as Joel Selwood tackled the Sydney onballer as the final siren sounded.
Richardson admitted that Cameron’s non-mark should have been paid, with the decision to call it play on incorrect.

So he conveniently ignores that the umpire was shouting 'touched, play on'.....sounds like the usual tiring Vic appeasement to me. Extremely disappointing but sadly, not surprising.

[dejavoodoo44]

I was starting to wonder if people were making this up, just watched it and yes - you can hear "touched play on" clear as day. Twice, I think.

Not sure what the second umpire calls when Cameron takes it, maybe "not 15", maybe not. Doesn't matter though does it, if touched was called.

Kind of funny, watching the media work themselves into a frenzy over the wrong thing.

Yes, my impression now, is that one umpire called, "touched play on" as soon it left the boot and then the oblivious Nicholls may have complicated things, by then deciding it was not 15. I also get the impression, that the AFL review, may have only assessed how far the ball travelled, not whether it was touched.

- - - Updated - - -

I think individual journalists can rise above that, but few do.

The only AFL analysis I consume is the The Age podcast and On The Coach, but they're both flawed and neither close to some NBA podcasts, which I listen to for the depth of analysis even though I don't watch most games.

Does The Front Bar count as AFL analysis? If not, I don't really watch any.

- - - Updated - - -

I watched the replay today and we got the rough end of the stick consistently. The one that really grates is Stephens for deliberate in Geelong's forward line then Geelong player not penalised for a more obvious deliberate minutes later in our forward line. We won despite the obviously inconsistent adjudication. We have 4 points. Bank it.

Yes, Selwood got a free, for pushing Stephens in the back and then getting in the umpire's face.

[KSAS]

Sorry to rain on the parade, gang. This just in:

AFL umpires boss Dan Richardson has conceded Jeremy Cameron should have been given the chance to take a dramatic shot to win Saturday night’s contest against Sydney.

But the AFL has backed in the decision not to penalise James Rowbottom for holding the ball as Joel Selwood tackled the Sydney onballer as the final siren sounded.
Richardson admitted that Cameron’s non-mark should have been paid, with the decision to call it play on incorrect.

Not that it matters now, but I'm flabbergasted by that admittance from the AFL when the touch/play on call can easily be heard. I assume Dan Richardson interviewed the umpires & not just went by Matthew Richardson's commentary! Surely he would've picked up the touch/play on call & confirmed that with the umpire? The kick was definitely 15+ metres but that shouldn't really be the point of contention. Hope one of the Footy Shows tomorrow picks up on this.