I meant to add that it would only be fair for the umps, as they sure as hell crucified us tonight

VERY noticeable in the last quarter. Disgrace, they should be dropped after tonight showing. They had their whistle up their arses at one stage, then pulled it out to only give WB a free kick. WTF

i don't understand how this could be a throw in, I haven't watched the replay but if the ball was not fumbled(pretty sure it wasnt't) it should either be a mark or on the full.

the replay is a lil inconclusive

just watched the game in fast forward on foxtel

it looks like he might slightly fumble it that being said i think the mark could have been paid before the fumble took place.

the umpiring of tonights game was a disgrace they cost us at least three goals.i dont think i have ever been this angry at a match .the umpires should be banned from next weeks matches.

Yeah, I'm kinda bored. But the fact remains that we have been screwed by the umpires this year, not once, but twice. I've been to every game so far this season, and every single game I remember multiple free kicks against us which were definitely not free kicks and received massive uproars from the crowd. And the Doggies game was the worst of the lot.

It really sucks how our only Friday night game of the season was ruined by the horrible umpiring decisions. As I've heard and said before, the umpires are sponsored by OPSM, but they can't see [censored].

And if this post pisses anybody off, just think - we could be 5-2 if the umpiring was half-decent. We're 3-4.

EDIT: I have a link to an enquiry page if anybody wants to release some anger. Click Contact the AFL, there is a section with umpiring mentioned in it.

Link

Arbiteri ite domum.

UMPIRES GO HOME

brabeuta ite domum, I think

Is crucifixion illegal?

Obviously Not, 'why', they crucified Us last night!

My take on the contentious umpiring decisions (from watching on the TV):

-'Mark' to Trengove - correct decision (fumbled over the line)

-'Goal' to Dunn - looked touched as you can briefly see 2 of Lake's fingers bend backwards

-'Out on the full' against Sylvia and Davey(?) - both incorrect.

-'Goal' to Green - vision was inconclusive, hence happy to say that no goal should be awarded unless the umpires are definitely sure it is a goal.

-'Holding the ball' against Scully(?) - bloody disgraceful. This rule almost ruins the sport for me.

-'Goal' to Dunn - looked touched as you can briefly see 2 of Lake's fingers bend backwards

-'Goal' to Green - vision was inconclusive, hence happy to say that no goal should be awarded unless the umpires are definitely sure it is a goal.

Yeah - Nahh. It's a question of process. Goal umpires are trained and paid to make those the decisions, they're in the best spot to judge. I have no problem with the umpires conferring, and with the central umpire over-ruling the goal umpire if they 'know' that the ball has been touched, but in both cases you can clearly hear that the umpire's either didn't see or 'thought' the ball had been touched. In cricket you don't give an LBW if you 'think' the ball is going to hit the stumps - only if you 'know' it will. In both cases the person paid to make the decision and standing in the best spot to make the decision was over-ruled based on speculation.... not good enough.

My take on the contentious umpiring decisions (from watching on the TV):

-'Mark' to Trengove - correct decision (fumbled over the line)

-'Goal' to Dunn - looked touched as you can briefly see 2 of Lake's fingers bend backwards

-'Out on the full' against Sylvia and Davey(?) - both incorrect.

-'Goal' to Green - vision was inconclusive, hence happy to say that no goal should be awarded unless the umpires are definitely sure it is a goal.

-'Holding the ball' against Scully(?) - bloody disgraceful. This rule almost ruins the sport for me.

re the Green 'goal'. The goal ump had in front of him a ball a boot and a hand less than 2 m away. Perfect position to make the decision. The field ump was behind all this and further away. I cannot believe that the field umpire could be so arrogant as to overrule the goal umpire given the positions they were in. You don't need 'all' umpires to be absolutely sure. Goal umpire was bullied.

i have two thoughts on this:

a) 4 umpires might watch the goal kicked but only one of them actually see the touch due to his angle.

B) in both cases the goal umpire was certain that it was a goal, and didn't need input from others. he was in a good position both times and should've been allowed to make his call.

has anyone seen replays? what did they indicate?

also, there is no way trengove fumbled that ball over the line. it was a clear cut mark imo, from watching it happen, and from the replay.

how they paid the deliberate against frawley is beyond me when he effectively knocked it out of the other blokes hands. I can't work out why umpires feel they need to make big subjective pressure decisions that change the course and momentum of the game. They grandstand imo, especially when going to pay holding the ball.

why wasn't harbrow reported from striking bennel? it was late, it was high, it was intentional (he punched a player in the face who had disposed of the ball) and it had a pretty reasonable impact as bennell struggled to get up.

how many times were players allowed to through the ball up off the ground to passing teammates?

AND THE ONE THAT IMO COST US THE GAME:

Why were they allowed to dress like us? same colour jumper, dark blue shorts. Would they ever be allowed to wear black and white strips when collingwood was playing? What about a dark blue top in a carlton match? At least three times last night we directed kicks and knock ons towards an umpire and gave up possession. The AFL should apologise for that stuff up.

The decision to overrule Dunn's goal cost us the match.

We played better than the Doggies and even Lake admitted they were crap and yet the bloody Umpires decide the game.

I am used to being dudded by the Umps as a Melbourne supporter but this was a disgrace and if ever we were allowed to say it..."we waz robbed!"

But there are so many positives for us to take away and out of the bad we must focus on the good because there's a lot to be happy about for our future.

I am sick to the stomach with the umpiring and the stupid strip they wore!

As for Lake why is it teams who we beat or run close claim they played badly, pathetic. They dont believe we are any good. Guess they are all in for a shock as the ynext 2 years play out.

aker didn't. aker said lets set it straight, melbourne were the better team tonight but we got the win.

My take on the contentious umpiring decisions (from watching on the TV):

-'Mark' to Trengove - correct decision (fumbled over the line)

-'Goal' to Dunn - looked touched as you can briefly see 2 of Lake's fingers bend backwards

-'Out on the full' against Sylvia and Davey(?) - both incorrect.

-'Goal' to Green - vision was inconclusive, hence happy to say that no goal should be awarded unless the umpires are definitely sure it is a goal.

-'Holding the ball' against Scully(?) - bloody disgraceful. This rule almost ruins the sport for me.

Agree with the Trengove decision, but see Nasher's thread regarding goal umpires, it is their final call, right or wrong. That's the big issue here.

First door on the left. One cross each.

Nice one

Agree with the Trengove decision, but see Nasher's thread regarding goal umpires, it is their final call, right or wrong. That's the big issue here.

I always thought the goal umpire awaits "all clear" from the central umpire before signalling a goal or a point. Its actually the field umpire that can overrule either a goal or boundary umpire.

Disappointing outcomes nevertheless.

From memory, there were only about two 'holding the ball' decisions paid last night. One shocker against Scully. Incorrect disposal was absolutely rife from both teams because of the conditions and the umpires let the game go and then seemed to pick those two arbitrary moments to ping players for supposedly dragging the ball in. Scully had absolutely no control over that one.

It hurts but its a good hurt. we now have a team to be proud of. as for the umps,enjoy your few weeks off

WE WERE ROBED :mad:

I always thought the goal umpire awaits "all clear" from the central umpire before signalling a goal or a point. Its actually the field umpire that can overrule either a goal or boundary umpire.

Disappointing outcomes nevertheless.

I thought the "all clear" referred to whether the ball was touched off the boot (i.e. all clear at the field umpires end), but I may be wrong. As posted somewhere the rules of the game say that the goal umpire has the final call.

Surprised no one's mentioned the 'tripped' call on Cross late. That started the passage of play that led to Griffen's goal.

Surprise surprise, that wasn't a free kick. Cross fell over. The umpire panicked.

As Luke Darcy continally says, umpires should try to stay out of the game rather than get involved. In close games, marginal decisions should be left alone. The contact on Cross was neglible if it existed at all. Should have been left alone.

Surprised no one's mentioned the 'tripped' call on Cross late. That started the passage of play that led to Griffen's goal.

Surprise surprise, that wasn't a free kick. Cross fell over. The umpire panicked.

As Luke Darcy continally says, umpires should try to stay out of the game rather than get involved. In close games, marginal decisions should be left alone. The contact on Cross was neglible if it existed at all. Should have been left alone.

I seem to remember that as Brent Monoley getting penalised for tackling high, when the Doggies player ducked under his arm then got tackled.

That set up one of the last two.

There was also the decision not to pay holding the ball against Murphy when he dropped it (though that probably gets cancelled out by the ridiculous decision not to pay holding the ball against Frawley).

I'm actually going go to on TheBigTip (write your own sport articles, eventually get paid :D) and write up about the umpires.

Good on you.

Post a draft here for us to enjoy too

From The Contested Footy site

The Pink Umpire debacle

After Friday nights game against Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs the question has to be asked what is the AFL thinking? The AFL has in recent times made a point of ensuring that the umpires are distinguishable form the players on the ground. This has meant a shift from the traditional all white attire to an assortment of colours depending on the teams playing.

Last night however the AFL decided it would be wise to have the umpires in a pink shirt and black shorts. You may think, well that is not an issue is it? Well it is when the Demons have already marked their intentions to wear a strip that contained pink instead of the traditional red. Make no mistake I think the gesture from the AFL is great to show their support for a worthy cause but surely it could have been done in another way.

I say this because late in the last quarter Melbourne players could be seen in the heat of battle handball directly towards the umpire due to the pink strip. This I believe is understandable from a player knowing that their jumper on the night consisted of pink in the top half. If this was not a close game questions would not be being asked. However Melbourne was leading when Clint Bartram handballed to what he believed to be a team mate, which turned out to be an umpire. The result was a turn over and subsequent goal to the Dogs. Captain of Melbourne James McDonald has said on the issue “I don’t think it was thought through too well. As players we make mistakes and obviously someone’s made a mistake at the AFL.”

The AFL has apologized for the mistake which is no consolation for the Melbourne Football Club or football fans. This is a multi-million dollar business and mistake like this should not be happening. Clubs live and die by wins and for a club to be at a disadvantage due to the umpire’s attire is ridiculous in 2010. I personally never had a problem with the all white strip the umps have worn for over a century. Yes it way not be great for telecasts but who watches the umpires anyway? No club has an all white strip, yes Collingwood, North Melbourne and Geelong have plenty of white but it was never an issue before.

Consistency is all we ask for as supporters of this great game. The AFL should be doing more to make sure mistake like this do not occur. The standard was set the umpires should not clash with the clubs jumpers, which I have no problems with. But to suddenly change the rules seems like a ridiculous decision considering the subsequent clash that eventuated.

From The Contested Footy site

The Pink Umpire debacle

After Friday nights game against Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs the question has to be asked what is the AFL thinking? The AFL has in recent times made a point of ensuring that the umpires are distinguishable form the players on the ground. This has meant a shift from the traditional all white attire to an assortment of colours depending on the teams playing.

Last night however the AFL decided it would be wise to have the umpires in a pink shirt and black shorts. You may think, well that is not an issue is it? Well it is when the Demons have already marked their intentions to wear a strip that contained pink instead of the traditional red. Make no mistake I think the gesture from the AFL is great to show their support for a worthy cause but surely it could have been done in another way.

I say this because late in the last quarter Melbourne players could be seen in the heat of battle handball directly towards the umpire due to the pink strip. This I believe is understandable from a player knowing that their jumper on the night consisted of pink in the top half. If this was not a close game questions would not be being asked. However Melbourne was leading when Clint Bartram handballed to what he believed to be a team mate, which turned out to be an umpire. The result was a turn over and subsequent goal to the Dogs. Captain of Melbourne James McDonald has said on the issue “I don’t think it was thought through too well. As players we make mistakes and obviously someone’s made a mistake at the AFL.”

The AFL has apologized for the mistake which is no consolation for the Melbourne Football Club or football fans. This is a multi-million dollar business and mistake like this should not be happening. Clubs live and die by wins and for a club to be at a disadvantage due to the umpire’s attire is ridiculous in 2010. I personally never had a problem with the all white strip the umps have worn for over a century. Yes it way not be great for telecasts but who watches the umpires anyway? No club has an all white strip, yes Collingwood, North Melbourne and Geelong have plenty of white but it was never an issue before.

Consistency is all we ask for as supporters of this great game. The AFL should be doing more to make sure mistake like this do not occur. The standard was set the umpires should not clash with the clubs jumpers, which I have no problems with. But to suddenly change the rules seems like a ridiculous decision considering the subsequent clash that eventuated.

Well written, it's all a bit hollow isn't it. 4 points is 4 points and we got duped.

The AFL will say "You were lucky to be playing friday night" i bet. We are small on their radar at this moment.

The whole thing stinks as they had days to look at the 2 strips close up. Anderson the true numbers man. or should i say Toe Cutter.

From The Contested Footy site

The Pink Umpire debacle.

The AFL has apologized for the mistake which is no consolation for the Melbourne Football Club or football fans.

I don't believe the AFL has apologized but rather admitted making a mistake. There should be an apology to the MFC and its supporters.