I wouldn't usually even think about making a thread for this..

but seriously Carlton were just gifted that game from the umpires.

The absolute worst umpiring i have ever seen, they all had Carlton jumpers on, absolute joke.

PATHETIC

Edited April 26, 201411 yr by JackVineyForPresident

Yep absolute disgrace, umps were wearing navy blue this afternoon. Unbelievable.

I'm absolutely staggered by that, vented my frustration in the other thread.

There should be an investigation into the umps in that match and their personal connections. That's some of the most blatant rigging I've seen, absolutely pathetic.

Carlton deserved it, good win.

3 Votes: Andrew Stephens (Ump 1)

2 Votes: Nick Foot (Ump 2)

1 Vote: Troy Pannell (Ump 3)

Edited April 26, 201411 yr by JackVineyForPresident

I'm absolutely staggered by that, vented my frustration in the other thread.

There should be an investigation into the umps in that match and their personal connections. That's some of the most blatant rigging I've seen, absolutely pathetic.

WC should make a formal complaint over it, the umps were clearly on the take or had money on Carlscum themselves.

Why, WHY, was there a 50 metre penalty paid to Carlton at that crucial moment? What happened to putting the whistle away? It seems to only come out when the umps see an opportunity to gift the losing team an easy goal.

Admittedly the Eagles had 3 great chances in the dying minutes and butchered all 3, but Carlton were nowhere near victory halfway through the final quarter, until the umps intervened.

There was an incident in the 4th quarter, West Coast 24 points up where Shuey was taken high in their forward 50. Umps put their whistle away. But god forbid a Carlton player gets touched.

I am still furious

I hate both.

Joke

I thought this thread was about the Melbourne game.

Was really impressed the first three weeks having seen 4-5 games each week. Umpires interpretation of prior opportunity is puzzling.

Was really impressed the first three weeks having seen 4-5 games each week. Umpires interpretation of prior opportunity is puzzling.

That period where Sydney got two holding the ball decisions which were rubbish (especially the Viney ones) was ridiculous. They were then forced to pay Melbourne a soft holding the ball just to keep things even.

Edited April 28, 201411 yr by Clint Bizkit

There is a serious problem with interpreting holding the ball/dropping the ball/push in the back/ball held in decisions. The Viney one tonight was a shocker, with him being tackled immediately and then piled on top by three players, called holding the ball. Poor decision, but it should have at least set a precedent. It did not.

Less than 1 minute later the same happened to a Sydney player and it was called in the back - the exact opposite interpretation to the VIney scenario.

The next three plays down in Dees right forward flank: exactly the same scenario again of one player tackled and being pushed forward in the tackle and third player in piles in top - all three plays called as ball-ups.

I am stuffed if I can tell any difference at all in any of these five scenarios and we got three totally different decisions.

The holding the ball rule has gotten out of control.

It is now better for players to drop the ball than to hold on to it; if you drop it, incorrect disposal almost certainly won't be paid, but if you hold it, you're much more likely to get called for holding the ball.

The three consecutive decisions paid tonight in the second quarter, two in a row against us with a third in our favour, were all abysmal.

I'm no fan of umpires and it's pointless to get too upset about it but Clint and Maldon boy are spot on. The umpires at the G tonight embarrased themselves especially that fool who paid the Melbourne free kick on the wing to compensate for the two idiotic Sydney frees immediately prior, Give me strength !!!!!!!! Umpire the game fairly or get out.!! These people are being paid thousands to do this to the game. Do the job right !

The holding the ball rule has been broken for a couple of years and this year has been utterly destroyed. They had it right about 10 years ago with the "prior opportunity" interpretation now I don't even know what they're trying to do. It seems they want continuous ball movement but then complain about rolling mauls?

The umpiring this weekend has been out of control and that goes for all matches. Clearly there's been a directive following some coach comments and media spotlight yet the AFL will insist there's no such thing as directives or rules of the week. Just coincidence that every umpire begins interpreting the rules a particular way all on the same weekend and in different states and even nations on the same day...

They might as well write in to the rules that if a player gets tackled, they must immediately start convulsing as if they are having a seizure. That seems to be umpires' requirement for making a "genuine attempt".

The two holding the balls (especially the Viney one) was utter crap.

Then they payed a Jones one which was rubbish

Why are players allowed to hold an arm before/as a player gets the ball.

We dont do it .other teams get away with it.

There were also some low tackles last night that were trips.

The Swans tackle very low ,which is effective but not part of ozzie rules.

This holding the ball business has to be sorted out. Apparently a player can take possession, immediately be tackled and ridden to the ground, have a couple more jump on top and be guilty of holding.

No wonder we have these "mauls" - where is the incentive/protection for the play maker?

Why all the angst? Obviously many have not seen or forgotten the umpiring standards(bias) of WC games when they play at home.

Edited April 27, 201411 yr by america de cali

It's a shame, the umpiring WAS actually going well for the first 3-4 rounds, I swear I reckon the media attention for the tagging on Cotchin seemed to totally change things. The very next week the ball winners were getting soft free kicks again. But aside from that rules seem to change interpretation from incident to incident.

50m pentalty - this goes for both going over the mark and interfering afterwards. The going over the mark one in particular is just getting ridiculous, one minute the umps are giving them time to get back and the next the moment the go over it's a penalty.

Holding the ball - I think most will agree that the Viney holding the ball was up there with the most decisions ever, on the telecast you can hear the umpire saying, "you could've knocked it on". Since when is that taking possession? You always have that option, he's basically saying every time you take the ball and get tackled it's holding the ball.

In the back (tackled) - I give up on this one, how many times to players get tackled on their side and it's "in the back"?

I did have to laugh with a bit of anger at WC getting totally shafted at Subi v Port, that mark that was paid when it was physically impossible for the ball to do what it did had the port player had first go on it was incredible. I actually thought the Eagles fans were going to jump the fence! But it's actually about time they didn't get their way there, they've had plenty go their way that gifted them games.

Edited April 28, 201411 yr by Pates

Holding the ball interpreation is rubbish. All it does is encourage the tackler/s to hold the ball in resulting in more scrimages and rolling mauls. There are loads of examples of holding the ball where the player awarded the free kick actually has possesion of the ball. Definately does not reward the ball players like Viney.

The rule itself is okay but the interpretation should be where there is no reasonable opportunity the Umpires should ball it up. You reduce ball ups by paying incorrect disposals when they occur even if the ball is knocked out in the tackle. That would encourage quicker movement rather than encouraging players to pile on top and hold the ball in.

That period where Sydney got two holding the ball decisions which were rubbish (espeically the Viney ones) was ridiculous. They were then forced to pay Melbourne a soft holding the ball just to keep things even.

I was sitting next to a swannies supporter and we laughed how they got all three of those decisions in such a short space of time so horribly wrong.