6 minutes ago, ignition. said:

As much as I agree with you regarding the poor umpiring decisions, particularly at the end of the Saints vs North game.
 

I'm glad North won as it's 4 less points the Saints have to possibly challenge us for a top 8 spot at seasons end.

Spot on. I have a bet going with a couple of mates that we finish 11th or better. I win and they pay for my meal at a really good restaurant. They win and i pay for both of them at pretty good restaurant.

The way things are shaping up the Saints are one of the threats to me so their two close losses are great!

Edited May 9, 20169 yr by binman

6 hours ago, GM11 said:

Mark Evans is the real problem.

Yeh, the game's so much worse this year with the changes he's brought in.

He's protected the head, he's stopped so many deliberate out of bounds, he's restricted the interchange and he's increased the protected zone.  The last three rule changes have resulted in the best footy we've seen in years.

It's a very difficult game to umpire.  Has always been and will always be that way.  Change the rules to make it easier to umpire and you risk ruining the game.

 

2 hours ago, daisycutter said:

Try and explain this. 

Champion Data - Free Differential YTD 2016

WB    +66

ESS   +16

NTH   +11

COL   +5

GWS   +5

WC     +4

SYD   +3

MEL   +1

HAW   -1

BRI    -1

RCH   -9

STK   -11

POW  -11

ADL   -13

GCS   -13

CAR   -15

FRE   -16

GEE   -21  

OK, ah, um, well, ah, mmm, mm that is interesting isn't it? No, sorry no explanation for that, unless the Doggies have been better trained to play for frees.

Edited May 9, 20169 yr by ManDee

It would be interesting to see last years figures.  My impression is the Doggies seem to get a pretty good go at it.

 

5 minutes ago, ManDee said:

OK, ah, um, well, ah, mmm, mm that is interesting isn't it? No, sorry no explanation for that, unless the Doggies have been better trained to play for frees.

It's actually because they have given away so few frees.

 

They've given away 101 and the 2nd lowest is Ess at 125

8 minutes ago, mrtwister said:

It's actually because they have given away so few frees.

 

They've given away 101 and the 2nd lowest is Ess at 125

That's about 1 free given away every 10 minutes of play. Pretty good. 

7 hours ago, jnrmac said:

So here is the ruck rule

2. Virtually every ruck contest has contact. The umps pull frees out of their bottoms at times. It is the most consistently poorly umpired  rule in history. 

 

You hit the nail on the head. An umpire can have a preconceived idea that a particular ruckman (Goldstein) gets regularly infringed, and is always on the lookout for any contact. In our game against North, the umpire somehow missed Goldstein grabbing Gawn first, and paid a free against Gawn when he barely touched Goldstein. IMO, the umpire was looking for the free.

What I found disturbing was our game against the Tigers when Reiwoldt was complaining to umpire Stephens (Hawthorn supporter) about being blocked when going for marks. The umpire's response was "I'm looking at it". That's just plain wrong. The umps response should always be "I'll call it if I see it".

22 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Yeh, the game's so much worse this year with the changes he's brought in.

He's protected the head, he's stopped so many deliberate out of bounds, he's restricted the interchange and he's increased the protected zone.  The last three rule changes have resulted in the best footy we've seen in years.

It's a very difficult game to umpire.  Has always been and will always be that way.  Change the rules to make it easier to umpire and you risk ruining the game.

 

Too right!

Whinging about umpires - what an innovation that is!

Edited May 9, 20169 yr by Fifty-5

7 minutes ago, mrtwister said:

It's actually because they have given away so few frees.

 

They've given away 101 and the 2nd lowest is Ess at 125

OK but they are still 41 in front of the next best.

9 minutes ago, ManDee said:

OK but they are still 41 in front of the next best.

I know. I'm just pointing out that it's not necessarily that they receive a lot more free kicks (they only have 9 more than WC and 11 more than us). The differential is mainly caused by the small amount they give away.

47 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Not me. First time this year we have had more frees. We did win by 12 goals, so you could say we were first to the ball

And the reasons may well be that we were first to the ball, and tackled better. Same as the Bulldogs.

Also, I believe a free kick goes down in the stats as a contested possession. So the more free kicks you win, the better your CP count. Sort of like a self-fulfilling prophecy if you think that the more contested possessions you win, the more likely you are to get a free kick.

I'd like to see where Pannell did the majority of his umpiring. If it was, say, in the centre where the Bulldogs were first at the ball, it might explain some of the discrepancy. Or maybe the Bulldogs forward line, where defenders can often infringe in marking or ruck contests.

I don't think it's just as simple as 17-1 = bias.

51 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Well that would be the first time in about 10 years against them.

Correct

43 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

It would be interesting to see last years figures.  My impression is the Doggies seem to get a pretty good go at it.

 

   For            Against           For Total            Against 

  17.0            16.8                   391                    387

Edited May 9, 20169 yr by Rafiki

1 minute ago, Rafiki said:

                                                  For            Against           For Total            Against Total

2015 average for them was      17.0            16.8                   391                       387

Thanks!  Not much difference there.

Looked up the 3 biggest positive differentials from last year for shnitzel and giggles

Eagles: +85

Tigers: +71

North: +54

Dees: -15

29 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

 

I don't think it's just as simple as 17-1 = bias.

I didn't say it was, but it is a highly unusual stat. 

Your analogy about first to the ball doesn't hold, as we won in a 12 goal thrashing, while Dogs and Crows were even and that would suggest they were both hard at the ball.

I don't think in any game in the last 10 years against the Dogs, have we come close to their frees.

58 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Too right!

Whinging about umpires - what an innovation that is!

Now now, Fifty-5, you know that is a major part of footy discussion.

we should go back to the captains decided on free kicks

Here's some facts (with a good dose of opinion) ...

• Our sport (Aussie rules) is by far the hardest game to umpire in my opinion (it's daylight to the 2nd hardest sport to umpire)
• There is no replay facility (apart from goal line technology)  Many other sports do have a replay facility.
• There are more grey areas in our game than any other sport (by a country mile)
• At any given moment, a free kick (or non free kick) could be awarded for in the back, holding the ball, tripping, holding the man, incorrect disposal, around the neck, play on or a ball up - all for the one incident!  Seriously, what hope have the umpires got?  And people want consistency?  It's not possible.
• The umpires are not biased and do not favour a particular side. 
• The free kick count is irrelevant ... the umpires just pay free kicks as they see them.
• Those who say "It's never been this bad" generally say that every season.
• Those who moan about umpires when their team loses usually have nothing to say when their team wins (apart from the obligatory "The umpiring was bad - for both sides")
• Anyone who follows the sport from a young age should have come to terms with umpiring by the time one reaches adulthood. 

My advice - just watch the game and ignore the umpires.  Nothing is ever going to change and you will never get consistency - our sport won't allow that to happen.  Whinging and moaning about umpiring is a futile exercise. 

I don't expect to change anyone's mind with the above stuff but it might have the effect of toning down the anger and frustration that many seem to be afflicted with.

The umpires are not destroying the game at all. 

 

 

*ducks for cover"

Edited May 10, 20169 yr by Macca

1 hour ago, binman said:

This was in the Hun today was it not? Or at least that is what Wheatley said when discussion it on 774 this morning.

Great timing for us that this is being discussed. I'll bet London to a brick that we get more frees than the doggies this week

You attribute far too much integrity, and logic, to the AFL.

More likely is that they will say - we had better let him have another go for in a Bulldogs game just to see if it is true.

 

1 hour ago, binman said:

Spot on. I have a bet going with a couple of mates that we finish 11th or better. I win and they pay for my meal at a really good restaurant. They win and i pay for both of them at pretty good restaurant.

The way things are shaping up the Saints are one of the threats to me so their two close losses are great!

Well mate I hope you get that really good dinner.

Good umpires should never be noticed. A good game is a game where you don't notice their impact.

I felt their impact twice last round. Not good viewing!

8 hours ago, Baghdad Bob said:

It would be interesting to see last years figures.  My impression is the Doggies seem to get a pretty good go at it.

 

The Weagles were the umps pets last year. Won the frees for count by a huge margin. Duckers!

The only way that umpiring can improve (be more consistent) is if they only pay the really obvious ones that impact on the play and not every little slight touch or bump.

 

9 hours ago, Adzman said:

Good umpires should never be noticed. A good game is a game where you don't notice their impact.

I felt their impact twice last round. Not good viewing!

That sums it all up.