This stat sheet is interesting but we must remember, it is not the number of frees that really count, it is when and particularly, where these decisions are made. Twenty frees in front of goal across a season can make for a successful year! 

Just now, Deemania since 56 said:

This stat sheet is interesting but we must remember, it is not the number of frees that really count, it is when and particularly, where these decisions are made. Twenty frees in front of goal across a season can make for a successful year! 

Also doesn't take in to account free kicks not received which is a bug bear of mine. 

1 minute ago, Demonland said:

Also doesn't take in to account free kicks not received which is a bug bear of mine. 

Double-edged sword, held by the umpires, and it goes by the name of Excalibur. 

No equalisation tactics in those stats ?

If TWSNBN"s game is anything to go by from now on i'm going to refrain from orchestrated hate sessions.....

7 hours ago, Deemania since 56 said:

This stat sheet is interesting but we must remember, it is not the number of frees that really count, it is when and particularly, where these decisions are made. Twenty frees in front of goal across a season can make for a successful year! 

Bl00dy good point Deemania!

..and the not paid frees - mentioned above - are also debilitating.

Looking at the chart above makes defeating Collingwood and North all the more satisfying. Whereas, Hawthorn can eat a big bag of [insert offence here]...

P.S. Razor Ray can join the Hawks as stated above...

 

We had ridiculously good run v the drug cheats ...

Richmond -87??? 

I was told with certainty by posters here that winning teams got more frees because they played in front and had the ball more often. And the dogs with their poor start and propensity to throw the ball...

Hmmm does that mean I can't believe everything I read on Land ...? I'm shocked.....

What you also have to factor in - some teams use professional free kicks to slow the game down to allow them time to rebuild their defensive structures.

Great, we’re 9th again!

Eagles and Adelaide always seem to get dream run at home. 

Also gotta look at WHEN they're paid  

Not so Port and Freo

 

4 hours ago, bingers said:

We had ridiculously good run v the drug cheats ...

I went back and had a closer look at the Richmond game - we fared particularly poorly during the two periods of the game where we were up and about (1st and 3rd quarters).  Williamson (22) was the main culprit as I'd anticipated ahead of the game.  The exact same umpires were in charge at the weekend and it was Williamson who paid the Gawn front on tackle that resulted in his second goal....but only after an initial hesitation.   I really wonder if things were said during the week to Hayden Kennedy by the club, so stark was the turnaround.   Anyway, happy to be on the right side of the ledger for a change.

That there is such a great disparity in the numbers between Dogs and Tiges worries me greatly.

The balance of free kicks should even out over time (and I understand that a season and a bit is not a lot of time) but still +92 to -87, a 179 differential over about 30 games, cannot be both right and good for our game.

It tells me that there is a real problem with the rules and also with the interpretation of the rules. It may be that the "Selwood Syndrome", where the rules and their interpretations suit the playing style of certain players, can also apply to whole teams (Dogs in 2016?).

Some one who watches all games and analyses all free kicks should be commissioned to  investigate. I would have liked to suggest  the umpires leadership but I suspect that their analysis could be clouded by a huge conflict of interest.

Help?

1 hour ago, tiers said:

That there is such a great disparity in the numbers between Dogs and Tiges worries me greatly.

The balance of free kicks should even out over time (and I understand that a season and a bit is not a lot of time) but still +92 to -87, a 179 differential over about 30 games, cannot be both right and good for our game.

It tells me that there is a real problem with the rules and also with the interpretation of the rules. It may be that the "Selwood Syndrome", where the rules and their interpretations suit the playing style of certain players, can also apply to whole teams (Dogs in 2016?).

Some one who watches all games and analyses all free kicks should be commissioned to  investigate. I would have liked to suggest  the umpires leadership but I suspect that their analysis could be clouded by a huge conflict of interest.

Help?

There is an umpires rep at each game that takes notes (I suspect they confer at half time but don't know for sure) and they go through every game afterwards and mark down frees that were incorrect or missed. They will claim they are doing a fantastic job and would be lucky to get 3 or 4 wrong in a game.

The umpires rep at every game is there to record free kicks that were incorrect or missed in accordance with the prevailing rules and interpretations of the rules. Serviceable but not enough.

My concern is that the rules themselves and their interpretations are the problem, not whether they are being implemented correctly. Who is recording the idiot free kicks that detract from the game and the contest but can be gamed by some players and teams and that are, seemingly, one of the most probable reasons for the enormous disparity in the number of free kicks awarded.

Or the missed free kicks that, with three umpires on the field, should never be missed but because of the rules and their interpretations are toss ups at any given time and just not awarded.

All the same old, same old platitudes about better teams being always in front and poorer teams indulging in scragging is pulp fiction. The game is now too sophisticated for such banal commentary and needs a more advanced analysis.

But who is to do it? Again is say help?

The third quarter of the Richmond game was about as fired up and heated as I’ve been for a long time but it wasn’t to do with the frees the tigers were getting. Most of the frees they got were correct decisions but what fired all the Dees fans up was that they simply weren’t paying obvious ones to us. 

Several holding the balls/incorrect disposals (two against Martin, one which directly resulted in a goal to them), a deliberate out of bounds that would’ve been paid under the old interpretation, head high contacts (are they being told not to pay high fend offs against Martin). Plus there was a plain as day 50m penalty not paid to us in the first quarter.

I recognise the umpires job is not an easy one but it must have deflated the players that their tackles weren’t being rewarded. 

It wasn’t the umpires fault we lost that game but it seriously screwed our momentum for the 4th quarter. 

It's not hurting Richmond.

5 hours ago, radar said:

Eagles and Adelaide always seem to get dream run at home. 

Also gotta look at WHEN they're paid  

Not so Port and Freo

 

1

Interesting point. Eagles have for years been given an armchair ride by the chumps when playing at home. Also a lot of duckers and stagers in their team. Freo I cannot explain. Their crowd at home does make a lot of noise.

What irks me is the way umps get influenced by crowds especially inteinterstate.

Understandable and hard  rerectify.

Who can forget the infamous match against the Weagles in Perth several years ago when the free kick count approaching half time was 20+ to 1. Guess who had the 1?

As bad as the count was, what was worse was the lack of outrage at the time and in the period after the game. Admittedly we were at a low point, but such a difference cannot be explained by any rational excuse  It had to be poor umpiring.

It won't  change until the so-called expert commentators learn the rules and call-out the egregious mistakes. It is not an attack on the umpires but, for the good of our great game, it is vital that umpiring is not only at a high standard (as determined by the umpiring rep) but also seen to be at a high and consistent standard by the supporters. The AFL should lift its game!