I've been saying for yea s MFC needs to invite umpires to our club to tell us what we are doing wrong.

we are positioning ourselves badly or executing technique badly.

perhaps we should also emphasise that we execute and position to ensure the ball is kept moving and that scoring is increased.

 

31 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

They're not as blatantly wrong as Twitter is making them out to be.

The first one in that video is clearly at least an arguable dangerous tackle. Redman pins an arm and drives him downwards. It's line ball to me, could have gone either way.

Similarly the second one is a bit 50/50 on whether he had prior opportunity: if he didn't, it's a free for holding, which is what was paid. Personally I reckon he had prior opportunity.

C'mon.

The Bont is a big unit and takes some dragging down.
1st one he tried to stand in the tackle and was caught cold.

2nd one he tried to use his size to blast through with the ball and when it was dislodged in the tackle he threw his arms out claiming to be held without possession when he dropped it.

Prior opportunity there both times.

The umpiring has been bad for years but this year it's an absolute disgrace.

7 minutes ago, dpositive said:

I've been saying for yea s MFC needs to invite umpires to our club to tell us what we are doing wrong.

we are positioning ourselves badly or executing technique badly.

perhaps we should also emphasise that we execute and position to ensure the ball is kept moving and that scoring is increased.

 

Not sure that would help. I am curious however about the rotation of Umpires through the season. Anecdotally, I think we get Nicholls, Williamson and Margetts an extraordinary amount of times. Would love to know if there was a table for this. If not I intend to keep one next season.

I can see how the umpires make both calls with clear conscience.  The HTM decision, if the ball was dislodged in the tackle (no effort to dispose) then the tackle lingered and could be seen as HTM.  The Dangerous tackle was there if the umpire overlooked the incorrect disposal.  Had prior opportunity and did not get rid of it correctly, so should have been called.  After the no call, the tackle can be seen as dangerous, the arm was pinned, the head was slung into the ground.

They could have both easily gone the other way if the maggot blew the whistle as soon as the first infringement happens (both against Bont).  Letting it play out led to the second obvious frees emerging.  Easier to blow these ones.

11 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

I can see how the umpires make both calls with clear conscience.  The HTM decision, if the ball was dislodged in the tackle (no effort to dispose) then the tackle lingered and could be seen as HTM.  The Dangerous tackle was there if the umpire overlooked the incorrect disposal.  Had prior opportunity and did not get rid of it correctly, so should have been called.  After the no call, the tackle can be seen as dangerous, the arm was pinned, the head was slung into the ground.

They could have both easily gone the other way if the maggot blew the whistle as soon as the first infringement happens (both against Bont).  Letting it play out led to the second obvious frees emerging.  Easier to blow these ones.

This is the number one issue as to why it’s so frustrating with how good the bulldogs run is, it seems that whenever there is a 50/50 decision it goes their way. I don’t know how it happens and I’m not suggesting a deliberate plot by the umpires but it just seems to happen too much to ignore. For me both those decisions are stone cold HTB. 

Loved the one in the last to the Bont, where he was done cold holding the ball/dropped it, umpire doesn't see that one (or refuses to pay it), but does he see the tackle bringing him down moments later.......you bet. Don't worry about the first one muppet 🤦

Was also good to see Bont making a late run for a diving medal. Better luck in Paris Marcus.

Edited August 8, 20214 yr by Demon Disciple

2 hours ago, Demonland said:

Bont is a protected species. 

None of our players get this kind of consistent protection. 

No in fact with Petracca it's the opposite, regularly gets pinged holding the ball without having any prior

Bullies are a loved side. Bont is a loved player. We aren’t a loved side and we don’t need the umpires. Bulldogs aren’t that great anyway. I think we are the team to beat. 

If anyone has twitter; this is an interesting account to follow;

https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup

Goes through contentious incidents from all games. 

18 minutes ago, roy11 said:

If anyone has twitter; this is an interesting account to follow;

https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup

Goes through contentious incidents from all games. 

I get a sense this account sometimes has a particular bias. Not convinced they are a professional umpire. I could be wrong though.

2 minutes ago, Demonland said:

I get a sense this account sometimes has a particular bias. Not convinced they are a professional umpire. I could be wrong though.

Yeh I don't agree with every comment they make on decisions but find the account interesting as it's presented in a methodical way which sort of helps understand how a decision was reached. Can then decide if I agree with their interpretation or not. Better than the commentators just shouting words.

 

 

7 minutes ago, roy11 said:

Yeh I don't agree with every comment they make on decisions but find the account interesting as it's presented in a methodical way which sort of helps understand how a decision was reached. Can then decide if I agree with their interpretation or not. Better than the commentators just shouting words.

Commentators on TV for the most past don't even mention or analyse (particularly in game) whether decisions are wrong or not.

I nearly fell out of my chair when they mentioned the lopsided adjudication of the Dees vs Dogs game a few weeks ago particularly given that there was no crowd "booing" alerting them.

No one can catch the Bulldogs now.

They’ve done it again!

4 mysterious frees to Weightman for 4 goals in the wet.

Last time I looked it was 20 frees to 12, despite equal possessions

I know they won by 49 points , but they were given a leg up.

Bomber fans will be furious!

Edited August 29, 20214 yr by Jumping Jack Clennett
Typo

8 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

They’ve done it again!

4 mysterious frees to Weightman for 4 goals in the wet.

Last time I looked it was 20 frees to 12, despite equal possessions

I know they won by 49 points , but they were given a leg up.

Bomber fans will be furious!

Umpires didn't keep Essendon goalless for an hour. 

Weightman has played his cards now and the umpires will be onto his antics. 

He pulled the arm around his neck in the first free and the Draper one he just ran into him.
The last one on the boundary was just a bad call from the umpire, it wasn't a push at all. 

21 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

They’ve done it again!

4 mysterious frees to Weightman for 4 goals in the wet.

Last time I looked it was 20 frees to 12, despite equal possessions

I know they won by 49 points , but they were given a leg up.

Bomber fans will be furious!

Brilliant

10 minutes ago, FritschyBusiness said:

Umpires didn't keep Essendon goalless for an hour. 

Weightman has played his cards now and the umpires will be onto his antics. 

He pulled the arm around his neck in the first free and the Draper one he just ran into him.
The last one on the boundary was just a bad call from the umpire, it wasn't a push at all. 

He's done it all year and they bought it today, so I reckon they'll be done by it again.

The Bulldogs are downright terrible to watch.

36 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

They’ve done it again!

4 mysterious frees to Weightman for 4 goals in the wet.

Last time I looked it was 20 frees to 12, despite equal possessions

I know they won by 49 points , but they were given a leg up.

Bomber fans will be furious!

22 to 14 in favour of the Dogs in the end.

This takes their tally to +80 free kicks for the year.

Geelong are the next closest team on + 34

I don't know about the rest but three of the four Weightman free kicks were completely there.

The one that wasn't was the fourth, where he was pushed out of bounds and just fell over, but got a free for a push in the back somehow.

Again, there is no rule that says the free kick count has to be even. Essendon were largely crap all day. It isn't necessarily a surprise that if the Dogs were first to the ball and had their head over it more, they'd get more free kicks.

7 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

The one that wasn't was the fourth, where he was pushed out of bounds and just fell over, but got a free for a push in the back somehow.

Maybe the umpire thought the ball had gone over, hence the push despite not being in the back was after play had stopped, but really soft and harsh call.

To be fair to the dogs, they're actually 8th for frees for and the reason for the high differential is they give away the least frees. But still think they get a good ride

On 7/11/2021 at 8:47 PM, Demonland said:

Prior to this round they were leading the Free Kick Differential by nearly 30.

Also they are the only team that consistently gets away with blatant throwing of the ball.

It's an established lineage from Teddy "flick pass" Whitten written into the" secret rule book " and stored  in the basement at AFL House

9 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

I don't know about the rest but three of the four Weightman free kicks were completely there.

The one that wasn't was the fourth, where he was pushed out of bounds and just fell over, but got a free for a push in the back somehow.

Again, there is no rule that says the free kick count has to be even. Essendon were largely crap all day. It isn't necessarily a surprise that if the Dogs were first to the ball and had their head over it more, they'd get more free kicks.

 

1 hour ago, Hellish Inferno said:

Maybe the umpire thought the ball had gone over, hence the push despite not being in the back was after play had stopped, but really soft and harsh call.

To be fair to the dogs, they're actually 8th for frees for and the reason for the high differential is they give away the least frees. But still think they get a good ride

I could see where they came from with the push.

Umpires are relatively trigger happy when aplayer pushes someone in the back just as they go to kick the ball. I thought the same thing happened to Weightman while handballing. 

I haven't seen a slow enough replay to confirm if it was back or side, but I think that's what they were paying.

 

Edited August 29, 20214 yr by deanox

On 7/11/2021 at 10:08 PM, Demonland said:

The adjudication of the length of passes and whether it has gone the required distance or not is so inconsistent from kick to kick.

Often a ball has clearly traveled the required distance only to be called play on and then seconds later it clearly travels less than 15 and is called a mark. 

The only consistent thing about it is that interpretation is just as horrendous from match to match. 

Most frustrating is the umpires whp call "play on not 15"  just after it is kicked and before the team mate has even marked it!

1 hour ago, deanox said:

 

I could see where they came from with the push.

Umpires are relatively trigger happy when aplayer pushes someone in the back just as they go to kick the ball. I thought the same thing happened to Weightman while handballing. 

I haven't seen a slow enough replay to confirm if it was back or side, but I think that's what they were paying.

 

Weigtman had turned around and was facing the 'pusher' Pushing in the front is not a free

On 7/11/2021 at 8:47 PM, Demonland said:

 

Also they are the only team that consistently gets away with blatant throwing of the ball.

What really upsets me is they can blatantly throw it and get away with it and Oliver can legitimately handball so quickly he sometimes gets called for throwing.