1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

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

The push looks to his back, not his front, in this screen shot.

I'm not saying it's not soft, and I can't guarantee it's in the back and not in the side, but it is pretty clearly two outstretched hands pushing him, not tackling.

I can see why, depending on umpires angle, that may have been paid 

First half yesterday was about where the bulldogs free kicks were given. Kept them in the game along with Essendon inaccuracy and also the one sided adjudication of rules. The bulldogs get frees that the other side don’t get and yesterday’s first half was no different. Two sets of rules for them.

On one hand it's schadenfreude to see this happen to Essendon.

On the other hand, what the Dogs get away with is a blight on the game.

Some good may come of this, because Essendon's whinge power is considerable ... they have plenty of clout at AFL house, so some behind the scenes "approaches" may be made, which in turn might refocus the AFL's attention. Fairy tale endings (Dogs in GF) are one thing, but a powerhouse club in the GF ($$$$$$) is another.

12 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

 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.

But the total number of possessions was equal for each side. So the Dogs weren't first to the ball any more than Essendon.

So then the argument changes.........the Dogs must tackle better.   But they seem to get away with high tackles, throws,front-on frees etc more than any other side.

They even overcame a hostile crowd in Launceston.    I don't know how Tasmanians could have a soft spot for such an unlikeable team as Essendon.

The question remains....."How do the Bulldogs do it?"

Edited August 30, 20213 yr by Jumping Jack Clennett
Afterthought

On 8/30/2021 at 10:38 AM, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

But the total number of possessions was equal for each side. So the Dogs weren't first to the ball any more than Essendon.

So then the argument changes.........the Dogs must tackle better.   But they seem to get away with high tackles, throws,front-on frees etc more than any other side.

They even overcame a hostile crowd in Launceston.    I don't know how Tasmanians could have a soft spot for such an unlikeable team as Essendon.

The question remains....."How do the Bulldogs do it?"

Interested to see if anyone is willing to defend yet another lopsided pro-bulldogs umpiring performance tonight. 

+9 tonight

39 minutes ago, The Corridor said:

Interested to see if anyone is willing to defend yet another lopsided pro-bulldogs umpiring performance tonight. 

Not really. What I do know is that razor ray and his boys can book themselves in for the gf. That crew tonight were appalling. They'd be swabbed if they were horses.

LoL

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

LoL

I saw some bulldog fans on Twitter saying the umps got us over line 😂

I can really only recall one outrageous decision and it went in the Dogs' favour - Pickett not getting a free for a high tackle, despite Hunter having got one for the exact same tackle earlier.

I really can't recall any other big umpiring errors.

Thought the game was well umpired.

47 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I can really only recall one outrageous decision and it went in the Dogs' favour - Pickett not getting a free for a high tackle, despite Hunter having got one for the exact same tackle earlier.

I really can't recall any other big umpiring errors.

Thought the game was well umpired.

In the third quarter when we were getting some momentum Viney was taken high at a centre bounce and it wasn’t paid then moments later he was penalised for  doing what a Bolldogs player had just done to him.

Fritsch was held in the goalsquare in the first quarter and not paid, but other than that it was well officiated.

Thought they were very good last night the umps, a well done to them…one or two might have been a bit dodgy but you get that. An exceptional bit of umpiring came in the third quarter just prior to the Gus mark and goal.

Pickett attempts a tackle on Weightman and fell on his back. Was waiting for the whistle against us but upon closer inspection it was in fact Weightman that locked arms with Kozzie to drag him onto his back in order to draw a free. You can clearly hear the ump say play on when he saw it. 

Edited September 26, 20213 yr by Dee Zephyr

And I reckon Gawn coulda got one after Daniel threw him over the line.

But I thought it was a really well umpired game.

Edited September 26, 20213 yr by deanox

no real howlers, but if anything i think that the dogs got a better run than us! lots of throws from them too.. particularly in 2nd & 3rd qtrs..

I thought Browns goal in the third was a clear hands in the back against him

I thought Schache should have had a free when Brayshaw smashed into him in their 50 

I thought  Pickett should have clearly had a free against Libba

I thought Max should have had a free in the goal square when Easton Wood went front on (spoiled the ball mind you)]

 

There were just enough 'either way' calls to make me nervous that it might be beginning to tip to the Bulldogs, but even early in the third I was still not having any serious 'grrpmh, umpires' thoughts.

I actually think the most important single moment in the game was that the team didn't go into any sulk mode after what should pretty clearly have been a free against Caleb Daniel for his late/dangerous/sling/off-the-field-of-play tackle on Gawn.

Of course, by halfway through the final quarter the umpires could have been penalising us for having asymmetrical neck hair and it would have neither mattered nor upset me.

was max's non goal a goal?

have afl said anything about it?

was it reviewed  at the time?

6 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

was max's non goal a goal?

have afl said anything about it?

was it reviewed  at the time? a twitter (below) video from somebody recording behind the goal directly in line with the kick. I think it at least deserved a review as it looked to have snuck in. 

 

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/melbourne-demons/afl-grand-final-2021-max-gawn-set-shot-goal-not-paid-no-score-review-video-behind-the-goals-vision-social-media-reaction/news-story/9a5ad3fcbf7ee40c866ccedf1923d88f

Edited September 26, 20213 yr by CYB

17 hours ago, Demonland said:

LoL

#freekickmelbourne

Ha ha ha ha ha!

The umpires called them out to play on for short kicks.  They were used to generally getting away with them.  It surprised them, they couldn't control the tempo and weren't ready to play on.

Thankfully the umps didn't give them too much leeway with throws etc. 

16 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

I can really only recall one outrageous decision and it went in the Dogs' favour - Pickett not getting a free for a high tackle, despite Hunter having got one for the exact same tackle earlier.

I really can't recall any other big umpiring errors.

Thought the game was well umpired.

That one was a howler! Just about took picketts head off. 
but yes agree, aside from that one the game was generally very well umpired.

there were a couple of clear missed calls both for and against, but the important thing is that the decisions - or lack thereof - didn't have any impact on the result

BUT

we should've won by 90 as max's set shot in the second quarter was a clear goal (biased view, but seemingly correct judging by the video) and was an 11 point turnaround and shifted the momentum entirely as the bont nailed his set shot up the other end immediately thereafter

1 hour ago, Gippsland Dee said:

That one was a howler! Just about took picketts head off. 
but yes agree, aside from that one the game was generally very well umpired.

Not that it made a skerrick of difference but there were a few obvious errors that in the end, evened itself out (although, it must be said, we did lead the free kick count 19-13)

The high tackle on Kossie, hands in the back against Brown not paid,  holding the man to Brown for a 'lingering' tackle and the mark to May not paid

You win big by having having high talent levels,  a solid & flexible game plan and top level coaching

Be 5 goals better than any opposition and you've got nothing to worry about

Enjoying the win immensely but if we're to contend again we still need to improve in all those aforementioned areas.  Recruit with real intent for starters

Edited September 27, 20213 yr by Macca

2 hours ago, Macca said:

Not that it made a skerrick of difference but there were a few obvious errors that in the end, evened itself out (although, it must be said, we did lead the free kick count 19-13)

The high tackle on Kossie, hands in the back against Brown not paid,  holding the man to Brown for a 'lingering' tackle and the mark to May not paid

You win big by having having high talent levels,  a solid & flexible game plan and top level coaching

Be 5 goals better than any opposition and you've got nothing to worry about

Enjoying the win immensely but if we're to contend again we still need to improve in all those aforementioned areas.  Recruit with real intent for starters

Yeah that’s all very true. Just getting to rewatch the replay now and definitely seeing a few frees missed here and there. thankfully they didn’t have an impact o no the end result for us 

35 minutes ago, Gippsland Dee said:

Yeah that’s all very true. Just getting to rewatch the replay now and definitely seeing a few frees missed here and there. thankfully they didn’t have an impact o no the end result for us 

Winners are Grinners, GD!!!

Party time!  (in lockdown??? wtf)