Throwing away the whistle on GF day.

[bush demon 2,118]

West Coast's last 'goal' from the 2018 GF has stayed with me since their premiership win of that year. How can blatant push-outs not be penalised. And that's because it's a grand final, where umpires by traditional custom don't get involved on the last day. We saw it again this year with Johannisen's double-handed 'speccy' plus plenty of others. It just goes to show that our code is basically ungovernable so you can put the whistle away. 

[leave it to deever 17,556]

Given the horrible effort of the umps last time we played the dogs with the 25 to 11 count on a wet night and the dogs free kick differential plus the dogs throwing that doesnt  get pinged I was concerned the umps would get too involved. I think they did a very good job and while I still dont understand why the dogs get so many frees, Im very happy the unmps didnt make this the case. well done you maggots,

[DeeSpencer 26,091]

2 hours ago, bush demon said:

West Coast's last 'goal' from the 2018 GF has stayed with me since their premiership win of that year. How can blatant push-outs not be penalised. And that's because it's a grand final, where umpires by traditional custom don't get involved on the last day. We saw it again this year with Johannisen's double-handed 'speccy' plus plenty of others. It just goes to show that our code is basically ungovernable so you can put the whistle away. 

Not sure why you'd be disappointed at Collingwood getting the raw end of the deal, was great umpiring! Rioli had the right to contest with his opponent though in case the ball got over the back and Maynard sold the push out a lot. Wasn't a clear cut block. It's a free kick, but where was Sheed's opponent? 

As for the JJ mark do you really want that to be a free kick to Bowey? Really? Some contact with his on the back has been allowed for a speccy for years, it's part of what makes the game great. He's simply used his hands for a little balance before a great leap and mark, I'd hate to take that out of the game.

I think the umpires should establish the rules during the home and away season, then in finals the best teams will be more disciplined and won't give away as many free kicks to begin with. The Dogs success with the umpires has a lot to do with them being very well coached and their game style. Similarly we were great this year at not giving away dumb free kicks. Then in finals I think it's fair to expect the umpires to pay whatever they see but not to go diving deep in to the rule books for the more 'administrative' free kicks like extra 50m penalties etc. I think there's a balance between protecting players, fairly officiating the game but not having the umpires become too big a part of the contest.

Apart from the non mark paid to May late in the 2nd and the Hunter cheating I thought the grand final was umpired really well and with the right balance between paying free kicks that were there and letting the players take centre stage.

[Redleg 41,758]

5 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

 

As for the JJ mark do you really want that to be a free kick to Bowey? Really? Some contact with his on the back has been allowed for a speccy for years, it's part of what makes the game great. He's simply used his hands for a little balance before a great leap and mark, I'd hate to take that out of the game.

I

Well actually that's not true. He used his hands to climb and push him forward and away from the contest.

It was a free clearly, but WE WON THE FLAG.

[DeeSpencer 26,091]

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

Well actually that's not true. He used his hands to climb and push him forward and away from the contest.

It was a free clearly, but WE WON THE FLAG.

 

A little steadying with the hands before the knees go firmly on the numbers which pushes Bowey forward as JJ elevates fairly acutely upwards. That's a great mark. If you want that as a free kick I think you're out to ruin one of the great parts of the game.

The first 2 marks in this Robbo highlights video do similar. No way would I want these paid as in the back.

 

[Mickey 4,752]

If we're complaining about the JJ non-free, we should also be complaining about the Scache non-free when Brayshaw collected him in the back.

Swings and roundabouts. Though the GF was pretty well officiated.

[loges 6,767]

Would rather the GF be under umpired rather than over umpired. Thought the worst decision was the non free kick to Kozzie, all in all they did a good job.

[Lucifers Hero 40,487]

The interesting thing about the JJ mark was that Max immediately set up to block an easy run into goal.  Bowey on the other hand was walking away from JJ and Max to appeal the umpire.  The kid will learn.  

In a similar 50/50 situation a few games earlier Rivers was appealing a decision with the umpire when Lever slapped him on the chest and yelled:  'Focus'.  The kid will earn.

Even JV has been 'tamed' (an oxymoron concept, I know) when it comes to appealing umpire decisions.  McCrae rammed his head into Jack's legs and was paid a free for 'high'.  Jack just stood the mark and shook his head.  Those antics just make Jack tackle harder!

While our players are showing respect to umpire decisions, more importantly they stay focussed.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Premiers

[PaulRB 6,425]

I liked that they played deliberate out of bounds a couple of times when Doggies had no options and tried dump kicks…

thought umpiring was great, loved the JJ mark was paid, highlight of our game.

[bush demon 2,118]

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

Not sure why you'd be disappointed at Collingwood getting the raw end of the deal, was great umpiring! Rioli had the right to contest with his opponent though in case the ball got over the back and Maynard sold the push out a lot. Wasn't a clear cut block. It's a free kick, but where was Sheed's opponent? 

As for the JJ mark do you really want that to be a free kick to Bowey? Really? Some contact with his on the back has been allowed for a speccy for years, it's part of what makes the game great. He's simply used his hands for a little balance before a great leap and mark, I'd hate to take that out of the game.

I think the umpires should establish the rules during the home and away season, then in finals the best teams will be more disciplined and won't give away as many free kicks to begin with. The Dogs success with the umpires has a lot to do with them being very well coached and their game style. Similarly we were great this year at not giving away dumb free kicks. Then in finals I think it's fair to expect the umpires to pay whatever they see but not to go diving deep in to the rule books for the more 'administrative' free kicks like extra 50m penalties etc. I think there's a balance between protecting players, fairly officiating the game but not having the umpires become too big a part of the contest.

Apart from the non mark paid to May late in the 2nd and the Hunter cheating I thought the grand final was umpired really well and with the right balance between paying free kicks that were there and letting the players take centre stage.

So why was Maxy's push-out quickly paid earlier in the game? Because it was in the backline?

[bush demon 2,118]

51 minutes ago, Mickey said:

If we're complaining about the JJ non-free, we should also be complaining about the Scache non-free when Brayshaw collected him in the back.

Swings and roundabouts. Though the GF was pretty well officiated.

PS I'm not arguing against this and other decision just re-stating the general premise  that umpiring is going to be 'minimalist' on this day kind of like a Tom Wills game in the park.

[Webber 10,563]

Only 3 real clunkers for me. 1. Max’s  ‘non-goal’, 2. May’s ‘non-mark’, 3. the inconsistency between Lachie Hunter’s free kick for ‘too high’, but Kozzie not awarded for the same. All three could have affected the result, but we won by a lot, so blah blah. Johannisen’s elevator hands not a problem. A legitimate speccy every day. 

[Foopy on the telly 534]

5 hours ago, bush demon said:

West Coast's last 'goal' from the 2018 GF has stayed with me since their premiership win of that year. How can blatant push-outs not be penalised. And that's because it's a grand final, where umpires by traditional custom don't get involved on the last day. We saw it again this year with Johannisen's double-handed 'speccy' plus plenty of others. It just goes to show that our code is basically ungovernable so you can put the whistle away. 

If anything, that was free kick for high against Maynard if you look closely

[Cranky Franky 2,148]

5 hours ago, bush demon said:

West Coast's last 'goal' from the 2018 GF has stayed with me since their premiership win of that year. How can blatant push-outs not be penalised. And that's because it's a grand final, where umpires by traditional custom don't get involved on the last day. We saw it again this year with Johannisen's double-handed 'speccy' plus plenty of others. It just goes to show that our code is basically ungovernable so you can put the whistle away. 

Disagree.  GF's should be umpired the same as any other game.

Under your scenario the spoil on Ben Brown would have been play on & not paid a free.

As for JJ - that was a clear mark - Jeff White took speccies like that his whole career.

 

[Pates 9,661]

If we’re splitting hairs on the free kicks from the GF, Fritta’s second goal in a minute that started our run could’ve been penalised for unrealistic attempt/push in the back. 

For me the biggest howler was Kozzie clearly getting his head taken off in the third quarter. It was way more of a free kick compared to the one the dogs got in the second quarter where he lowered his body to draw the free, Kozzie was down collecting the ball and was very clearly taken high (as Trac quickly pointed out to the umpire). 

Overall I though the umpiring was consistent with most decisions, it certainly didn’t feel over-umpired as is usually the case in season. 

[Sir Why You Little 37,242]

JJ took a great Mark. That has been a great mark for years and should be encouraged. 
Max’s goal was 50/50 depending on the camera angle you watch

I thought the Umps were fine on GF night

I didn’t notice them except for Kozzie’s high Contact in the 3rd Quarter 

That got me fired up!

Edited October 23, 2021 by Sir Why You Little

[mauriesy 7,378]

3 hours ago, Pates said:

If we’re splitting hairs on the free kicks from the GF, Fritta’s second goal in a minute that started our run could’ve been penalised for unrealistic attempt/push in the back.

Unrealistic? Fritsch would have marked that ball if Gawn hadn't got hands to it first.

[Phil C 730]

Max missed. I was almost right behind it and I knew it was a point straight away. It curved late so it looks like a goal somewhat but the ball was well past the goals by that stage. 

[The heart beats true 18,178]

We was robbed! Should have won by 120. When will this club finally put an opponent away? Percentage could mean a lot this year!

Sorry, I’m struggling to adjust to being the Premiers. Maybe when my Premiership Cheeseboard arrives it’ll finally sink in?

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

Unrealistic? Fritsch would have marked that ball if Gawn hadn't got hands to it first.

Yep. There would’ve been hell to pay had that been deemed an unrealistic attempt.

[Demon Disciple 12,315]

Definitely wasn’t a free against Fritsch.

Brayshaw crashing into Schache was late and should’ve been a free, but then again so should’ve the high on Kossie where Trac went nuts for the non-call.

[dee-tox 4,835]

Overall umpires did a reasonable job.

Didn't like the Hannan free kick in the third (soft as f***), non-free to Kozzie and the immediate holding the man afterwards to Martin.

The two frees against Viney in the third were dubious as well.

On the other side BBB was given four frees mainly for arm chops and Brayshaw crashing into the back of Schache was probably a free.

[david_neitz_is_my_dad 4,084]

There was two counts of inconsistencies:

1. Hunter paid a high free kick for dropping the knees whilst Kozzie gets taken high without dropping and nothing gets paid.
2. Steven May drops the ball after the marking motion (right before half time), this happened earlier to a dogs player and ofcourse it was whistled for the mark.

Edited October 23, 2021 by david_neitz_is_my_dad

[monoccular 17,607]

9 hours ago, Webber said:

Only 3 real clunkers for me. 1. Max’s  ‘non-goal’, 2. May’s ‘non-mark’, 3. the inconsistency between Lachie Hunter’s free kick for ‘too high’, but Kozzie not awarded for the same. All three could have affected the result, but we won by a lot, so blah blah. Johannisen’s elevator hands not a problem. A legitimate speccy every day. 

True.  

1.  IF we had gone down by under 5 points Max’s non reviewed goal would have been a massive talking point.  Wasn’t it introduced (in the AFL’s typical knee jerk reaction) exactly for that reason, “to avoid a  GF being decided by a dubious goal call”?  
3. agree 100% - blatant inconsistency. 

[DaveyJones'sLocker 647]

Firstly JJs mark wasn’t a free kick. A few years ago they made that rule - any hands in the back is a free kick but quickly scraped  it. 
Not sure if the umpires finally woke up to the soft free kicks they had paid to the dogs all year or we were the ones who benefited from the “throwing of the whistle away on GF day”.

Below is a list of free kicks that I expected would have been paid to the dogs based on games they played this season.

- Bradshaw body spoil on schache

-Pickett holding/in the back/late tackle on weightman lead up to Brayshaw goal 

- May hit on hanan

- Viney aggressive tackle on McRae 

- Salem agressive tackle on McRae 

- rivers tackle on dale 19 points down just has his arm over his shoulder for a split second 

Edited October 23, 2021 by DaveyJones'sLocker