Throwing away the whistle on GF day.

[Demon Disciple 11,812]

25 minutes ago, DaveyJones'sLocker said:

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

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

Weightman actually drags Kossie down with him, trying to get either an in the back or holding free. Glad the ump didn’t fall for that blatant cheating.

Weightman for me is fast reaching Mathieson levels of hatred.......................... and that’s saying something.

[Pates 9,626]

21 hours ago, mauriesy said:

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

Just saying I’ve seen them paid before, completely took the player out of the contest and didn’t take the grab (as you say Gawn spoiled him). I think it was the right call to say play on but every so often umpires decide to pay them. 

[Willmoy1947 3,983]

On 10/23/2021 at 8:58 AM, leave it to deever said:

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,

They found they couldn't outwhistle perfection..

[MT64 1,144]

On 10/23/2021 at 5:36 PM, The heart beats true said:

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?

Was at Cosco's yesterday and they are selling cheeseboards. I did resist. Alright. I already have one.

Edited October 24, 2021 by MT64

[MT64 1,144]

23 hours ago, dee-tox said:

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.

I think you will find umpire #8 involved in all. Will stand to be corrected. I always feel nervous when he officiates.

[Bay Riffin 1,454]

On 10/23/2021 at 10:46 AM, Premiers said:

  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!

 

Thats my beef with the doggies. Macrae dives low into his opponents body and gets head highs all the time. Hunter survives on conning the umpire and got a goal from a free that was so obviously contrived. It was my biggest fear going into the grand final. The doggies still played for them but this occasion unlike last time, the umps didn't get sucked into it as much.

[Brownie 5,925]

I'd be happy if they put the whistle away all bloody year. Usually makes for a much better game.

[rufus 1,089]

20 minutes ago, Brownie said:

I'd be happy if they put the whistle away all bloody year. Usually makes for a much better game.

This x 100. The game is difficult to adjudicate...so if you're not sure it was an infringement then let it go. Do everything in your power to let the result be decided by the players.

AFL games can go from one of the most enjoyable viewing experiences to one of the most painful based on the level of involvement of the umpires. Even if it doesn't necessarily advantage one team over the other, constant free kicks are an absolute spectacle killer.

[Rivers Run Red 187]

45 minutes ago, Brownie said:

I'd be happy if they put the whistle away all bloody year. Usually makes for a much better game.

Agree.

I'd rather a few non calls rather than them plucking dubious ones.

[dpositive 1,662]

I wonder if the umpires were overwhelmed by the sentiment that Melbourne after 57 years deserved this premiership more than the dogs who had had recent success. Plus the WA crowd who seemed to be more supportative of the Dees providing the necessary noise quotient to action.

It did seem like we got the rub of the green and in my 60 years of following this is a very rare thing. 

Umpiring decisions no doubt change games.

i know that on statistical data we are not always paid less frees but I have certainly seen games where the balance was achieved only long after the game was lost. Free kicks paid in critical situations almost always went against us. Not in the grand final. Perhaps the umpires also recognised we were an unstoppable force after the Geelong matches.

I have after called for the club to have a conference with the umpires as we were obviously deficient in our style of play, our tackling was poor or our positioning poor when blatant errors were made. We had no backs and no necks, there was certainly no protection of our heads while soft infringements for the other side were recognised.

I always remember an occasion where a Melbourne player wa tripped with no free, and in the same game a Melbourne player was penalised for an attempted trip. Our technique was so poor we could not even execute a trip? I think we even had a player reported for an attempted trip.

i hope the umpires do not revert to the give the Dees nothing approach this year and just as importantly that the players take the umpires out of it by just getting on with the game.

 

[Clintosaurus 7,668]

Not sure we got the rub of the green - some very soft free kicks were paid the Dogs way, Macrae ducked and got one, Hunter got a goal from one where he led with his head.

Outside of 2016, Grand Finals are generally pretty even umpiring wise.

[John Demonic 5,611]

1 hour ago, Clintosaurus said:

Not sure we got the rub of the green - some very soft free kicks were paid the Dogs way, Macrae ducked and got one, Hunter got a goal from one where he led with his head.

Outside of 2016, Grand Finals are generally pretty even umpiring wise.

The 3rd quarter in particular had quite a few high frees to the Dogs. It was annoying, but it was also a clear indicator that they were running out of options. When high frees are all you can summon from an offensive stand point to advance the ball forward, then you're running on fumes and about to be overrun. Probably part explains why they were so quick to hang their heads after our barrage of goals. They'd sensed it was coming a lot earlier and knew it was over, based on their own inability to do anything but draw a high free to combat the flow and run of our momentum prior to.

 

 

Edited February 18, 2022 by John Demonic

[John Demonic 5,611]

On 10/23/2021 at 2:14 AM, 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? 

This is what irked me about the blocking topic. Sheeds opponent, Pendlebury btw, was nowhere to be found. If he'd actually contested with Sheed, the umpire would've just seen two pairs wrestling for the mark and let it go, be it a mark or spoil. And no one would be discussing Maynard being held.

So a blocking free if it was awarded, would just be letting Pendlebury off the hook for not being there to contest. It would be a penalty against Sheed for being fitter. I think the ump got it right in  officiating in the spirit of the game, rather than technically.

Edited February 18, 2022 by John Demonic

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,664]

I'm imagining what the game would be like if we went back right to the beginning where there were no umpires and the captains adjudicated. Imagine Max in that role? It would be most entertaining.

Mind you, the whole scheme would come tumbling down when Sydney decide to have 22 co-Captains.

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

On 10/23/2021 at 10:18 AM, 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.

Agree with you entirely Redleg. It should have been a free to Bowey. Bowey was taken out of the contest entirely, JJ put his hands on his shoulders, pushed them down and used that resistance to push himself upwards. If JJ had just got into Bowey's back with his body as part of the marking contest that's entirely different (as long as it's a realistic attempt). I disagree that paying a free kick for such situations would ruin the high mark as a part of our game. As long as you don't use your hands to take someone else out of the contest then there's no problem.

As to the ridiculous (IMV) comparisons with Bayley Fritsch's attempted mark later in the 3rd Quarter, it's an entirely different situation. Fritsch didn't use his hands and it was just his momentum that carried him forward, not pushing his opponent out with his hands, and using that resistance to get elevation. 

The fact that Robbo and Jeff White used their hands on occasion 20 years ago is neither here nor there. They played under the rules as they existed back then. Chopping of the arms by defenders was also allowed. Does anyone want to see that make a comeback?

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

6 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

Not sure we got the rub of the green - some very soft free kicks were paid the Dogs way, Macrae ducked and got one, Hunter got a goal from one where he led with his head.

Outside of 2016, Grand Finals are generally pretty even umpiring wise.

Agree with you Clintosaurus.

We won the free kick count 19-13. I don't know what the count was at 3/4 time but my feeling was that that margin was achieved in the last quarter when the game was basically over. BBB in particulat got a few chopping the arms frees which were definitely there but not sure whether they would have been paid in goal-scoring  positions earlier in the game.

The only blatant free the Bulldogs missed out on was the free Schache should have received when Brayshaw took him out. It seems to me that the umpires have  their views on certain players. For instance, Kossie doesn't get the frees he should probably get because he throws himself around, and JV gets soft frees paid against him because he plays the game hard. In the GF it seemed to me the Bulldogs got a number of marginal around-the-neck decisions, especially if Viney was involved. I'm not sure what Petty did to upset the umpires. Just because you duck to try not to get decapitated doesn't mean you're staging (still it was the Bont making the tackle which might have something to do with the non-decision)...  

[Cards13 9,117]

We're actually very lucky in the AFL world, the start of the season see's the new rules/new "interpretations" and general "we're not here to f k around guys" over umpiring but then tends to blend into a predictable pattern. That is unless the AFL decides they want to change something midstream. But this doesn't tend to change once we hit the finals series..

NHL ice hockey is one of the biggest changes you'll ever see, they don't call many penalties in a game in the regular season but come paly off time you can literally hit a bloke in the back as hard as you can, breaking your stick and you wont get penalised. Teams/coaches/announcers literally say the regular season is fine and you can win in that but you have to be built to play "play off hockey". You need to be big and strong and be able to stick it and take the punishment you'll get in the play offs.

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

On 10/23/2021 at 10:24 AM, DeeSpencer said:

 

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.

 

Disagree entirely. You can't actually see on this clip in real time at distance but,if you look at the replay on Kayo, JJ puts his hands on the shoulders of Bowey before the ball arrives, pushes off, pushes Bowey out, then takes  the mark. Bowey was basically removed from the action and had no opportunity to compete.

The 2 Robbo marks  are quite different. In the first he barely brushes the back of his opponent. In the 2nd there is definitely more contact but in neither case was the oponent prevented from attempting the mark. In the 2nd mark the opponent even remained on his feet. Robbo definitely used his opponents back to provide stability but that's all.

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

On 10/23/2021 at 10:46 AM, Lucifers Hero said:

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.

With due respect, I (belatedly) disagree. Firstly Max pointed out to the umpire that Bowey had been pushed out before Bowey did. Bowey justifiably appealed to the umpure but not in an overly demonstrative way. At the time he was appealing Max was already on the mark and in the process of handing that responsibility over to Ben Brown.  Bowey was not letting JJ play on. What's this kid will learn BS? He did nothing wrong and should have received a free kick IMO.

I agree entirely about showing respect to umpires but also think decisions or non-decisions should be queried in an appropriate way if they're confusing or possibly incorrect, as long as the player doesn't their eye off the play. Maybe, just maybe, these things have nothing to do with age and we should stop making demeaning comments about kids learning one day. Never confuse age with maturity. They're very different things.

[Tony Tea 2,806]

There can be no doubt that the umpires looked at the first final last year when Free Weightman conned the umps 5 times, and decided to pay no coulda-been-paid frees. The Dogs got a few cheat frees in the GF, but mostly the umps pointedly ignored the Scray's shenanigans. In short: the Dogs had no one to blame but themselves. They overplayed their hand, and got hit by the karma bus.

Chuck in the 2016 GF for retrospective caution by the umps.

[Redleg 40,380]

I actually thought Schache could have got a free in the marking contest, when Gus just barrelled  him. The fact that he pretended to be mortally wounded probably went against him. Gus clearly tried to put him out of the contest and succeeded.

But who cares, we are Premiers.

[In Harmes Way 7,716]

I thought the umpiring in the grand final was pretty good overall excepting the goal umpire who robbed Max of his grand final goal.

[BDA 22,412]

Some people take issue with the JJ mark and goal but was it any different to BB's mark and goal in the 3rd when he had his hands in the back of the defender before marking. I think the 2 negate each other

The only obvious inconsistency i can remember was when Spargo was pinged for a high tackle on Hunter (that he scored from) however Kozzie didn't get a free in the exact same situation later in the game. I think is was Libba that tackled him

As long as umpires are consistent in game i've no issues

[John Crow Batty 8,826]

I don’t care all about this and that free kick. Even action in a game influence the next action and so on. The roll of the dice, how the cards fell and dispensation of karma was so sweet. We won the premiership. 

Edited February 20, 2022 by John Crow Batty

[In Harmes Way 7,716]

11 hours ago, BDA said:

Some people take issue with the JJ mark and goal but was it any different to BB's mark and goal in the 3rd when he had his hands in the back of the defender before marking. I think the 2 negate each other

Having watched the replay a couple of times, my view is that BBB used his forearms not hands in that marking contest, which as I understand it is OK. That said, I'm of the view that JJ's mark was a mark, so I think the two do negate each other as well.