Imagine the Differential if these were all paid. Poor Doggies.

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

Imagine the Differential if these were all paid. Poor Doggies.

So after training for free kicks, this is Beverage's second row of defense in his secret weapons for free kicks - fan army free kick advocate bots.

We're onto you Doggies.

On another note, is there any stats published on goals from free kicks?  My suspicions are that Sydney would have had this stat covered on Saturday night.

35 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

On another note, is there any stats published on goals from free kicks?  My suspicions are that Sydney would have had this stat covered on Saturday night.

Pretty sure it was 5 or higher.

Yet again the Doggies lose the match when the free kick count doesn’t go there way!

No one seems to be mentioning the two ear massages Nibbler and Clarrie got in the first half, clearly after marks had been taken. No thought of 50 metre penalties by Green clowns 26 and 2. Both would have taken our lads to the goal square with dare I say it - certain goals. 12 point margin, there you go! Then Gulden and Papley in the last were just beyond belief. Add Reid’s two gifts - and all ticked off by the Scott running the umpires. Rant over. By the way, I certainly agree that we did not make it any easier by playing kick to kick with the Mcartins!

I fear next week when billy idol gets within 2 metres of the ball . The pressure on the umpires from the opposition fans  to give him frees

2 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

Pretty sure it was 5 or higher.

I’d like to see a free kick goal ladder. We seem to hardly get one going our way and at times multiple against. 
 

I find it absolutely bewildering the media doesn’t focus on these but yet chooses to focus on Givemeone and the Calls against the Pies in a non event. I was adamant that this time we’d finally get some acknowledgment
 

Watch the Pies get a bucketload of frees this week for complaining to the umps.

Edited June 6, 20223 yr by CYB

1 hour ago, Call Me What You Will said:

No one seems to be mentioning the two ear massages Nibbler and Clarrie got in the first half, clearly after marks had been taken. No thought of 50 metre penalties by Green clowns 26 and 2. Both would have taken our lads to the goal square with dare I say it - certain goals. 12 point margin, there you go! Then Gulden and Papley in the last were just beyond belief. Add Reid’s two gifts - and all ticked off by the Scott running the umpires. Rant over. By the way, I certainly agree that we did not make it any easier by playing kick to kick with the Mcartins!

The free kick stat only matters where and when they are given... like Carlton ..they are always in the Forward line. The fine line now between mark and free kick always decides play on or go back and take the kick.This is another fine line to which Club it is being given to. Reid last week kicked three straight which confused things more because that doesn't happen. 

In-between pushing Max in the back along with lurch the other ruckman. Yet they all say what a great player Max is ...how good would he be if he didn't get interference thirty times each game. Don't forget that if he goes too early he will be pushed or ridden and potentially in this dirty dangerous push in the back times we are in, it could easily lead to him getting knocked out or worse in the forward momentum.

On 5/11/2022 at 5:10 PM, Macca said:

We are polar opposites on this issue, willmoy

I put my views forward on umpiring in order to perhaps influence 10% - 15% of this site

Did the same with the drafting debate ... now there is barely a person here who doesn't admit that the draft is at least somewhat flawed

Beforehand there was a belief system (shared by many) that the drafting numbering system was entirely accurate

So in that area, my work is done. 

In summary, I see the constant questioning of umpiring decisions as sweating the small stuff

There are many who probably believe that umpires have a huge influence on games ...buy by my reckoning it's less than 5% (influence of umpires)

So why not take in the other side of the argument?

After all, I've been hearing your side of the argument for my entire life.  Along with 1000's of others all saying the same thing.  Over and over and over again

On nearly every one of your posts you find a way to complain about umpires

Where's your footy anslysis?  I've never seen it

I'm not totally at odds, no use complaining and not a direct influence, however I still say that umpiring decisions affect confidence and future behaviour.

If you receive frees for being tackled in the back you you will feel more confident getting in front. If you are tackled and penalised holding the ball when hitting he found you will be less confident being in front.

if you throw and get away with no penalty you will continue to throw.

if you duck and get free you will confidently continue.

sides that know they will not be hurt from a penalty will continue to penalise.

they will do it confidently and other specks of their game will come off

9 hours ago, CYB said:

I’d like to see a free kick goal ladder. We seem to hardly get one going our way and at times multiple against. 

In the Hun today:

10 hours ago, CYB said:

Watch the Pies get a bucketload of frees this week for complaining to the umps.

This might come as a shock to some, but the umpires are only human. And accordingly, I think the opposite is more likely to happen. The human reaction to an accusation of bias or unfairness is to protect previous behaviour so as to avoid having to admit that mistakes were made. I think it's therefore more likely that should the umpires respond to the accusation, it's likely to be defensive and therefore not in Collingwood's favour. 

For those still playing at home.

1 minute ago, Demonland said:

For those still playing at home.

That's an interesting breakdown

So we're actually 8th for free kicks and have just given away less than many others. Eye-opening.

We do well not to give away free kicks. I wonder if that's improved on last year...

A good differential is a thinking differential.. 

Weightman didn't get a free yet played a brilliant and courageous game.  He is a much better player focusing on getting the ball on his merits, of which he has plenty, rather than getting cheap frees. 

The fuss over his 'skill' to milk frees, ironically may be the making of him. 

50 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Weightman didn't get a free yet played a brilliant and courageous game.  He is a much better player focusing on getting the ball on his merits, of which he has plenty, rather than getting cheap frees. 

The fuss over his 'skill' to milk frees, ironically may be the making of him. 

I agree, much more to his game than flopping. Looked very good against the G's. 

I'm not too sure whether it's  a wise practice to go to extreme lengths of getting permanent ne ck and back damage to prove the point of how desperate an attempt is, at getting a genuine  FC.

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

I am certainly know statistician but the Dogs and Tigers must be statistically significant from the rest.  Crazy differential 

10 hours ago, ANG13 said:

I am certainly know statistician but the Dogs and Tigers must be statistically significant from the rest.  Crazy differential 

To me it just reinforces the point that the free kicks (for and against) are systemic in the style of football they play.