Jump to content

Featured Replies

On 8/1/2022 at 7:40 AM, Demonstone said:

It's not so much the frees they receive, but all the ones that aren't paid against them for holding the ball and throwing.

And where on the ground they were paid.

 

Do they have statistics  on which team asks/appeals/ yells/demands of the umpire for a free kick the most, wait, no I know the answer.If you didn't  pick a team with white or blue on their jumper you're in the naughty corner.

Dogs are 150 ahead of the Tigers on the differential. 

madness

 
10 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Do they have statistics  on which team asks/appeals/ yells/demands of the umpire for a free kick the most, wait, no I know the answer.If you didn't  pick a team with white or blue on their jumper you're in the naughty corner.

G_____g?

Bonts non 50 meter penalty on the weekend, was…. Wow! 
Umpires are biased to players as much as teams. 


  • Author
2 hours ago, willmoy said:

Do they have statistics  on which team asks/appeals/ yells/demands of the umpire for a free kick the most, wait, no I know the answer.If you didn't  pick a team with white or blue on their jumper you're in the naughty corner.

The benefit of stadiums like Marvel and Optus Stadium is that you get a good vantage point and are close to the action. In the past two weeks I have witnesses 3 teams play quite close up; the Dees, Dogs and Dockers. Only one team had players constantly (and I mean constantly, verbally, throwing their arms up, gesticulating etc) appealing for frees whether they were there or not.

I'm sure you can guess which team is the guilty party.

The other team in the AFL that use this tactic are the Cats.

4 hours ago, DubDee said:

Dogs are 150 ahead of the Tigers on the differential. 

madness

Which makes 7.8 frees differential per game on average over the 19 rounds.

That is absolutely criminal.. 

Tell me that is not biased? Surely the tigers don’t play that carelessly, this is why we need a professional umpiring review and ranking system. 

It’d be great if someone with a lot of time and the technology to do so, to develop an Unofficial umpiring decision and review website to hold them to account.

Wouldnt be hard to technically judge, we all watch other team games and realise what is BS and what is fair.

Edited by DeezNuts

13 hours ago, mauriesy said:

It's a slightly different perspective when you take the differential out of it.

Club Free kicks for Club Free kicks against
Crows 433 Tigers 436
Blues 424 Swans 422
Lions 419 Kangaroos 420
Bulldogs 409 Saints 420
Swans 409 Crows 412
Magpies 405 Lions 407
Cats 399 Hawks 404
Bombers 394 Suns 402
Hawks 392 Dockers 393
Dockers 390 Power 391
Suns 389 Cats 387
Kangaroos 391 Eagles 387
Giants 378 Magpies 382
Saints 378 Bombers 382
Eagles 376 Giants 373
Tigers 367 Blues 367
Power 364 Demons 359
Demons 361 Bulldogs 324

How the mighty have fallen. Wetcoke 4th bottom receives. Can that be right????

 
  • 4 weeks later...

Just now, leave it to deever said:

Ps they had 10 more than us in our last game/ losses Against them.

The fact that it keeps happening with such a big difference is puzzling to say the least.

Libba out of finals. Doubt they beat Freo

The doggies may win the freekick count but won't make a difference as their defence is terrible. 

And of course we all know that the Dogs get away with 100 throws a game as well....


10 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Zero Hanger stopped doing the Free Kick Differential Ladder after Round 20 but here is the ladder after Round 23.

Image

Mental to see the Dogs with nearly double the next closest team. They have had the most insanely biased run I can remember, and that includes a lot of throws not paid in the spirit of the AFL wanting to “make the game faster”!

  • Author
30 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Mental to see the Dogs with nearly double the next closest team. They have had the most insanely biased run I can remember, and that includes a lot of throws not paid in the spirit of the AFL wanting to “make the game faster”!

The post above yours shows that they are now in the positive 9 years running. The last 2 years at least have been almost double the next team. Then when you add all the not paid frees something really smells fishy.

This actually a pretty decent normal distribution. It's weird in that it has occurred in such a small population.

Calculations: mean 0, standard deviation 35.8. Dogs are getting out to near 3 standard deviations from the mean.

Chance of "scoring" 91: 0.04% (this is about the same chance that someone is 6'4" in a human population)

Chance of "scoring" -81: 1.1%

It looks extreme but it's not unreasonable, from a purely statistical sense.

The problem with the "Bulldogs favouritism" theory is that it also has to explain why Richmond gets such a rough trot. I think the latter is because the Tiges try to play "unsociable football" and either get it wrong (too far over the line), or are playing "unsociable football" according to a bygone era (ten years ago) and umpiring standards have changed. Players like Riewoldt continually moaning and groaning may also get the umps offside; they are only human after all.

Now for the Dogs. Pure favouritism (in the sense of Margetts/WCE) doesn't seem to be what's going on. I think it is that Dogs have found a chink in the armour. They are coached to play in a way that the current umpiring fashion is prepared to overlook. Throwing, dropping ... the blatancy with which they do this is inexplicable, unless the explanation is that the umps are directed to overlook it. We now see players from other teams (even our own) trying it on. Cripps in round 23 tried it in the last few minutes of the game ... "oh, I'm in trouble .. I'll just let go of the ball and cause a stoppage". He'd done it all game, but the umps chose that moment to pay holding the ball for the first time! And C'wood scored a goal.

There seems to be a direct line through a "champion of the game" (Selwood) getting away with it, the Dogs' industrialisation of that exploit, and the current blight of players from all teams trying it on. All in the name of making more entertaining a game that through dint of its crowd sizes manifestly does not need that.


2 hours ago, DubDee said:

Libba out of finals. Doubt they beat Freo

This is indeed a blow. Who else do the Dogs have who can dive on the ball while simultaneously scooping it with two hands to a nearby teammate? I hope they have been training this "skill of the game".

On 8/2/2022 at 10:10 PM, DeezNuts said:

Which makes 7.8 frees differential per game on average over the 19 rounds.

That is absolutely criminal.. 

Tell me that is not biased? Surely the tigers don’t play that carelessly, this is why we need a professional umpiring review and ranking system. 

It’d be great if someone with a lot of time and the technology to do so, to develop an Unofficial umpiring decision and review website to hold them to account.

Wouldnt be hard to technically judge, we all watch other team games and realise what is BS and what is fair.

Agree with point 1.

However Tigers are incredibly careless, late & dirty, that’s why they sit bottom of the heap!

To all the theorists out there who think the umpires/AFL blatantly favour the Dogs or even cheat, how do you explain us winning the free kick count 19-13 over the Dogs in the most important game of the 2021 season?

Edited by Bring-Back-Powell

 
1 hour ago, Mazer Rackham said:

This actually a pretty decent normal distribution. It's weird in that it has occurred in such a small population.

Calculations: mean 0, standard deviation 35.8. Dogs are getting out to near 3 standard deviations from the mean.

Chance of "scoring" 91: 0.04% (this is about the same chance that someone is 6'4" in a human population)

Chance of "scoring" -81: 1.1%

It looks extreme but it's not unreasonable, from a purely statistical sense.

The problem with the "Bulldogs favouritism" theory is that it also has to explain why Richmond gets such a rough trot. I think the latter is because the Tiges try to play "unsociable football" and either get it wrong (too far over the line), or are playing "unsociable football" according to a bygone era (ten years ago) and umpiring standards have changed. Players like Riewoldt continually moaning and groaning may also get the umps offside; they are only human after all.

Now for the Dogs. Pure favouritism (in the sense of Margetts/WCE) doesn't seem to be what's going on. I think it is that Dogs have found a chink in the armour. They are coached to play in a way that the current umpiring fashion is prepared to overlook. Throwing, dropping ... the blatancy with which they do this is inexplicable, unless the explanation is that the umps are directed to overlook it. We now see players from other teams (even our own) trying it on. Cripps in round 23 tried it in the last few minutes of the game ... "oh, I'm in trouble .. I'll just let go of the ball and cause a stoppage". He'd done it all game, but the umps chose that moment to pay holding the ball for the first time! And C'wood scored a goal.

There seems to be a direct line through a "champion of the game" (Selwood) getting away with it, the Dogs' industrialisation of that exploit, and the current blight of players from all teams trying it on. All in the name of making more entertaining a game that through dint of its crowd sizes manifestly does not need that.

You’ve nailed it.

Dogs get tackled and just drop ball without penalty, and are let throw more than anyone.

In GF they weren’t given their normal treatment, with best umpires in attendance!

Selwood/Hawkins/Dangerfield/Bont protected species!

Thanks Mods for merging my thread into the correct one. 

Sorry bout that it was on the layzie side of doing things.

He he.

Nonetheless it really gets me angry how it's happening constantly.

Oh well at least they won't win a flag  this year. AGAIN.

 


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • NON-MFC: Round 11

    Round 11, the second week of The Sir Doug Nicholls Round, kicks off on Thursday night with the Cats hosting the Bulldogs at Kardinia Park. Geelong will be looking to to continue their decade long dominance over the Bulldogs, while the Dogs aim to take another big scalp as they surge up the ladder. On Friday night it's he Dreamtime at the 'G clash between Essendon and Richmond. The Bombers will want to avoid another embarrassing performance against a lowly side whilst the Tigers will be keen to avenge a disappointing loss to the Kangaroos. Saturday footy kicks off as the Blues face the Giants in a pivotal clash for both clubs. Carlton need to turn around their up and down season while GWS will be eager to bounce back and reassert themselves as a September threat. At twilight sees the Hawks taking on the Lions at the G. Hawthorn need to cement themselves in the Top 4 but they’ll need to be at their best to challenge a Brisbane side eager to respond after last week’s crushing loss to the Dees on their home turf. The first of the Saturday night double headers opens with North Melbourne up against the high-flying Magpies. The Roos will need a near-perfect performance to trouble a Collingwood side sitting atop the ladder.

      • Thanks
    • 153 replies
    Demonland
  • PREVIEW: Sydney

    The two teams competing at the MCG on Sunday afternoon have each traversed a long and arduous path since their previous encounter on a sweltering March evening in Sydney a season and a half ago. Both experienced periods of success at various times last year. The Demons ran out of steam in midseason while the Swans went on to narrowly miss the ultimate prize in the sport. Now, they find themselves outside of finals contention as the season approaches the halfway mark. The winner this week will remain in contact with the leading pack, while the loser may well find itself on a precipice, staring into the abyss. The current season has presented numerous challenges for most clubs, particularly those positioned in the middle tier. The Essendon experience in suffering a significant 91-point loss to the Bulldogs, just one week after defeating the Swans, may not be typical, but it illustrates the unpredictability of outcomes under the league’s present set up. 

      • Clap
      • Love
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 3 replies
    Demonland
  • REPORT: Brisbane

    “Max Gawn has been the heart and soul of the Dees for years now, but this recent recovery from a terrible start has been driven by him. He was everywhere again, and with the game in the balance, he took several key marks to keep the ball in the Dees forward half.” - The Monday Knee Jerk Reaction: Round Ten Of course, it wasn’t the efforts of one man that caused this monumental upset, but rather the work of the coach and his assistants and the other 22 players who took the ground, notably the likes of Jake Melksham, Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Kozzie Pickett but Max has been magnificent in taking ownership of his team and its welfare under the fire of a calamitous 0-5 start to the season. On Sunday, he provided the leadership that was needed to face up to the reigning premier and top of the ladder Brisbane Lions on their home turf and to prevail after a slow start, during which the hosts led by as much as 24 points in the second quarter. Titus O’Reily is normally comedic in his descriptions of the football but this time, he was being deadly serious. The Demons have come from a long way back and, although they still sit in the bottom third of the AFL pack, there’s a light at the end of the tunnel as they look to drive home the momentum inspired in the past four or five weeks by Max the Magnificent who was under such great pressure in those dark, early days of the season.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • CASEY: Southport

    The Southport Sharks came to Casey. They saw and they conquered a team with 16 AFL-listed players who, for the most part, wasted their time on the ground and failed to earn their keep. For the first half, the Sharks were kept in the game by the Demons’ poor use of the football, it’s disposal getting worse the closer the team got to its own goal and moreover, it got worse as the game progressed. Make no mistake, Casey was far and away the better team in the first half, it was winning the ruck duels through Tom Campbell’s solid performance but it was the scoreboard that told the story.

      • Thanks
    • 3 replies
    Demonland
  • PREGAME: Sydney

    Just a game and percentage outside the Top 8, the Demons return to Melbourne to face the Sydney Swans at the MCG, with a golden opportunity to build on the momentum from toppling the reigning premiers on their own turf. Who comes in, and who makes way?

      • Thanks
    • 341 replies
    Demonland
  • PODCAST: Brisbane

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 12th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we analyse a famous victory by the Demons over the Lions at the Gabba.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Clap
      • Love
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 35 replies
    Demonland