One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: mightytiges on June 05, 2010, 01:14:53 AM
-
Was Shane Stewart the umpire who just made one perplexing inconsistent decision after the other?
:help
-
That was fukicng ridiculous
-
i really do not understand why there is no investigation, we get abused raped stuffed over by the umps week in week out
yesterday in the first half esp. they destroyed us
-
God, where do you start??? Kosi's Lloyd-esque dive? The push in the side paid against McGuane in the scramble to rush a behind? White penalised for propping with his body behind his opponent (no hands)? The Saint who took on Tucky, was stopped cold for a play-on compared to Nahas being pinged off one step? Or the Saint who retreated across the boundary line and got away with it?
It's gotten to the stage now where we have to factor in that the umps will be against us as a weekly constant.
-
A few weeks ago against the Bombers i didnt notice but last night was stuffin B U L L poo . Umpire number 10 im sure of it
seriously wtf is going on out there.
GALE STAND UP AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. I couldnt believe what i saw last night. That Mcguane free against was a disgrace
edit: avoidance of swear filter
-
I couldnt believe what i saw last night. That Mcguane free against was a disgrace
I came home last night and watched the Fox replay to see if the decisions looked as bad on telly as they did at the ground. On the McGuane one Leigh Matthews said " It didn't look like a free kick from this angle".
-
I couldnt believe what i saw last night. That Mcguane free against was a disgrace
I came home last night and watched the Fox replay to see if the decisions looked as bad on telly as they did at the ground. On the McGuane one Leigh Matthews said " It didn't look like a free kick from this angle".
i am not one to blame umpires after the game but last night was a effin disgrace.
That Stkilda player Gilbert from memory running through the middle of the ground then gets caught but no we got nothing.
No holding the ball at all. Few minutes later we got done for holding the ball and our player had no prior.
Seriously Something needs to be done. If that was Mick or Rocket this umpiring circus would've been brought up the press conference. eff the fine and eff geesh that piece of poo . Something needs to be done.
-
Forget about the umpires and there decisions.
We got a good run against the Power the previous week, terrible against the bombers and last night.
No doubt we will get a good run next week,
-
Not good enough tho Jack, we should get a fair go every week. Not a very good ad for OPSM, certainly hasnt improved their eyesight lol :banghead
-
Once again the "marque" team gets away with murder..... while we on the other hand get pinged for every obscure rule infringement.
I know I watch games with my Yellow & Black glasses on but its getting beyond the joke.
-
Notice on the replay, the commentators were loathed to actually "commentate" on the umpiring. Probably an AFL directive not to comment on the rogering we get :banghead
-
Umpiring is bad every week. Every week.
In their defence our game is the most confusing game in the world. I took a mate from England to a game a while back and I just gave up explaining the game to him.
Holding the ball: If you have oppurtunity to dispose of teh ball you have to get rid of it or its a free kick against you. If you don't have an oppurtunity you have to look like or make an attempt to dispose of it. If your don't have an oppurtunity its a ball up. If you dive on the ball and not get it out its holding the ball. If you get tackled with one arm pinned its holding the ball. If you get tackled and the ball pops it it's sometimes holding the ball. If you get tackled mid possession and you get a grubber kick away its not holding the ball but if its a really bad grubber kick its holding the ball. If it takes a 360 degree turn in a tackle and dont dispose of it, its holding the ball - Unless your Gary Ablett.
Thats one bloody rule.
-
Umpiring is bad every week. Every week.
In their defence our game is the most confusing game in the world. I took a mate from England to a game a while back and I just gave up explaining the game to him.
Holding the ball: If you have oppurtunity to dispose of teh ball you have to get rid of it or its a free kick against you. If you don't have an oppurtunity you have to look like or make an attempt to dispose of it. If your don't have an oppurtunity its a ball up. If you dive on the ball and not get it out its holding the ball. If you get tackled with one arm pinned its holding the ball. If you get tackled and the ball pops it it's sometimes holding the ball. If you get tackled mid possession and you get a grubber kick away its not holding the ball but if its a really bad grubber kick its holding the ball. If it takes a 360 degree turn in a tackle and dont dispose of it, its holding the ball - Unless your Gary Ablett.
Thats one bloody rule.
Haha beautifully explained :thumbsup
-
God, where do you start??? Kosi's Lloyd-esque dive? The push in the side paid against McGuane in the scramble to rush a behind? White penalised for propping with his body behind his opponent (no hands)? The Saint who took on Tucky, was stopped cold for a play-on compared to Nahas being pinged off one step? Or the Saint who retreated across the boundary line and got away with it?It's gotten to the stage now where we have to factor in that the umps will be against us as a weekly constant.
I thought the McGuane one against Schneider was a shocker but the Gilbert step across the boundary line was the worst of the night IMHO - beggered belief
-
God, where do you start??? Kosi's Lloyd-esque dive? The push in the side paid against McGuane in the scramble to rush a behind? White penalised for propping with his body behind his opponent (no hands)? The Saint who took on Tucky, was stopped cold for a play-on compared to Nahas being pinged off one step? Or the Saint who retreated across the boundary line and got away with it?It's gotten to the stage now where we have to factor in that the umps will be against us as a weekly constant.
I thought the McGuane one against Schneider was a shocker but the Gilbert step across the boundary line was the worst of the night IMHO - beggered belief
Cheap goals being handed on a platter to the opposition. Maybe just maybe after our run in the third we could have been at worst level or a few kicks in front. We'll never know now if we may have won from there. Once again umpires just ruining the game. Why can't they just umpire the game as if both teams were placed one and two on the ladder? No wonder the fans are disillusioned.
-
Let's all get to the G against the eagles and make some noise and see if we can at least get a fair that way and let them know all about it if we dont! :gotigers
or when we dont, pity we cant get a home crowd at the MRP
-
sometimes l wonder how much umpires are betting on us to keep us down
-
sometimes l wonder how much umpires are betting on us to keep us down
i think theres a serious issue here. I am going to sound like a conspiracy theorist but I HAVE NO DOUBT that umps have a bet on the result, reckon he had $$$ on the saints by 40+.
Peter Carey back at waverley in the early 90's was paying free kicks for his brother in law Brian Taylor against Spud Frawley so he could get his 2 goals and reach 100. BT had pinged a hammy in the first quarter and Leigh Matthews gave him 1 quarter plonked in the square to get 100. P.Carey obliged.
-
Very poor umpiring. Why Tuck did not get a free for that tackle in the middle was disgraceful. Grossly negligent. We also appeared not have a back.
-
Very poor umpiring. Why Tuck did not get a free for that tackle in the middle was disgraceful. Grossly negligent. We also appeared not have a back.
the irony is that it was an almost identical tackle to the one he copped by Sammy Mitchell that cost us the 4 points.
It didnt bother me against the Bombers but this one was a stuffin disgrace. It had nothing to do with the result of the game we still would've lost but are they stuffin blind those pieces of scum
-
Very poor umpiring. Why Tuck did not get a free for that tackle in the middle was disgraceful. Grossly negligent. We also appeared not have a back.
the irony is that it was an almost identical tackle to the one he copped by Sammy Mitchell that cost us the 4 points.
It didnt bother me against the Bombers but this one was a effin disgrace. It had nothing to do with the result of the game we still would've lost but are they effin blind those pieces of scum
Now if I was a small man... :lol
-
Pack of whingers 8)
Most of the time I never have a problem with umpires. I support my team strongly and I know when's a free and when isn't. I find it quite funny how fans stand up and yell over frees paid or not paid when 95% of the time the decision is correct. Maybe once a month I have a problem with a decision in a Richmond game. The only problem I have is pointless 50m penalties paid because of stupid afl rules but the umpire is just following the rules but the umps should use a bit of common sense sometimes. Why do people look at frees for and against? Is there a rule that these numbers should be even? ::)
-
Pack of whingers 8)
Most of the time I never have a problem with umpires. I support my team strongly and I know when's a free and when isn't. I find it quite funny how fans stand up and yell over frees paid or not paid when 95% of the time the decision is correct. Maybe once a month I have a problem with a decision in a Richmond game. The only problem I have is pointless 50m penalties paid because of stupid afl rules but the umpire is just following the rules but the umps should use a bit of common sense sometimes. Why do people look at frees for and against? Is there a rule that these numbers should be even? ::)
When the weight of incorrect decisions begin to fool the outcome of a game, then it is worth noting. In this game there were some glaring ones but I still don't think we would of won the game. There were some Barry Crockers but that first quarter was pretty hard, and Saints defence is tighter than a fishes arse most of the time.
-
Pack of whingers 8)
Most of the time I never have a problem with umpires. I support my team strongly and I know when's a free and when isn't. I find it quite funny how fans stand up and yell over frees paid or not paid when 95% of the time the decision is correct. Maybe once a month I have a problem with a decision in a Richmond game. The only problem I have is pointless 50m penalties paid because of stupid afl rules but the umpire is just following the rules but the umps should use a bit of common sense sometimes. Why do people look at frees for and against? Is there a rule that these numbers should be even? ::)
TOTALLY AGREE! :clapping
Most supporters dont know the rules
Sitting there on Friday Night I was "'crindging" when all the Richmond supporters were abusing the umpires, not good at all.
Learn the rules.
Saying that , the free kick the saints got in the goal square was a joke, but you get on with it. We got a brillant run the week before
-
Pack of whingers 8)
Most of the time I never have a problem with umpires. I support my team strongly and I know when's a free and when isn't. I find it quite funny how fans stand up and yell over frees paid or not paid when 95% of the time the decision is correct. Maybe once a month I have a problem with a decision in a Richmond game. The only problem I have is pointless 50m penalties paid because of stupid afl rules but the umpire is just following the rules but the umps should use a bit of common sense sometimes. Why do people look at frees for and against? Is there a rule that these numbers should be even? ::)
TOTALLY AGREE! :clapping
Most supporters dont know the rules
Sitting there on Friday Night I was "'crindging" when all the Richmond supporters were abusing the umpires, not good at all.
Learn the rules.
Saying that , the free kick the saints got in the goal square was a joke, but you get on with it. We got a brillant run the week before
yeah the free against Mcguane was crap. Mcguane played well apart from 1 holding the ball. Poor bloke can't take a trick 8)
-
Give more opportunity to the game's ball-getters
GREG BAUM
June 8, 2010
IN THE white noise that surrounded the AFL's poaching of Israel Folau, there was something of a consensus that the least virtue a rugby league player might bring to the AFL was his tackling. Tacitly, this was an acknowledgement that as AFL grows more like rugby league (and rugby league more like AFL), tackling has become one of the game's pre-eminent skills. Players pride themselves on their tackle count as they once did kicks and handballs.
Correspondingly, the premium on getting the ball - once the whole purpose - is falling. Every fan can think of an instance in which a player did not dare to take possession of the loose ball, not because of a failing of courage, but because he knew that the moment he did, opponents would fall on him, the crowd would bawl for ''baaaall'', and a free kick against him might ensue.
In life, possession supposedly is nine-tenths of the law. In football, it has become an illegal act.
As football becomes compressed into half the field at a time, no player ever is very far from another, the number of tackles is rising steadily, and so is the conundrum.
This column always has argued the reward for a successful tackle is too high anyway. Tackling is a reaction, not an action, so not always worth a free kick. If a tackle jolts the ball free, that is reward enough. Only if the tackle forces an illegal disposal - a throw, for instance - should a free kick follow. Generally, umpires now recognise this.
The problem now is how little time and scope the ball-winning player is allowed. The governing principle is ''prior opportunity''. Presumably acting to instructions, umpires interpret it narrowly. A half-spin, two steps, one baulk, a sideways glance even: actions lasting merely split seconds, yet all are considered ''prior opportunity''.
Indeed, anything other than moving the ball on the instant it comes into a player's hands is ''prior opportunity''. If then caught, the game is up. In a couple of recent instances, a player has taken on his opponent, been tackled, properly disposed of the ball by hand or foot, but been penalised anyway. This is counterintuitive.
But, petrified of stoppages, the AFL still insists on a breathlessly short interpretation of what constitutes ''prior opportunity''. Few players have the ability to wiggle out of packs like Chris Judd and Gary Ablett, but all ought at least to have the incentive to try. Instead, the growing custom is to move the ball on by pushing, prodding and paddling.
If a player does take possession, is seized and goes to ground, as often as not a macabre pantomime ensues. The umpire circles, and with each split-second that he does not call for a ball-up, it becomes more certain he will pay a free against the player in notional possession.
Usually, more players pile in, opponents seeking to trap the ball under the caught player and make certain of the free kick, teammates hoping to leave the umpire no option but to call for a ball-up. Needing to adapt to survive, players have: mostly, they will nudge the ball loose, only for the same pile-up to recur. It makes for an unedifying spectacle.
Of course, some players have become experts at retaining the ball while feigning to have nothing to do with it. So be it. However rules are framed and interpreted, some will find ways of bending and exploiting them. At the moment, the presumption too often is of guilt, not innocence. Surely it is preferable that the con-artist gets away with it occasionally than the honest player is wrongly punished.
Surely, it is better to err on the side of the ball-getter.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/give-more-opportunity-to-the-games-ballgetters-20100607-xqq0.html
-
Been a long time since I read a newspaper article I so wholeheartedly agree with.
-
Pack of whingers 8)
Most of the time I never have a problem with umpires. I support my team strongly and I know when's a free and when isn't. I find it quite funny how fans stand up and yell over frees paid or not paid when 95% of the time the decision is correct. Maybe once a month I have a problem with a decision in a Richmond game. The only problem I have is pointless 50m penalties paid because of stupid afl rules but the umpire is just following the rules but the umps should use a bit of common sense sometimes. Why do people look at frees for and against? Is there a rule that these numbers should be even? ::)
TOTALLY AGREE! :clapping
Most supporters dont know the rules
Sitting there on Friday Night I was "'crindging" when all the Richmond supporters were abusing the umpires, not good at all.
Learn the rules.
Saying that , the free kick the saints got in the goal square was a joke, but you get on with it. We got a brillant run the week before
Don't tell people to learn the rules you patronising prick, we know the effing rules, we want them applied fairly and consistently across the board.
-
Pack of whingers 8)
Most of the time I never have a problem with umpires. I support my team strongly and I know when's a free and when isn't. I find it quite funny how fans stand up and yell over frees paid or not paid when 95% of the time the decision is correct. Maybe once a month I have a problem with a decision in a Richmond game. The only problem I have is pointless 50m penalties paid because of stupid afl rules but the umpire is just following the rules but the umps should use a bit of common sense sometimes. Why do people look at frees for and against? Is there a rule that these numbers should be even? ::)
TOTALLY AGREE! :clapping
Most supporters dont know the rules
Sitting there on Friday Night I was "'crindging" when all the Richmond supporters were abusing the umpires, not good at all.
Learn the rules.
Saying that , the free kick the saints got in the goal square was a joke, but you get on with it. We got a brillant run the week before
Don't tell people to learn the rules you patronising prick, we know the effing rules, we want them applied fairly and consistently across the board.
Apart from calling you a prick Jack, I agree with Owl, I also fail to see what the dream run the week before has to do with it. A bit of consistency every week is all we ask. I dont care about the tally of free kicks during the game, its more about the wheres and the the what fors. Instead of sitting there cringing, stand up and get into it...its good to vent lol :gotigers
-
ok prick was a bit harsh, how bout, patronising bastard?
Just watching the replay now and it really was poo and two sets of rules applied depending on your jumper. I think it got better after that first quarter though, with the odd glaring crap decision, but that is just normal.
-
Peter Carey back at waverley in the early 90's was paying free kicks for his brother in law Brian Taylor against Spud Frawley so he could get his 2 goals and reach 100.
Are you sure?
Peter Cameron was (and is) David Cloke's brother-in-law. I know that for a fact because I played junior footy with David's younger brother and Peter Cameron married one of his sisters.
What would be the odds of 2 players who left Richmond and went to Collingwood both having a brother-in-law as a field umpire?
-
Is it a new AFL rule that Shane Stewart umpires our games ??? :P
-
Peter Carey back at waverley in the early 90's was paying free kicks for his brother in law Brian Taylor against Spud Frawley so he could get his 2 goals and reach 100.
Are you sure?
Peter Cameron was (and is) David Cloke's brother-in-law. I know that for a fact because I played junior footy with David's younger brother and Peter Cameron married one of his sisters.
What would be the odds of 2 players who left Richmond and went to Collingwood both having a brother-in-law as a field umpire?
Was a fundraiser night for Mitcham footy club and we had the Ox, BT and scotty west come out as MC's, straight from the horses mouth FF, had us in stitches did old barge.a.r.s.e
-
Is it a new AFL rule that Shane Stewart umpires our games ??? :P
If he was wearing #13 he should be sacked cause he hates Richmond
-
Was a fundraiser night for Mitcham footy club and we had the Ox, BT and scotty west come out as MC's, straight from the horses mouth FF, had us in stitches did old barge.a.r.s.e
Thanks for the info.
Maybe there are more family members/in-laws of players umpiring them at the top level.
No surprise it's kept quiet if there are.