Nine umpires not enough?
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- kosifantutti23
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: Fri 26 Sep 2008 12:55am
- Location: Horgen
Nine umpires not enough?
Not one of them saw the ball deflect of Gwilt's hand before going through the goal. And none of the field umpires saw why he only had one hand up.
Furtius Quo Rdelious
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1093
- Joined: Fri 30 Jul 2004 6:12pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Nine umpires not enough?
I saw it from Sydney, when it happened live - didn't even need the replay. Having said that we got one back with Milne kicking that goal to put us 87-81 up.kosifantutti23 wrote:Not one of them saw the ball deflect of Gwilt's hand before going through the goal. And none of the field umpires saw why he only had one hand up.
UP THE SAINTERS!
Re: Nine umpires not enough?
See Mortons mark ..?kosifantutti23 wrote:Not one of them saw the ball deflect of Gwilt's hand before going through the goal. And none of the field umpires saw why he only had one hand up.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Jack Newnes happy to be a Saint !!!! PS and to hit a target !!!
- kosifantutti23
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: Fri 26 Sep 2008 12:55am
- Location: Horgen
Re: Nine umpires not enough?
Did you see them three times in our forward 50 in the last quarter refuse to pay holding the ball against Richmond, despite paying it for similar things all night.?Middo wrote:See Mortons mark ..?kosifantutti23 wrote:Not one of them saw the ball deflect of Gwilt's hand before going through the goal. And none of the field umpires saw why he only had one hand up.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
If those three frees had been paid we could have won by three points.
Furtius Quo Rdelious
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1093
- Joined: Fri 30 Jul 2004 6:12pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Nine umpires not enough?
Funny but undoubtedly true.kosifantutti23 wrote:If those three frees had been paid we could have won by three points.
UP THE SAINTERS!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23208
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 735 times
- Been thanked: 1776 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5109
- Joined: Wed 04 Aug 2004 3:18pm
- Has thanked: 12 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
Looking forward to this stat , usually has it in herald sun. The holding the ball decision had me. Umpire no 7 paid about 4 down in Richmonds forward 50, Last quarter gram sitting on guy exactly the same as richmond had sat on us and it was called that gram wasnt tackling??? WTF? I still find it hard to believe that a player can actually sit on a guys back and it be called holding the ball. Would rather that it not be called at all, game would have gone in our favourTeflon wrote:The worst umpiring in a game Ive ever seen.
Inconsistent decision making that left players baffled.
But we'll make no noise and bring no attention to being bent over.
What were the final "goals from frees" numbers?
- desertsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10404
- Joined: Sun 27 Apr 2008 2:02pm
- Location: out there
- Has thanked: 186 times
- Been thanked: 701 times
shocking umpiring - both ways - but we got much the worse of it - of course the media will only harp on about the deliberate behind.
i also wonder about the lack of innovation in players. right at the end - havent seen a replay so dont know the players involved, one player blocked anothers attempt at a shot, so the player in posession froze - why not a thumping handball over heads for a winning behind? do they coach for this contingency? could win a match or two every year.
i also wonder about the lack of innovation in players. right at the end - havent seen a replay so dont know the players involved, one player blocked anothers attempt at a shot, so the player in posession froze - why not a thumping handball over heads for a winning behind? do they coach for this contingency? could win a match or two every year.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "