![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
@ bluthy
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
What? Why? Each team has different players and plays a different game style, so why should the counts end up equal?stinger wrote:to me free kicks are a bit like playing two up.........play long enough and there should be an even number somewhere along the line...
And I don't believe that Schneider's inability to win a fair share of free kicks since he sarcastically 'clapped' that umpire is a pure co-incidence.desertsaint wrote:We're a little club. At the back of their minds there's less pressure making wrong calls against us than against a big club.
We need to bring them to account publicly. It can hardly get worse. One of the smartest things Hird did as captain of Essendon was to publicly name an umpire that he felt held a bias against his club. After a week of bull and repatriation it all settled down, and Essendon benefitted immediately by umpires not wanting to be seen as holding a grudge, especially after Hird's apology and mandatory rehabilitation program.
We all know about 'whispers in the sky' and the effect of Thomas's criticisms - but he was seen as an upstart lucky to be an afl coach. More importantly there was no apology and pretend reconditioning. Get a respected player like Hayes to bring it up. Trouble is Hayes is more the type to wear it and soldier on.
Actually you are misquoting Occam's Razor, what it actually says is the "hypothesis with the fewest number of assumptions should be selected".WellardSaint wrote:Some ppl have suggested that umps can be bought off by criminals to influence a result.
Well, it would be too hard to involve players unless it was something like that Filth defender who started a game in the F50. Bets were placed on him kicking first goal.
There are 22 players; but only 3 field umps;
they are held sacred and untouchable, criticism by footy officials is a guaranteed fine; journos risk sanctions by the AFL.
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely" it has been said.
The Vatican gets away with a lot of stuff because of who they are. Allegations that Pope JP 1 was poisoned; no autopsy permitted on a Pontiff (supposed to be thinking of allowing contraception, etc, far too progressive, upset the Old Guard with his planned radical changes).
If you're not held accountable, you can get away with MURDER.
Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
How else to explain radical and abrupt 360 turn around in the umpiring on Sunday?
It's a solid theory and definitely high on my list.SinCitySainter wrote:Actually you are misquoting Occam's Razor, what it actually says is the "hypothesis with the fewest number of assumptions should be selected".WellardSaint wrote:Some ppl have suggested that umps can be bought off by criminals to influence a result.
Well, it would be too hard to involve players unless it was something like that Filth defender who started a game in the F50. Bets were placed on him kicking first goal.
There are 22 players; but only 3 field umps;
they are held sacred and untouchable, criticism by footy officials is a guaranteed fine; journos risk sanctions by the AFL.
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely" it has been said.
The Vatican gets away with a lot of stuff because of who they are. Allegations that Pope JP 1 was poisoned; no autopsy permitted on a Pontiff (supposed to be thinking of allowing contraception, etc, far too progressive, upset the Old Guard with his planned radical changes).
If you're not held accountable, you can get away with MURDER.
Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
How else to explain radical and abrupt 360 turn around in the umpiring on Sunday?
To state deliberate collusion would require a conspiracy on the scale of believing the moon landings never happened.
We are a small club so it is far easier to dismiss our protestations than the bigger clubs.
Umpires are human they know that decisions that go against us do not receive the same level of critical analysis as would a decision against say Collingwood.
Imagine the press in Perth had the game gone the other way around.
The umpires would have been pilloried but in Melbourne because of who we are the discussion is "Oh well you only have yourselves to blame".
Umpires are just human and human nature dictates that we take the path of least resistance in most things.
So it goes with umpires it is easier to err on the side of the big clubs than the small.
By definition Occam's razor supports this and not some conspiracy theory.
I see only one flaw in this plan and that is the four week suspension that would go with breaking the cheaters jaw.stevie wrote:If the cheats are going to win a free kick anyway, instead of tackling them, just ram them in the head with a well placed knee or hip.
A broken jaw or worse will soon stop the pieces of s***
Yeah true, bro. But by God it would be refreshingSinCitySainter wrote:I see only one flaw in this plan and that is the four week suspension that would go with breaking the cheaters jaw.stevie wrote:If the cheats are going to win a free kick anyway, instead of tackling them, just ram them in the head with a well placed knee or hip.
A broken jaw or worse will soon stop the pieces of s***
Love your work ace.ace wrote:Andrew Demetriou has never forgiven Ross Oakley then CEO of the AFL for not stepping in to save Demetriou's North Meblourne from the brink.
Demetriou is determined to get revenge on Oakley by destroying St Kilda.
Destroying St Kilda with plausible deniability while creating an illusion that he is there to help.
When the club becomes the Wellington Saints he may be satisified.
Cane toads go "corrupt, corrupt, corrupt".
Demetriou is a cane toad.
excellent post mm.....Mr Magic wrote:And I don't believe that Schneider's inability to win a fair share of free kicks since he sarcastically 'clapped' that umpire is a pure co-incidence.desertsaint wrote:We're a little club. At the back of their minds there's less pressure making wrong calls against us than against a big club.
We need to bring them to account publicly. It can hardly get worse. One of the smartest things Hird did as captain of Essendon was to publicly name an umpire that he felt held a bias against his club. After a week of bull and repatriation it all settled down, and Essendon benefitted immediately by umpires not wanting to be seen as holding a grudge, especially after Hird's apology and mandatory rehabilitation program.
We all know about 'whispers in the sky' and the effect of Thomas's criticisms - but he was seen as an upstart lucky to be an afl coach. More importantly there was no apology and pretend reconditioning. Get a respected player like Hayes to bring it up. Trouble is Hayes is more the type to wear it and soldier on.
If I take the next step then it seems unbelievable to me that all umpires individually came to the conclusion to 'punish' him for his 'act of disrespect' to that umpire.
So why does it continue to occur, years after the incident took place?
Why does Lindsay Thomas, a renowned and publicly outed 'free kick cheat' continue to get awarded free kicks at the slightest touch, yet Milne needs to actually 'show the bullet hole' to an umpire to get anything?
If you put a camera on Roo for the whole game I believe you would see that he is infringed against in nearly ever marking contest and yet he averages a little more than 1 free kick per game over his career (and fans from other teams often jeer that he is a 'protected species')
As for 'holding the ball' and 'incorrect disposal', those rules make the weekly MRP chooklotto look like a well oiled and transparent system.
Now as regards to the 'dropping the knees' and/or 'ducking the head' tactics that seem to have been mastered by an ever growing number of players, it would seem that Bartlett (Rules Committee) gave us all the answer - I believe he stated that Razor Ray's interpretation of the rule as stated to Ablett was correct - it's only a 'play on' if the player ducking is using his head as a battering ram.
Therefore there is nothing in the actual rules to say it is not legal to wriggle/wrestle/contort/duck yourself so as to draw high/low contact and win a free kick. The only proviso seemingly is the umpires' opinion on whether you've taken too long to do that? Freom the replay of Sunday's game it appeared that the 3 umpires felt trhat no WCE player could be tackled long enough to reach that point.
If that is going to continue then we better either stop tackling or learn to combat it.