Is umpire Umpire Foote a cheat or just blind

[Enrico_Misso]

On another note there is an (internet) rumour that in the last qtr one of the umps didn't blow for time off and as a result the quarter was 30 seconds short.
A lot can happen in 30 seconds in a one kick game.

Does anyone know anything about this?

[CURLY]

On another note there is an (internet) rumour that in the last qtr one of the umps didn't blow for time off and as a result the quarter was 30 seconds short.
A lot can happen in 30 seconds in a one kick game.

Does anyone know anything about this?

Will end up with the high performance drug level of the Collingwood players in the 2010 GF. The AFL to hard basket.

[st.byron]

The more blatant error was the free-kick that was missed in the third against the Brisbane player directly in front when he got tackled and dropped the ball.

The other bad miss was when Kent was pushed in the back at the throw in.

Kent was blocking and that was either sheparding or in the back, my call is in the back.
Definitely missed one there IMO.
Romas was soft and wasn't that umpire #2?

I really cannot understand the focus on umpiring and the belief we get shafted every week.
It was 11/11 against the Lions and there were soft ones given to both and plenty missed for both.

If some could look objectively there would be perspective.

There is the odd game where we have a howler from the umps like the WC game this year and those where we were the beneficiary of the umpires shocker such as the PA game.

Umpiring didn't cost us the game yesterday, the horrendous set shot kicking by the Lions kept us in the hunt when I thought we'd be blown away.

Re the soft Roma free kick immediately after half time:

At half time the umpires are coached as well.

Perhaps it was brought to umpire Foote’s attention that he had not yet paid a free kick to St Kilda, that several had been missed and that he overlooked a definite 50 metre penalty.

Perhaps umpire Foote has this in mind when judging that contest where the free could have gone either way or he could have called play on. Instead he was super keen to pay the first free he could to a St Kilda player. It was a token effort to try to prove that he had no bias. To me it just said that the umpiring department have started to question whether he is perhaps biased and now he had to do something obvious to disprove it.

So your case is...

- hypothetically the umpires coach realized Foote is biased against St Kilda and spoke to him at half time
- hypothetically after being exposed, Foote consciously chose to gift St Kilda a free in front of goal to cover his tracks, that'll throw them off the trail thought Foote.

And you summarize that the umpiring department is NOW awake to the fact that umpire Foote hates St Kilda and deliberately cheats against us and the free to Roma was a cover?

Can't say I see a lot of logic in that theory BFUSA as you assume the umpires coach (who may or may not have been at the game, pulled him up at 1/2 time) has never noticed this blatant cheating until Sunday and that Footes performances against St kilda over the past seasons have not been reviewed. Or is it that the whole umpires department is part of the bias?

I'm planning to watch the replay this week, I never bother watching umpire numbers but I'll take notice if you can actually see the umpires awarding and see if Foote actually pays any frees to us.

I remember another poster stating Foote was 11/0 against us in one match as if it was a statistical fact, only for another poster to watch a replay and point out three frees paid to us in a quarter.

For what it is worth I find the persecution complex around umpiring inaccurate and one particular poster to be pulling the chain of all on this forum with their comments, but by blocking that poster on game day I am able to read through & enjoy the match day thread and only come across the ramblings when quoted by another.

Re the persecution complex regarding umpiring - I completely agree. If you go to the Druggies or I’m betting any other club’s forum, you’ll find exactly the same content with Essendon et al substituted for St. Kilda. Every team has supporters that constantly repeat the same “they’re out to get us....we’re being shafted.....the umpires are cheats” refrains. And no amount of arguing or pleas for a broader perspective or common sense will convince them otherwise. In fact calling out the one eyed rinse and repeat only makes it stronger.

I reckon you’d struggle to find too much moaning after any home game played by WCE in Perth

Oh completely agree that umpiring at WCE home games is on another planet. Richo summed it up with his “noise of affirmation” comments.

[st.byron]

That’s just factually wrong.

Try again.

Actually, it is correct that WCE have a massive home ground free kick advantage. The stats show their frees for and against are massively lopsided. Check this out. On page 5 or 6 it shows where WCE ranked in frees for and against differential from 2006 - 2018. 9 times ranked # 1.

http://media.news.com.au/multimedia/201 ... alysis.pdf

A sobering reality for any consideration of a Perth GF.

[The_Dud]

That’s just factually wrong.

Try again.

Actually, it is correct that WCE have a massive home ground free kick advantage. The stats show their frees for and against are massively lopsided. Check this out. On page 5 or 6 it shows where WCE ranked in frees for and against differential from 2006 - 2018. 9 times ranked # 1.

http://media.news.com.au/multimedia/201 ... alysis.pdf

A sobering reality for any consideration of a Perth GF.

Yeah I don't doubt the WCE do well at home, I was referring to saynta's claim that we are at the bottom of the frees for and against difference year after year. Absolutely incorrect, as that doc you attached shows.

Also what I found interesting from it is that frees for/against numbers have no bearing the it comes to who wins premierships.

[saynta]

Those charts actually conform what i was saying except I should have said "at or near".

"The Saints have been sinners. From ranked first in 2009 through to continuously being one of the lowest teams for lowest free kicks. Do the Saints fans need to have a bigger voice like the West Coast, Adelaide and Collingwood fans? We heard it on Sunday in Round 20 against Fremantle? Let’s see in 2020.St Kilda"


"Who are the sinners?The biggest sinners for free kicks against are GWS and St.Kilda.GWS had a dream run in their first year to be third highest for total free kicks % to their advantage. It’s been all downhill from there. Maybe it’s their style of play, or it’s the lack of crowd, but it is very low."

'Home fans impac, The impact of the home fans is substantial. Just looking at the last 8 years that all 18 teams have been in the AFL, the home fans have made the difference. West Coast average 5 more free kicks at home than their opposition. The bottom of the list are St.Kilda who average 0.2free kicks less per game at home than their opposition. Could it be that the Saints have been really poor or is it time for their fans to fire up?"

[Mr Magic]

I just watched the replay of King's mark in the last quarter and I'm astonished no 50m penalty was paid.
The vision clearly shows Zorko go to ground to grab King after he's taken the mark.
One could argue that the umpire's whistle blew (to pay the mark) as Zorko grabbed King but the umpire clearly tells Zorko it's a mark and to let go.
Zorko's response was to swear (F-bomb) and the umpire clearly hears it and tells him 'relax stand up'.
In what part of AFL rules does it give the umpire the opportunity to ignore blatant dissent to a decision including swearing?
Absolutely should have been a 50m and a kick from the goal line.
Umpire #2

[saynta]

I just watched the replay of King's mark in the last quarter and I'm astonished no 50m penalty was paid.
The vision clearly shows Zorko go to ground to grab King after he's taken the mark.
One could argue that the umpire's whistle blew (to pay the mark) as Zorko grabbed King but the umpire clearly tells Zorko it's a mark and to let go.
Zorko's response was to swear (F-bomb) and the umpire clearly hears it and tells him 'relax stand up'.
In what part of AFL rules does it give the umpire the opportunity to ignore blatant dissent to a decision including swearing?
Absolutely should have been a 50m and a kick from the goal line.
Umpire #2

What ever you want to call it, for mine that is clearly cheating.

[StPeter]

I just watched the replay of King's mark in the last quarter and I'm astonished no 50m penalty was paid.
The vision clearly shows Zorko go to ground to grab King after he's taken the mark.
One could argue that the umpire's whistle blew (to pay the mark) as Zorko grabbed King but the umpire clearly tells Zorko it's a mark and to let go.
Zorko's response was to swear (F-bomb) and the umpire clearly hears it and tells him 'relax stand up'.
In what part of AFL rules does it give the umpire the opportunity to ignore blatant dissent to a decision including swearing?
Absolutely should have been a 50m and a kick from the goal line.
Umpire #2

Why am I not surprised. We probably should consider ourselves fortunate he paid the mark!

[StPeter]

Umpires this week against Melbourne again include Nick Foot (2) and Andrew Stephens (12).

We are in for another bumpy ride!!

[tonyh]

2016 Finals: Dogs 79 frees for 48 frees against (incl GF for 20 against 9). So much for what someone said re umpiring does not decide premierships

[longtimesaint]

Stephens was the self confessed Hawks supporter who helped the Hawks best us at Launceston a few years ago.
Foote always gives us a very hard time paying 50/50 frees against us and only blatant ones for.

[The_Dud]

Stephens was the self confessed Hawks supporter who helped the Hawks best us at Launceston a few years ago.
Foote always gives us a very hard time paying 50/50 frees against us and only blatant ones for.

Leigh Fisher?

[longtimesaint]

Leigh Fisher was a Saints player and is a fair umpire.

[The_Dud]

Leigh Fisher was a Saints player and is a fair umpire.

So the ‘Hawks supporter’ is bias but the ex-player isn’t? Cool.

[longtimesaint]

Leigh Fisher was a Saints player and is a fair umpire.

So the ‘Hawks supporter’ is bias but the ex-player isn’t? Cool.

He was in that particular match and if anything Fisher seems to work extra hard not to favour the Saints while remaining fair.

[saynta]

Leigh Fisher was a Saints player and is a fair umpire.

Very fair actually and also very good. GOOD ENOUGH TO GET A FINAL THIS YEAR .

Stands to reason someone who actually played the game would have a better feel for it and an understanding of the rules than a little nerdy twerp like Foote who was probably bullied at school by the jocks.

[StPeter]

Stephens was the self confessed Hawks supporter who helped the Hawks best us at Launceston a few years ago.
Foote always gives us a very hard time paying 50/50 frees against us and only blatant ones for.

Leigh Fisher?

I don't think Leigh Fisher has umpired a St Kilda match all year.

Foot is coming up for his 4th or possibly his 5th. Similarly with Stephens.

[saynta]

Leigh might have umpired one Saints gamey from memory.

I seem to remember Chuck going off his nut over that fact.

[Joffa Burns]

Like my question in the other post about winning the game, where did I write they were cheating?

It’s a cheap shot.

By they, I assume we refer umpires, so could you please refer me to the post where I accused you of stating umpires cheat.

I have used this generically as it is a common phrase on this forum used by some posters, but to the best of my knowledge it has not been direct specifically at you at any point in time, unless you can show me otherwise.

But again Joffa, why do you keep straw manning me?

I am at a loss to understand to what you refer?
Again, meaning plural, what was the first question or what were the previous instances? This was your first quote directed at me, I checked in notifications. And keep straw manning, making the statement this is repetitive behavior.

Straw manning you?
I was not familiar with the term so looked it up and its quite ironic that you have made this accusation when in the first instance you have accused me of a statement I did not write, and have referred to again when there was no previous question. Is straw manning not exaggeration of a point of view to suit ones purpose?

I’m happy to carry on the conversation but you’ll need to bring me up to speed on the content please.

Come off it Joffa. You wrote it.

I’m sure you can read your own posts and the words you used.

Seriously st pav, I have looked at my posts from this morning and cannot find it, can you share it with me I am at a loss on this one.

First post at 11:30am

“Umpiring didn't cost us the game yesterday, the horrendous set shot kicking by the Lions kept us in the hunt when I thought we'd be blown away”.

Second post at 5:24pm

“Personally I couldn't give a rats ringer about umpires, I barely notice them and can't comprehend the obsession with their cheating, but each to their own”.

Thanks St Pav, but where do I accuse you of writing or stating umpires are cheats or straw manning you?
I am not winding you up, I am genuinely confused.

Well, that was the strong implication as you were directly responding to my post were you not?

If you sincerely wanted to clarify your post and any misunderstanding, you could have just said “I wasn’t specifically referring to you” which will clear it all up rather than trying to be clever.

First quote a very long stretch and totally unrelated to second quote. I see why you think the second quote was specifically directed at you, however it was not and poorly worded as the intention was to comment generically around the opinion of many who post that umpires deliberately cheat against us week after week.

The straw manning comments where totally unfounded IMO and not sure where I’m trying to be clever, as anyone who knows me understands I am an uneducated bogan.

Perhaps that’s why you wrote “trying”.

[Mr Magic]

I didn’t notice the umpires last night
Other than the HTB decision still seems a chooklotto

[Joffa Burns]

I didn’t notice the umpires last night
Other than the HTB decision still seems a chooklotto

Maybe one holding the ball against Zac appeared a shocker, and the ruck wrestling was anyone’s guess therefore letting it go was the best option and they did.

Howard copped a big in the back that he didn’t receive but also thought Steele laid a couple of high tackles that weren’t called. Steele moving into that respect category that seems to provide a little leniency.

Can’t say I noticed them much at all, pretty decent Jon IMO.

[CURLY]

Pettracca’s first goal was the result of a horrendous free kick Foote stood z meter away from Marshall and King getting monstered but refused to pay a free.

[SaintPav]

Like my question in the other post about winning the game, where did I write they were cheating?

It’s a cheap shot.

By they, I assume we refer umpires, so could you please refer me to the post where I accused you of stating umpires cheat.

I have used this generically as it is a common phrase on this forum used by some posters, but to the best of my knowledge it has not been direct specifically at you at any point in time, unless you can show me otherwise.

But again Joffa, why do you keep straw manning me?

I am at a loss to understand to what you refer?
Again, meaning plural, what was the first question or what were the previous instances? This was your first quote directed at me, I checked in notifications. And keep straw manning, making the statement this is repetitive behavior.

Straw manning you?
I was not familiar with the term so looked it up and its quite ironic that you have made this accusation when in the first instance you have accused me of a statement I did not write, and have referred to again when there was no previous question. Is straw manning not exaggeration of a point of view to suit ones purpose?

I’m happy to carry on the conversation but you’ll need to bring me up to speed on the content please.

Come off it Joffa. You wrote it.

I’m sure you can read your own posts and the words you used.

Seriously st pav, I have looked at my posts from this morning and cannot find it, can you share it with me I am at a loss on this one.

First post at 11:30am

“Umpiring didn't cost us the game yesterday, the horrendous set shot kicking by the Lions kept us in the hunt when I thought we'd be blown away”.

Second post at 5:24pm

“Personally I couldn't give a rats ringer about umpires, I barely notice them and can't comprehend the obsession with their cheating, but each to their own”.

Thanks St Pav, but where do I accuse you of writing or stating umpires are cheats or straw manning you?
I am not winding you up, I am genuinely confused.

Well, that was the strong implication as you were directly responding to my post were you not?

If you sincerely wanted to clarify your post and any misunderstanding, you could have just said “I wasn’t specifically referring to you” which will clear it all up rather than trying to be clever.

First quote a very long stretch and totally unrelated to second quote. I see why you think the second quote was specifically directed at you, however it was not and poorly worded as the intention was to comment generically around the opinion of many who post that umpires deliberately cheat against us week after week.

The straw manning comments where totally unfounded IMO and not sure where I’m trying to be clever, as anyone who knows me understands I am an uneducated bogan.

Perhaps that’s why you wrote “trying”.

Ok. I accept that.

I probably got caught up in the heat of the monent.

Bygones.

Cheers

[saynta]

Pettracca’s first goal was the result of a horrendous free kick Foote stood z meter away from Marshall and King getting monstered but refused to pay a free.

King was actually infringed every time he went for a mark bar the nifty little pass fro Phillips, but the maggots still get a pass mark from me. Looks like Foote has had someone else's foot placed firmly up his arse.