Frees for and against.
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23098
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9036 times
- Been thanked: 3929 times
Frees for and against.
Saints v Filth 18 for....25 against. 17 point loss
Saints v Shockers 24 for....27 against. 10 point win.
Saints v Tigers 27 for .....19 against. 33 point win.
Saints v Shockers 24 for....27 against. 10 point win.
Saints v Tigers 27 for .....19 against. 33 point win.
Last edited by saynta on Sun 03 Apr 2022 7:50pm, edited 4 times in total.
- WellardSaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8338
- Joined: Sat 26 May 2012 11:25am
- Location: Perth- the best weather in Oz, but the worst rednecks.
- Has thanked: 1896 times
- Been thanked: 880 times
Re: Frees for and against.
Jack Hayes tackled a Docker, and maggot pinged him for 'rough tackle'.
Goal.
About 2 mins later, Crouch earned a free for an almost identical tackle. WTAF.
Another one- just below where I was sitting, Higgins on the flank near 50, kicked towards goal, was pushed right in the back, not the side, nothing. We all screamed at Ump #29.
There were a lot more that were either not paid to us, or paid against us.
Oh, there was one in the Freo fwd 50 where the ump closest to play, his head spun around to an ump 40m away, then decided to give Freo a free. We were dumbfounded.
Goal.
About 2 mins later, Crouch earned a free for an almost identical tackle. WTAF.
Another one- just below where I was sitting, Higgins on the flank near 50, kicked towards goal, was pushed right in the back, not the side, nothing. We all screamed at Ump #29.
There were a lot more that were either not paid to us, or paid against us.
Oh, there was one in the Freo fwd 50 where the ump closest to play, his head spun around to an ump 40m away, then decided to give Freo a free. We were dumbfounded.
A real Sainter will pledge allegiance to the β€ and despise the Pies, the Blues, and the Injectors.
Remember one of the 10 Commandments : Thou shalt have no other team before thee
Remember one of the 10 Commandments : Thou shalt have no other team before thee
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10332
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 147 times
- Been thanked: 1320 times
Re: Frees for and against.
Collingwood on Saturday 30-14 so they are 23 in the positive in two games.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10332
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 147 times
- Been thanked: 1320 times
Re: Frees for and against.
Collingwood also scored 33 points from free kicks in the first half.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13956
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1314 times
- Been thanked: 2083 times
Re: Frees for and against.
Imagine coming home from the west complaining that the free count was 24-27
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23098
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9036 times
- Been thanked: 3929 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10332
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 147 times
- Been thanked: 1320 times
Re: Frees for and against.
As a StKilda supporter your right given we are generally 10 down. In saying that if the umpiring was non biased we would have won by 7 goals.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
- Ghost Like
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6562
- Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2007 10:04pm
- Has thanked: 5788 times
- Been thanked: 1909 times
Re: Frees for and against.
saynta,
This will be a good thread to bump each week with an update...
Saints v Filth 18 for....25 against. - LOSS 17 points
Saints v Shockers 24 for....27 against. - WIN 10 points
This will be a good thread to bump each week with an update...
Saints v Filth 18 for....25 against. - LOSS 17 points
Saints v Shockers 24 for....27 against. - WIN 10 points
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23098
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9036 times
- Been thanked: 3929 times
Re: Frees for and against.
Done.Ghost Like wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 2:15pm saynta,
This will be a good thread to bump each week with an update...
Saints v Filth 18 for....25 against. - LOSS 17 points
Saints v Shockers 24 for....27 against. - WIN 10 points
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13956
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1314 times
- Been thanked: 2083 times
Re: Frees for and against.
And if yourself and Stinger were non biased we wouldn't have multiple umpiring threads every single week.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10332
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 147 times
- Been thanked: 1320 times
Re: Frees for and against.
What did you think Dud of the umpire deciding to ignore Max getting taken high in the first?
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23098
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9036 times
- Been thanked: 3929 times
Re: Frees for and against.
He wouldn't know. He wasn't even watching.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13956
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1314 times
- Been thanked: 2083 times
Re: Frees for and against.
Stinger is right, I missed the start of the game but saw a replay of that incident, and it was obviously a mistake by the umpires, as they are human...
From when I did start watching the umpiring was fine, and I saw us receive multiple shots at goal from free kicks.
Also yourself and the rest getting all hot under the collar about the last free and goal to Freo is exactly why the umps can never win. That was 100% the correct decision according to the rules, but as you don't understand the rule you abuse the ump. Its a bad rule, not bad umpiring.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10332
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 147 times
- Been thanked: 1320 times
Re: Frees for and against.
So what your saying is that a umpire in full sight missed the most obvious free but then pulled a speculative free to gift them a goal. Thats what you said right?The_Dud wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 4:09pmStinger is right, I missed the start of the game but saw a replay of that incident, and it was obviously a mistake by the umpires, as they are human...
From when I did start watching the umpiring was fine, and I saw us receive multiple shots at goal from free kicks.
Also yourself and the rest getting all hot under the collar about the last free and goal to Freo is exactly why the umps can never win. That was 100% the correct decision according to the rules, but as you don't understand the rule you abuse the ump. Its a bad rule, not bad umpiring.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4987
- Joined: Tue 13 Jun 2017 1:16pm
- Has thanked: 1432 times
- Been thanked: 1469 times
Re: Frees for and against.
If there is an impenetrable pack, such as Darrah found himself at the bottom of it, and the umpire decides he is not going to bounce i.e. there is no scrum time limit, it is then incumbent on the ump to communicate: sing out loudly and often "play on. play on, until your arms give out, play on". But to do nothing waiting an inordinate amount of time until the bewildered players finally look up/around thinking WTF, has the ump fainted, then saying "gotcha" you stopped trying to punch a ball that was never going to be able to come out, is very poor umpiring. Entrapment.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12789
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 801 times
- Been thanked: 428 times
Re: Frees for and against.
Actually I think you are incorrect.The_Dud wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 4:09pmStinger is right, I missed the start of the game but saw a replay of that incident, and it was obviously a mistake by the umpires, as they are human...
From when I did start watching the umpiring was fine, and I saw us receive multiple shots at goal from free kicks.
Also yourself and the rest getting all hot under the collar about the last free and goal to Freo is exactly why the umps can never win. That was 100% the correct decision according to the rules, but as you don't understand the rule you abuse the ump. Its a bad rule, not bad umpiring.
The rule is perfectly fine - it's there to stop one player smashing a defenseless player into the turf and possibly causing head damage.
A perfectly reasonable rule that I've seen perfectly umpired on numerous occasions.
In the instance on Sunday night I believe the umpire thought that Hayes was going to smash the Freo player's head into the turf and blew the whistle.
He was wrong - it never happened and once again an incorrect decision was adjudicated because an umpire guessed instead if paying what he actually saw.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4987
- Joined: Tue 13 Jun 2017 1:16pm
- Has thanked: 1432 times
- Been thanked: 1469 times
Re: Frees for and against.
Possibly three worse decisions/non decisions this weekend. Max head bump, play on. Lachie O'Brien Blues, dives in fair tackle, free, goal. Free against Hayes for a perfect tackle.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23098
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9036 times
- Been thanked: 3929 times
Re: Frees for and against.
CURLY wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 4:15pmSo what your saying is that a umpire in full sight missed the most obvious free but then pulled a speculative free to gift them a goal. Thats what you said right?The_Dud wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 4:09pmStinger is right, I missed the start of the game but saw a replay of that incident, and it was obviously a mistake by the umpires, as they are human...
From when I did start watching the umpiring was fine, and I saw us receive multiple shots at goal from free kicks.
Also yourself and the rest getting all hot under the collar about the last free and goal to Freo is exactly why the umps can never win. That was 100% the correct decision according to the rules, but as you don't understand the rule you abuse the ump. Its a bad rule, not bad umpiring.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10598
- Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005 7:04pm
- Location: North
- Has thanked: 1011 times
- Been thanked: 1055 times
Re: Frees for and against.
I think in the case of the free against Hayes, the umpire was actually behind Hayes and Collyer. We had the benefit of the front on TV view and IMO it was never a free kick. It wasn't a dangerous tackle. It was just a good solid tackle. Maybe the ump being behind the two players gave him the impression it was something more than it was.The_Dud wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 4:09pmStinger is right, I missed the start of the game but saw a replay of that incident, and it was obviously a mistake by the umpires, as they are human...
From when I did start watching the umpiring was fine, and I saw us receive multiple shots at goal from free kicks.
Also yourself and the rest getting all hot under the collar about the last free and goal to Freo is exactly why the umps can never win. That was 100% the correct decision according to the rules, but as you don't understand the rule you abuse the ump. Its a bad rule, not bad umpiring.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23098
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9036 times
- Been thanked: 3929 times
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 466
- Joined: Thu 29 Sep 2011 12:24pm
- Location: Central Coast
- Has thanked: 210 times
- Been thanked: 58 times
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13956
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1314 times
- Been thanked: 2083 times
Re: Frees for and against.
If you pin both arms, then dump/slam/sling the player, itβs a free regardless of if they injure themselves or not. They punish the action (in this case) and not the outcome.Mr Magic wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 4:20pmActually I think you are incorrect.The_Dud wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 4:09pmStinger is right, I missed the start of the game but saw a replay of that incident, and it was obviously a mistake by the umpires, as they are human...
From when I did start watching the umpiring was fine, and I saw us receive multiple shots at goal from free kicks.
Also yourself and the rest getting all hot under the collar about the last free and goal to Freo is exactly why the umps can never win. That was 100% the correct decision according to the rules, but as you don't understand the rule you abuse the ump. Its a bad rule, not bad umpiring.
The rule is perfectly fine - it's there to stop one player smashing a defenseless player into the turf and possibly causing head damage.
A perfectly reasonable rule that I've seen perfectly umpired on numerous occasions.
In the instance on Sunday night I believe the umpire thought that Hayes was going to smash the Freo player's head into the turf and blew the whistle.
He was wrong - it never happened and once again an incorrect decision was adjudicated because an umpire guessed instead if paying what he actually saw.
Only a few years ago it was a perfect tackle, though for at least the last 2 seasons it is no longer.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13956
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1314 times
- Been thanked: 2083 times
Re: Frees for and against.
How can any of us speculate on what kind of sight he had on the play?CURLY wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 4:15pmSo what your saying is that a umpire in full sight missed the most obvious free but then pulled a speculative free to gift them a goal. Thats what you said right?The_Dud wrote: βMon 28 Mar 2022 4:09pmStinger is right, I missed the start of the game but saw a replay of that incident, and it was obviously a mistake by the umpires, as they are human...
From when I did start watching the umpiring was fine, and I saw us receive multiple shots at goal from free kicks.
Also yourself and the rest getting all hot under the collar about the last free and goal to Freo is exactly why the umps can never win. That was 100% the correct decision according to the rules, but as you don't understand the rule you abuse the ump. Its a bad rule, not bad umpiring.
Umpires make mistakes across every sport in the world, why do you expect AFL umpires to be perfect?
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
- Waltzing St Kilda
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2159
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2010 5:20am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 357 times
Re: Frees for and against.
Frees in front of goal at crucial times of a game should only be paid if they're clear and indisputable.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12463
- Joined: Thu 04 Jul 2019 8:53pm
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 2662 times