Exactly, dubious indeed. Some on here dont even think they were dubious free kicks...quite obviously they'd prefer to blame the players, and only the players. Leave the umpires out of it according to them.Animal Enclosure wrote:Anyone who thinks that the umpires don't have any effect on the outcome of games is living in fairy land.
Simply put, Collingwood received 4 very dubious free kicks that directly resulted in goals. In a 9 point result that does effect the outcome.
The one against BJ that Lockyer got was a disgrace & at a vital time.
Having said that we should have beat the filth despite this. Lenny missed 2 sodas & Milney missed one when Dal was all by himself in the fwd pocket.
the umpiring
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Wed 24 Mar 2004 11:45am
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 792
- Joined: Sat 26 Apr 2008 10:45pm
- Has thanked: 52 times
- Been thanked: 97 times
Re: the umpiring
No your wrong...when you lose and blame the umpires, you will always be a loser....we lost becasue we didnt take our chances...Milne, Hayes (twice) and various other missed opportunities. Simple as that.Saints Premiers 2008 wrote:it was terrible...so favourablr....terrible
dane swan throws it infrot of himself...get a free kick...somehow...goal...
sam fisher does not touch the ball...he camps over it...doesnt touch it...HOLDING THE BALL??? INTERESTING
the umpires beat us...not collingwood
and it farking hurts
totally agree, yes we should have easily won that with the chances we had but the point still needs to be made, they umpires had a shocker! The kosi in the square was the worst I have seen in a long time. I'm curious about the many times players throw, yes THROW the ball in front of them and then either get the free for holding or is allowed to take a shot at goal (see davis goal in the third).Sainterman wrote:Exactly, dubious indeed. Some on here dont even think they were dubious free kicks...quite obviously they'd prefer to blame the players, and only the players. Leave the umpires out of it according to them.Animal Enclosure wrote:Anyone who thinks that the umpires don't have any effect on the outcome of games is living in fairy land.
Simply put, Collingwood received 4 very dubious free kicks that directly resulted in goals. In a 9 point result that does effect the outcome.
The one against BJ that Lockyer got was a disgrace & at a vital time.
Having said that we should have beat the filth despite this. Lenny missed 2 sodas & Milney missed one when Dal was all by himself in the fwd pocket.
Also how was the push in the back thrown out the window? All we want is some kind of consistancy. The holding the ball is all up in the air, sometimes it's paid, sometimes it's not.
At the end of the day the pies got lucky with a few. It really deflates you when your key forward takes a great mark in the goal square and the ump decides to pay it against him for no real reason.
Oh and can anyone help me with the start of the final quarter. Those around me saw a saints player get put down and then was in utter suprise when the pies got the ball in the centre?
![Confused :?](./images/smilies/icon_confused.gif)
FQF
loyal in the good times and bad
In richo I trust
2013 trade/draft best ever?
Billings - future brownlow medallist Longer - future best ruck
Dunstan - future captain Eli - future cult hero
Acres - future norm smith
loyal in the good times and bad
In richo I trust
2013 trade/draft best ever?
Billings - future brownlow medallist Longer - future best ruck
Dunstan - future captain Eli - future cult hero
Acres - future norm smith
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
Joffa (the Filth Cheer Squad Prez) told the goal Umpire to tell the boundary umpire to tell the fiekd umpire (you know the one who kept paying holding the ball against us all night) that Gehrig had 'passed wind' and under Rule 3.1 subsection 6b THE MANDATORY COLLINGWOOD FREE KICK RULE, it was na infringement that required a penalty.Solar wrote:totally agree, yes we should have easily won that with the chances we had but the point still needs to be made, they umpires had a shocker! The kosi in the square was the worst I have seen in a long time. I'm curious about the many times players throw, yes THROW the ball in front of them and then either get the free for holding or is allowed to take a shot at goal (see davis goal in the third).Sainterman wrote:Exactly, dubious indeed. Some on here dont even think they were dubious free kicks...quite obviously they'd prefer to blame the players, and only the players. Leave the umpires out of it according to them.Animal Enclosure wrote:Anyone who thinks that the umpires don't have any effect on the outcome of games is living in fairy land.
Simply put, Collingwood received 4 very dubious free kicks that directly resulted in goals. In a 9 point result that does effect the outcome.
The one against BJ that Lockyer got was a disgrace & at a vital time.
Having said that we should have beat the filth despite this. Lenny missed 2 sodas & Milney missed one when Dal was all by himself in the fwd pocket.
Also how was the push in the back thrown out the window? All we want is some kind of consistancy. The holding the ball is all up in the air, sometimes it's paid, sometimes it's not.
At the end of the day the pies got lucky with a few. It really deflates you when your key forward takes a great mark in the goal square and the ump decides to pay it against him for no real reason.
Oh and can anyone help me with the start of the final quarter. Those around me saw a saints player get put down and then was in utter suprise when the pies got the ball in the centre?
plugger66 wrote:He dragged it in so he loses all rights unless he gets it out. Correct decision.Sainterman wrote:Fishers one was a disgrace dud, have you ever played footy?? Awful decision, the worst for the nigt, and there were 5 or 6 shockers!
the flowering filth maggot was standing on the ball ffs.....
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
Stinger, were you sitting on the City side of the Ground. I was and the ball definitely came out underneath the Collingwood player but the Umpire was on the docklands side and 'ASSUMED" that the ball was being 'hatched'. Once again a decision paid on assumption rather than seeing.stinger wrote:plugger66 wrote:He dragged it in so he loses all rights unless he gets it out. Correct decision.Sainterman wrote:Fishers one was a disgrace dud, have you ever played footy?? Awful decision, the worst for the nigt, and there were 5 or 6 shockers!
the flowering filth maggot was standing on the ball ffs.....![]()
![]()
![]()
We are unlucky arent we MM. We are picked on a,ll the time.Mr Magic wrote:Stinger, were you sitting on the City side of the Ground. I was and the ball definitely came out underneath the Collingwood player but the Umpire was on the docklands side and 'ASSUMED" that the ball was being 'hatched'. Once again a decision paid on assumption rather than seeing.stinger wrote:plugger66 wrote:He dragged it in so he loses all rights unless he gets it out. Correct decision.Sainterman wrote:Fishers one was a disgrace dud, have you ever played footy?? Awful decision, the worst for the nigt, and there were 5 or 6 shockers!
the flowering filth maggot was standing on the ball ffs.....![]()
![]()
![]()
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
Is that the 'official word' from AFL headquarters mr Monkey-Boy Anderson's spokesperson?plugger66 wrote:We are unlucky arent we MM. We are picked on a,ll the time.Mr Magic wrote:Stinger, were you sitting on the City side of the Ground. I was and the ball definitely came out underneath the Collingwood player but the Umpire was on the docklands side and 'ASSUMED" that the ball was being 'hatched'. Once again a decision paid on assumption rather than seeing.stinger wrote:plugger66 wrote:He dragged it in so he loses all rights unless he gets it out. Correct decision.Sainterman wrote:Fishers one was a disgrace dud, have you ever played footy?? Awful decision, the worst for the nigt, and there were 5 or 6 shockers!
the flowering filth maggot was standing on the ball ffs.....![]()
![]()
![]()
I can't believe it took so long for your obligatory sarcastic pro all things AFL response to arrive.
And BTW, Mr AFL SPokesperson, where in my post did I suggest anything remotely near what your sarcastic post alleges?
I am with some friends know and they cant stop laughing at you. I said it was a bit harsh as you only had one eye. They know understand.Mr Magic wrote:Is that the 'official word' from AFL headquarters mr Monkey-Boy Anderson's spokesperson?plugger66 wrote:We are unlucky arent we MM. We are picked on a,ll the time.Mr Magic wrote:Stinger, were you sitting on the City side of the Ground. I was and the ball definitely came out underneath the Collingwood player but the Umpire was on the docklands side and 'ASSUMED" that the ball was being 'hatched'. Once again a decision paid on assumption rather than seeing.stinger wrote:plugger66 wrote:He dragged it in so he loses all rights unless he gets it out. Correct decision.Sainterman wrote:Fishers one was a disgrace dud, have you ever played footy?? Awful decision, the worst for the nigt, and there were 5 or 6 shockers!
the flowering filth maggot was standing on the ball ffs.....![]()
![]()
![]()
I can't believe it took so long for your obligatory sarcastic pro all things AFL response to arrive.
And BTW, Mr AFL SPokesperson, where in my post did I suggest anything remotely near what your sarcastic post alleges?
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
Are your friends named Denetriou and Anderson?plugger66 wrote:I am with some friends know and they cant stop laughing at you. I said it was a bit harsh as you only had one eye. They know understand.Mr Magic wrote:Is that the 'official word' from AFL headquarters mr Monkey-Boy Anderson's spokesperson?plugger66 wrote:We are unlucky arent we MM. We are picked on a,ll the time.Mr Magic wrote:Stinger, were you sitting on the City side of the Ground. I was and the ball definitely came out underneath the Collingwood player but the Umpire was on the docklands side and 'ASSUMED" that the ball was being 'hatched'. Once again a decision paid on assumption rather than seeing.stinger wrote:plugger66 wrote:He dragged it in so he loses all rights unless he gets it out. Correct decision.Sainterman wrote:Fishers one was a disgrace dud, have you ever played footy?? Awful decision, the worst for the nigt, and there were 5 or 6 shockers!
the flowering filth maggot was standing on the ball ffs.....![]()
![]()
![]()
I can't believe it took so long for your obligatory sarcastic pro all things AFL response to arrive.
And BTW, Mr AFL SPokesperson, where in my post did I suggest anything remotely near what your sarcastic post alleges?
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Wed 24 Mar 2004 11:45am
Classic Plugger type response...predictable..and had a few laughing here too!plugger66 wrote:We are unlucky arent we MM. We are picked on a,ll the time.Mr Magic wrote:Stinger, were you sitting on the City side of the Ground. I was and the ball definitely came out underneath the Collingwood player but the Umpire was on the docklands side and 'ASSUMED" that the ball was being 'hatched'. Once again a decision paid on assumption rather than seeing.stinger wrote:plugger66 wrote:He dragged it in so he loses all rights unless he gets it out. Correct decision.Sainterman wrote:Fishers one was a disgrace dud, have you ever played footy?? Awful decision, the worst for the nigt, and there were 5 or 6 shockers!
the flowering filth maggot was standing on the ball ffs.....![]()
![]()
![]()
Actually I think Little Ray just gave the worst decision of the round - Santa O'Hairpin against Jono Brown off the ball resulting in a Lion goal.
Pathetic. Arms around the body apparently while the ball was forty metres away, but very poor umpiring, just let it go.
That small man Rampaging Ray Chamberlain needs to get over himself.
Pathetic. Arms around the body apparently while the ball was forty metres away, but very poor umpiring, just let it go.
That small man Rampaging Ray Chamberlain needs to get over himself.
![Image](http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo330/Iceman_234/feature-home.jpg)
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10598
- Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005 7:04pm
- Location: North
- Has thanked: 1011 times
- Been thanked: 1055 times
Standard reactionary umpire bashing garbage from various posters looking for somewhere to vent their spleen. From 58 - 43 up we went down 103 - 94.
Simply not good enough. Not hungry enough, not confident enough, not enough quality. Stop pointing the finger at the umpiring and start pointing at our own deficiencies. You just sound like a lot of sour grapes, whinging, crap losers.
Simply not good enough. Not hungry enough, not confident enough, not enough quality. Stop pointing the finger at the umpiring and start pointing at our own deficiencies. You just sound like a lot of sour grapes, whinging, crap losers.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Wed 24 Mar 2004 11:45am
Can you please highlight where the umpiring has been named as the cause of the loss? Can you point out where posters have singled this out, or where they have said that if not for the umpiring we would have won?st.byron wrote:Standard reactionary umpire bashing garbage from various posters looking for somewhere to vent their spleen. From 58 - 43 up we went down 103 - 94.
Simply not good enough. Not hungry enough, not confident enough, not enough quality. Stop pointing the finger at the umpiring and start pointing at our own deficiencies. You just sound like a lot of sour grapes, whinging, crap losers.
We had our chances last night, didnt take them, and coud have won the game. We made errors, dropped off for periods of the game and didnt kick goals we should have. AND...the umpiring didnt help.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10598
- Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005 7:04pm
- Location: North
- Has thanked: 1011 times
- Been thanked: 1055 times
Ah, so you want a bit each way. Yes you make concessions that we played poorly, but you couldn't resist tagging on the end that the umpiring was also partly responsible. Right there Sainterman is an example of someone i.e you, blaming the umpires. Forget this sh*t about the umpiring, we just weren't bloody good enough. End of story.Sainterman wrote: Can you please highlight where the umpiring has been named as the cause of the loss? Can you point out where posters have singled this out, or where they have said that if not for the umpiring we would have won?
We had our chances last night, didnt take them, and coud have won the game. We made errors, dropped off for periods of the game and didnt kick goals we should have. AND...the umpiring didnt help.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Wed 24 Mar 2004 11:45am
What rubbish, a bit each way! I can see a number of factors that I believe affected the result, as outlined already. And yes, I think the umpiring was one of those factors. There is no each way, I think it was a factor. If those 5 or 6 decisions that I think were very average were not paid would we have won? I am not too sure, but it only could have helped.st.byron wrote:Ah, so you want a bit each way. Yes you make concessions that we played poorly, but you couldn't resist tagging on the end that the umpiring was also partly responsible. Right there Sainterman is an example of someone i.e you, blaming the umpires. Forget this sh*t about the umpiring, we just weren't bloody good enough. End of story.Sainterman wrote: Can you please highlight where the umpiring has been named as the cause of the loss? Can you point out where posters have singled this out, or where they have said that if not for the umpiring we would have won?
We had our chances last night, didnt take them, and coud have won the game. We made errors, dropped off for periods of the game and didnt kick goals we should have. AND...the umpiring didnt help.
For the record, I dont think we are playing the type of footy to get us all that far atm, but do think we did take a step in right direction last night but laced polish and finish.
Just because you think commenting on umpiring amounts to excuse making doesnt mean much to me.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
St Byron,st.byron wrote:Ah, so you want a bit each way. Yes you make concessions that we played poorly, but you couldn't resist tagging on the end that the umpiring was also partly responsible. Right there Sainterman is an example of someone i.e you, blaming the umpires. Forget this sh*t about the umpiring, we just weren't bloody good enough. End of story.Sainterman wrote: Can you please highlight where the umpiring has been named as the cause of the loss? Can you point out where posters have singled this out, or where they have said that if not for the umpiring we would have won?
We had our chances last night, didnt take them, and coud have won the game. We made errors, dropped off for periods of the game and didnt kick goals we should have. AND...the umpiring didnt help.
I'm at a loss to understand why you posted what you did about blaming the Umpires.
I have just reread all 64 posts on this thread and apart from the op by Saints Premiers 2008, no other post has directly blamed the Umpires for our loss last night, if you discount MatrixCutters sarcastic post and Plugger66's baiting asrcastic posts.
The overall vast majority of the posts in this thread centre on 2 or 3 specific decisions and the varying opinions on whether they were legitimate or not. Virtually everybody has gone out of their way not to blame the loss on the Umpires.
Are we no longer allowed to question individual decisions without copping a spray for being 'one-eyed' in our view of the game?
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Wed 24 Mar 2004 11:45am
It makes one not want to post...frustrating at times. Lack of respect for others opinions on here is a regular occurance. And it is often those with the highest post counts that perpetuate it.Mr Magic wrote:St Byron,st.byron wrote:Ah, so you want a bit each way. Yes you make concessions that we played poorly, but you couldn't resist tagging on the end that the umpiring was also partly responsible. Right there Sainterman is an example of someone i.e you, blaming the umpires. Forget this sh*t about the umpiring, we just weren't bloody good enough. End of story.Sainterman wrote: Can you please highlight where the umpiring has been named as the cause of the loss? Can you point out where posters have singled this out, or where they have said that if not for the umpiring we would have won?
We had our chances last night, didnt take them, and coud have won the game. We made errors, dropped off for periods of the game and didnt kick goals we should have. AND...the umpiring didnt help.
I'm at a loss to understand why you posted what you did about blaming the Umpires.
I have just reread all 64 posts on this thread and apart from the op by Saints Premiers 2008, no other post has directly blamed the Umpires for our loss last night, if you discount MatrixCutters sarcastic post and Plugger66's baiting asrcastic posts.
The overall vast majority of the posts in this thread centre on 2 or 3 specific decisions and the varying opinions on whether they were legitimate or not. Virtually everybody has gone out of their way not to blame the loss on the Umpires.
Are we no longer allowed to question individual decisions without copping a spray for being 'one-eyed' in our view of the game?
Anyway, we move on to next week. Good to see Big Mac do well today in tough conditions.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10598
- Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005 7:04pm
- Location: North
- Has thanked: 1011 times
- Been thanked: 1055 times
Not aiming at people's right to discuss umpiring standards. Am aiming at discussing them in the context of how hard done by we are. I haven't re-read all of the thread, but I've read it once and there's plenty of complaining going on that wouldn't even rate a mention if we'd won. That's my point. Sam Fisher was hard done by, Max was hard done by, Kosi was hard done by etc. etc. Big deal. I'm sure the filth fans could go through the replay and find things that didn't go their way.Mr Magic wrote: St Byron,
I'm at a loss to understand why you posted what you did about blaming the Umpires.
I have just reread all 64 posts on this thread and apart from the op by Saints Premiers 2008, no other post has directly blamed the Umpires for our loss last night, if you discount MatrixCutters sarcastic post and Plugger66's baiting asrcastic posts.
The overall vast majority of the posts in this thread centre on 2 or 3 specific decisions and the varying opinions on whether they were legitimate or not. Virtually everybody has gone out of their way not to blame the loss on the Umpires.
Are we no longer allowed to question individual decisions without copping a spray for being 'one-eyed' in our view of the game?
Agreed that some posters are just having a general whinge about the umpires without directly blaming our loss on them. But the OP and context of the thread is that we were hard done by and I think that's cockysh*t.
This thread would barely rate a reply if we'd won.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Wed 24 Mar 2004 11:45am
We didnt win, it is a forum to discuss the footy and the Saints, and this is a topic some people feel is valid. Enough said.st.byron wrote:Not aiming at people's right to discuss umpiring standards. Am aiming at discussing them in the context of how hard done by we are. I haven't re-read all of the thread, but I've read it once and there's plenty of complaining going on that wouldn't even rate a mention if we'd won. That's my point. Sam Fisher was hard done by, Max was hard done by, Kosi was hard done by etc. etc. Big deal. I'm sure the filth fans could go through the replay and find things that didn't go their way.Mr Magic wrote: St Byron,
I'm at a loss to understand why you posted what you did about blaming the Umpires.
I have just reread all 64 posts on this thread and apart from the op by Saints Premiers 2008, no other post has directly blamed the Umpires for our loss last night, if you discount MatrixCutters sarcastic post and Plugger66's baiting asrcastic posts.
The overall vast majority of the posts in this thread centre on 2 or 3 specific decisions and the varying opinions on whether they were legitimate or not. Virtually everybody has gone out of their way not to blame the loss on the Umpires.
Are we no longer allowed to question individual decisions without copping a spray for being 'one-eyed' in our view of the game?
Agreed that some posters are just having a general whinge about the umpires without directly blaming our loss on them. But the OP and context of the thread is that we were hard done by and I think that's cockysh*t.
This thread would barely rate a reply if we'd won.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10598
- Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005 7:04pm
- Location: North
- Has thanked: 1011 times
- Been thanked: 1055 times
Notice that you neatly sidestep where I've pointed out that you were blaming the umpires when you claim you weren't. No further comment about that? And you use Magic's post to go all sanctimonius and superior. Anther favourite tactic of the blame shifter - safety in numbers.Sainterman wrote:[
It makes one not want to post...frustrating at times. Lack of respect for others opinions on here is a regular occurance. And it is often those with the highest post counts that perpetuate it.
Anyway, we move on to next week. Good to see Big Mac do well today in tough conditions.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Wed 24 Mar 2004 11:45am
St Byron, you have lost me. Not sure what I am sidestepping. I have said I think a number of factors were to blame. And YES, I do think the 5 or 6 bad decisions impacted on the game. I also think there were some other problems, such as poor finishing, lack of polish, and some poor blocks of time that we seem to have every week where opposition sidfes damage us. Happy to be quite categorical on the umpiring point last night as I thought it was very poor. Or am I unable to have this opinion without it being attributed as the one factor of blame for our loss. Are you reading what I am writing??st.byron wrote:Notice that you neatly sidestep where I've pointed out that you were blaming the umpires when you claim you weren't. No further comment about that? And you use Magic's post to go all sanctimonius and superior. Anther favourite tactic of the blame shifter - safety in numbers.Sainterman wrote:[
It makes one not want to post...frustrating at times. Lack of respect for others opinions on here is a regular occurance. And it is often those with the highest post counts that perpetuate it.
Anyway, we move on to next week. Good to see Big Mac do well today in tough conditions.
As for being sanctimonious and superior, that is not the intention. I read Saintsational every day, on and off season, post occasionally, have been a member since about 2000 and enjoy the site when it has threads that alow all to express opinions. There is not safety in numbers other than the fact that it means others share your opinion, but even if they didnt I would still have my opinion, and unless convinced otherwise, stick to it.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
st.byron wrote:Not aiming at people's right to discuss umpiring standards. Am aiming at discussing them in the context of how hard done by we are. I haven't re-read all of the thread, but I've read it once and there's plenty of complaining going on that wouldn't even rate a mention if we'd won. That's my point. Sam Fisher was hard done by, Max was hard done by, Kosi was hard done by etc. etc. Big deal. I'm sure the filth fans could go through the replay and find things that didn't go their way.Mr Magic wrote: St Byron,
I'm at a loss to understand why you posted what you did about blaming the Umpires.
I have just reread all 64 posts on this thread and apart from the op by Saints Premiers 2008, no other post has directly blamed the Umpires for our loss last night, if you discount MatrixCutters sarcastic post and Plugger66's baiting asrcastic posts.
The overall vast majority of the posts in this thread centre on 2 or 3 specific decisions and the varying opinions on whether they were legitimate or not. Virtually everybody has gone out of their way not to blame the loss on the Umpires.
Are we no longer allowed to question individual decisions without copping a spray for being 'one-eyed' in our view of the game?
Agreed that some posters are just having a general whinge about the umpires without directly blaming our loss on them. But the OP and context of the thread is that we were hard done by and I think that's cockysh*t.
This thread would barely rate a reply if we'd won.
Mr Magic wrote:St Byron,st.byron wrote:Ah, so you want a bit each way. Yes you make concessions that we played poorly, but you couldn't resist tagging on the end that the umpiring was also partly responsible. Right there Sainterman is an example of someone i.e you, blaming the umpires. Forget this sh*t about the umpiring, we just weren't bloody good enough. End of story.Sainterman wrote: Can you please highlight where the umpiring has been named as the cause of the loss? Can you point out where posters have singled this out, or where they have said that if not for the umpiring we would have won?
We had our chances last night, didnt take them, and coud have won the game. We made errors, dropped off for periods of the game and didnt kick goals we should have. AND...the umpiring didnt help.
I'm at a loss to understand why you posted what you did about blaming the Umpires.
I have just reread all 64 posts on this thread and apart from the op by Saints Premiers 2008, no other post has directly blamed the Umpires for our loss last night, if you discount MatrixCutters sarcastic post and Plugger66's baiting asrcastic posts.
The overall vast majority of the posts in this thread centre on 2 or 3 specific decisions and the varying opinions on whether they were legitimate or not. Virtually everybody has gone out of their way not to blame the loss on the Umpires.
Are we no longer allowed to question individual decisions without copping a spray for being 'one-eyed' in our view of the game?
You do all the populist things MM but in the end it gets down to they pick on us. Every post of yours is the same. I gather you are my age. How do you live like this thinking they have picked on us since 1966. How unlucky are we that it has happened for 42 years.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
LOL This has to be the absolute best example of Pot calling the kettke black I've seen on here.plugger66 wrote:Mr Magic wrote:St Byron,st.byron wrote:Ah, so you want a bit each way. Yes you make concessions that we played poorly, but you couldn't resist tagging on the end that the umpiring was also partly responsible. Right there Sainterman is an example of someone i.e you, blaming the umpires. Forget this sh*t about the umpiring, we just weren't bloody good enough. End of story.Sainterman wrote: Can you please highlight where the umpiring has been named as the cause of the loss? Can you point out where posters have singled this out, or where they have said that if not for the umpiring we would have won?
We had our chances last night, didnt take them, and coud have won the game. We made errors, dropped off for periods of the game and didnt kick goals we should have. AND...the umpiring didnt help.
I'm at a loss to understand why you posted what you did about blaming the Umpires.
I have just reread all 64 posts on this thread and apart from the op by Saints Premiers 2008, no other post has directly blamed the Umpires for our loss last night, if you discount MatrixCutters sarcastic post and Plugger66's baiting asrcastic posts.
The overall vast majority of the posts in this thread centre on 2 or 3 specific decisions and the varying opinions on whether they were legitimate or not. Virtually everybody has gone out of their way not to blame the loss on the Umpires.
Are we no longer allowed to question individual decisions without copping a spray for being 'one-eyed' in our view of the game?
You do all the populist things MM but in the end it gets down to they pick on us. Every post of yours is the same. I gather you are my age. How do you live like this thinking they have picked on us since 1966. How unlucky are we that it has happened for 42 years.
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Ever thought of running away and joining a circus, since you have this unbelievable talent of being able to read other people's minds?
YOu know, your little tricks won't work on me Plugger. No matter how many times you post the lie, it doesn't make it true.
But keep going if it amuses you.
I'm glad I can bring you some enjoyment.