Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
joffaboy wrote:Actually thought the umpire got it correct in not stopping play.
We were away and it would only have been a downfield not a fifty, so it would have been whee the ball was anyway, and the Saints were away.
P66 if you are about, hang on to your chair, but I think the umpire played the advantage for the Saints, may have learnt from the other bad free kick call.
He didn't know how bad the injury was, he did see late contact, made a judgement call on the play (a good judgement call) and then noted into his mike what had happened.
I. unlike many dont think Chamberlain is a bad umpire, compared to that No.25 work experience tool, he is one of the best.
I just fell over but it is interesting if he paid advantage without blowing the whistle. They are not allowed to do that even though I reckon that exactly what they should do in certain circumstances and that was one of them. When I umpire i often dont blow the whistle when i see a certain advantage. Wrong thing to do but continues play. You still get morons yelling out why didnt you pay the free but you just explain the advantage was always going to happen.
plugger66 wrote:
I think it is exactly right. It was a head clash in many opinions so it was always going to negligent contact. Its exactly what i said he would get last night.
I know it is a still P66, but from the above shot, how do you get a broken jaw from a head hitting your temple, while the point of the elbow is directly on the jaw?
Well you usually break your jaw up around the top part of the jaw which is very close to the temple. Not many break it around the mouth area from experiences. No idea where he broke his.
joffaboy wrote:Actually thought the umpire got it correct in not stopping play.
We were away and it would only have been a downfield not a fifty, so it would have been whee the ball was anyway, and the Saints were away.
P66 if you are about, hang on to your chair, but I think the umpire played the advantage for the Saints, may have learnt from the other bad free kick call.
He didn't know how bad the injury was, he did see late contact, made a judgement call on the play (a good judgement call) and then noted into his mike what had happened.
I. unlike many dont think Chamberlain is a bad umpire, compared to that No.25 work experience tool, he is one of the best.
I just fell over but it is interesting if he paid advantage without blowing the whistle. They are not allowed to do that even though I reckon that exactly what they should do in certain circumstances and that was one of them. When I umpire i often dont blow the whistle when i see a certain advantage. Wrong thing to do but continues play. You still get morons yelling out why didnt you pay the free but you just explain the advantage was always going to happen.
Well there you go. Even when they seem like they are using their initiative they are wrong. Or maybe I am. But tell me it would have only been a downfield free, not a 50, yeah? So it would have been disadvantageous to the Saints to get it?
I suppose this is the crux of umpire frustration, so think that they are so much in the play that when they let it flow, supporters get angry for no free. I do understand umpires
1) make mistakes
2) sometimes cant win either way
For me, I liked that type of umpiring. Thought it was decisive without being intrusive. If it was umpired more like this I would be happy, but i understand others wouldn't.
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
plugger66 wrote:
I think it is exactly right. It was a head clash in many opinions so it was always going to negligent contact. Its exactly what i said he would get last night.
I know it is a still P66, but from the above shot, how do you get a broken jaw from a head hitting your temple, while the point of the elbow is directly on the jaw?
Well you usually break your jaw up around the top part of the jaw which is very close to the temple. Not many break it around the mouth area from experiences. No idea where he broke his.
Fair enough, happy to be put straight.
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
cant play on form a free kick if the whistle is blown???????
god knows whats going on there [/quote]
That was a shocker,handful of jumper was a shocker,siposs head sent back to the yarra was a shocker..
But all in all ,Sen said it was good umpiring last nite WTF ??
Eddie Betts can accept 3 matches for rough conduct on Nathan Wright.Incident classified negligent, severe impact (broken jaw), high contact.
Hope he challenges and gets 5.
Sniper.
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
MRP wrote:The incident was assessed as reckless conduct, severe impact and high contact, totalling 550 demerit points and a five-match sanction.
However, Betts can accept a three-week ban with an early guilty plea because of his six-year good record, which reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to 412.5 points.
An early plea reduces the sanction by a further 25 per cent to 309.38 points and a three-match sanction.
Initially 5 down to 3 with a good record and early plea.
That sits better.
Clearly not a negligent act. The conduct was reckless bordering on intentional.
He meant to hit him. It was late. He left the ground to ensure that he got him high.
If he chooses to fight it and loses he will incur a four week ban.
Greg T wrote:and ray couldnt play on??
wtf is up with that?
cant play on form a free kick if the whistle is blown???????
god knows whats going on there
That was a shocker,handful of jumper was a shocker,siposs head sent back to the yarra was a shocker..
But all in all ,Sen said it was good umpiring last nite WTF ??[/quote]
Who is Sen? Whoever it is i agree. Fancy you finding mistakes with the umpiring. i always thought they were 100% right.
No...Five weeks is about the right amount.
And that's what he was charged with...
It's only three because of his record and guilty plea (and that is the system working).
No...Five weeks is about the right amount.
And that's what he was charged with...
It's only three because of his record and guilty plea (and that is the system working).
Fine. As long as Baker only got 4 for the farmer incident. did you notice how i rated the incident? Nothing hindsight about that.
plugger66 wrote:
I think it is exactly right. It was a head clash in many opinions so it was always going to negligent contact. Its exactly what i said he would get last night.
I know it is a still P66, but from the above shot, how do you get a broken jaw from a head hitting your temple, while the point of the elbow is directly on the jaw?
I thought you might have settled a bit over night - but how the heck do you still claim "elbow to the jaw" from that shot?
No...Five weeks is about the right amount.
And that's what he was charged with...
It's only three because of his record and guilty plea (and that is the system working).
Fine. As long as Baker only got 4 for the farmer incident. did you notice how i rated the incident? Nothing hindsight about that.
Not sure where I was arguing the Baker case.
But since you brought it up...It's hard to judge and compare that to this one as there was no vision.
Baker's record never helped him...Any suspension he got was almost doubled as a result.
Just like Diesel Williams for the umpire push back in 1997.
I think he got 11...only because his record was so poor.
plugger66 wrote:
I think it is exactly right. It was a head clash in many opinions so it was always going to negligent contact. Its exactly what i said he would get last night.
I know it is a still P66, but from the above shot, how do you get a broken jaw from a head hitting your temple, while the point of the elbow is directly on the jaw?
I thought you might have settled a bit over night - but how the heck do you still claim "elbow to the jaw" from that shot?
Thought you might have learned not to be such a pedantic twat overnight
Meant point of the shoulder (as the still i was discussing clearly shows)
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
No...Five weeks is about the right amount.
And that's what he was charged with...
It's only three because of his record and guilty plea (and that is the system working).
I'd agree with this.
5 weeks for being scum and picking off a player.
A good record should actually mean something.
I thought the all the gradings were pretty much spot on. Good job on the MRP for this one.
it has been around this time that "Kosi" will headbutt a fence, rip a hamstring or belt someone.
SainterK wrote:Razor rat stood and watched it play out right in front of him.
No whistle.
Wright crumpled to the ground, stared at him, still no whistle.
Reported him in his mic as the play commenced.
Why does he report him yet no free and no 50?
You really wanted the whistle to blow. They already had cost us one goal when they paid a free 50m out to Saad when Farren was running into an open goal with nobody near him.
I did.
It was very odd.
Yes Farren was called to stop running into an open goal.
This was the same play where Milne found himself 40m in the clear on the forward line. I can't see how blowing a whistle would help in the slightest.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
Confirmation that St Kilda youngster Nathan Wright had his jaw broken in a bump from Eddie Betts on Monday night has triggered a base suspension of five matches for the Carlton forward from the match review panel.
The only good news – comparatively – for Carlton out of the incident is that Betts could serve only three matches as punishment, due to discounts for his good record and a guilty plea.
"Just wanted to say sorry to Nathan Wright from St Kilda. I'm not a dirty player and I never intended to hurt him, just stop his run."(I) Wish him a speedy recovery and hope surgery goes well. (I) just gotta cop it on the chin now and do my time.''
"Just wanted to say sorry to Nathan Wright from St Kilda. I'm not a dirty player and I never intended to hurt him, just stop his run."(I) Wish him a speedy recovery and hope surgery goes well. (I) just gotta cop it on the chin now and do my time.''
'Cop it on the chin'
Thinks he's a comedian.
If the clown shorts weren't enough of a give away.
