Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
resaintlee wrote:A while back it was explained in the media that the Dogs were having a lot of frees paid against them because they were playing risky, attacking and desperate football. Perhaps we are in the same boat? Unfortunately when you see the game you know this is not really the case.
As for the AFL receiving the blame - I would think it has nothing to do with them that some umpires appear, by the decisions they make, to want our opponents to win.
Plugger, I woulld suggest the Shuey frees did affect us as it did seem to take some of the sting out of our play thereafter.
saintspremiers wrote:Jesus Flaming Christ plugger will you ever just shut the f up about your support of AFL umpires? Or at the very least games in Melbourne that you can't/do not want to attend that a lot us are actually there live?
....just my 2 cents worth
Well that was worth typing. Can you even tell me what support I have offered them in this thread or as usual are you just making no sense. And don't want to attend? What the hell are you on about? One of your better posts though.
Well put it this way, you constantly are the antichrist when it comes to the umpiring debate. Is it just to Shyte us all or do you genuinely think everything is above board??
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
saintspremiers wrote:Jesus Flaming Christ plugger will you ever just shut the f up about your support of AFL umpires? Or at the very least games in Melbourne that you can't/do not want to attend that a lot us are actually there live?
....just my 2 cents worth
Well that was worth typing. Can you even tell me what support I have offered them in this thread or as usual are you just making no sense. And don't want to attend? What the hell are you on about? One of your better posts though.
Well put it this way, you constantly are the antichrist when it comes to the umpiring debate. Is it just to Shyte us all or do you genuinely think everything is above board??
Of course everything is above board. We just don't have 27 really good umpires so mistakes happen in the lesser games more than the better games and also better skilled players usually are better at not giving frees away. Do you really think an ex umpire wouldn't have come out in the media and said that we are told to pay wrong decisions to certain sides if it was actually true.
Darth Vader wrote:. I suspect it's a combination of us being sloppy, our players haven't learned to do a Selwood head-duck and some umpires dislike Schneider (and Milney in the old days).
we have a winner
it is a problem the club is aware of and working on (directly from the coaches' mouth after the Carlton game)
the next two following games -the players heeded the message and things improved & so did the results
The stat has been on the decline since - and not surprisingly the scores followed suit.
Probably but unlike some here who just want those umpires dropped as if that's a new idea and the AFL have never thought of that, my common sense guess is the 28th umpire is worse than the 27th. And even though that is probably the case they still do drop umpires hoping the others have improved. Im sure the Saints would love 22 players as good as the Hawks and im sure the AFL would love heaps of umpires as good as their best but its obviously impossible.
The umpires were not consistent last week, but the fact that WCE were mostly first to the ball and we spent a lot of time chasing, then the ball carrier has a good chance of getting frees for sloppy tackles on them, and we did a lot of sloppy dumb tackles and gave away too many frees, but we missed a few which we should have got too. I would have preferred to see our onballers first to the ball instead of hanging out the back. If we had have played a better brand of footy, then the loss would have been a lot less.
I don't think umpires are on the take or bias because of a player, players or club allegiances.
In fact they are trying to do a good job.
They make mistakes just like players AND all human beings.
Sometimes this compounds another problem - which is what I think on the weekend.
The problem is that the umpires are coached.
We see it often as "rule of the week".
That too can add to confusion and frustration.
But on Saturday we had a combination of human error, coaching and what I believe is the root cause of the frustration - inappropriate umpire coaching.
If an umpire is coached to look out for say ruck work designed to nullify the jump of Natanui then umpires are primed to pay free kicks even if the free is not there or the contest no different to centre bounce contests in every game this year - in fact Mumford uses the same tactic at every centre bounce but it is never called a free against. It is a legitimate approach and on the weekend the WCE were granted an advantage from these decisions in that not only did it give them easy forward 50 entries early but it quickly stamp out our ruck man using their body to gain position under the ball - making us uncompetitive in taps and clearances as Natanui jumped all over us.
If an umpire is coached or believes that a shorter back line are going to hold and scrag their taller more talented opponents then they are on high alert to watch out for such free kicks - this was the case on Saturday with just 2 (maybe 3) of the 6 true free kicks - conversely there were zero frees paid to us in our forward 50 with 2 blatant frees missed and one or two others that were equal to the legitimate frees paid to the Weagles. Frees in the forward 50 should have been 2 or 3 frees to each team. The frees instead were 6-0. The only reasonable explanation is predetermined mind set IMHO. Quite simply the umpires are looking for frees and on high alert because they believe one team will be forced to infringe to compete.
Just my opinion.
The weird thing this weekend was that it really did seem to be one umpire making some very weird decisions.
AwayInUSA no longer ... have based myself back in Melbourne for a decade of Saintsational Success (with regular trips back to the USA)
BackFromUSA wrote:I have a slightly different slant on this.
I don't think umpires are on the take or bias because of a player, players or club allegiances.
In fact they are trying to do a good job.
They make mistakes just like players AND all human beings.
Sometimes this compounds another problem - which is what I think on the weekend.
The problem is that the umpires are coached.
We see it often as "rule of the week".
That too can add to confusion and frustration.
But on Saturday we had a combination of human error, coaching and what I believe is the root cause of the frustration - inappropriate umpire coaching.
If an umpire is coached to look out for say ruck work designed to nullify the jump of Natanui then umpires are primed to pay free kicks even if the free is not there or the contest no different to centre bounce contests in every game this year - in fact Mumford uses the same tactic at every centre bounce but it is never called a free against. It is a legitimate approach and on the weekend the WCE were granted an advantage from these decisions in that not only did it give them easy forward 50 entries early but it quickly stamp out our ruck man using their body to gain position under the ball - making us uncompetitive in taps and clearances as Natanui jumped all over us.
If an umpire is coached or believes that a shorter back line are going to hold and scrag their taller more talented opponents then they are on high alert to watch out for such free kicks - this was the case on Saturday with just 2 (maybe 3) of the 6 true free kicks - conversely there were zero frees paid to us in our forward 50 with 2 blatant frees missed and one or two others that were equal to the legitimate frees paid to the Weagles. Frees in the forward 50 should have been 2 or 3 frees to each team. The frees instead were 6-0. The only reasonable explanation is predetermined mind set IMHO. Quite simply the umpires are looking for frees and on high alert because they believe one team will be forced to infringe to compete.
Just my opinion.
The weird thing this weekend was that it really did seem to be one umpire making some very weird decisions.
