Just shows

[Bunk_Moreland]

When umpires are given a directive like they were on the weekend to pay the free kicks that are there, the Saints get a fair go.

The umpiring was good yesterday, not because we got more frees (even though we deserved to get them) but because they were as consistent as they could be on a difficult wet, crowded around the ball day.

Still let a raft of frees go that should get paid to Riewoldt however we are used to him being screwed by the umpires, but on the whole they paid what was there to both sides.

When they are allowed to umpire properly, we get a fair deal. More free kicks in a game? Sure, but most were there and they were consistent, so even if we lost the free count I wouldn't have complained.

[SENsei]

Umpires always struggle with consistency but I haven't noticed them in games I have watched in the last week or two as much. They had a horror night in the Carlton v Richmond game but it seems that was a sort of line in the sand game for them as they have improved since. The howlers are seemingly few and far between.


But they will return no doubt!!!

[CURLY]

Correct. Would honestly like to see footage of the treatment of our forwards and get some sort of excuse as to why they get no protection.

[Johnny Member]

I think they were awful, yet again, in relation to the 'holding the ball' rule.

Melbourne got dudded plenty of times in regards to that one.


It's the most poorly officiated rule in the game. Yet should be so simple.

[dragit]

Agree bunk, I think paying more frees around the ball would do lot to reduce congestion.

I'm not suggesting paying frees that aren't there, but don't just "let it go"... when there is a free there pay it!

[Johnny Member]

Agree bunk, I think paying more frees around the ball would do lot to reduce congestion.

I'm not suggesting paying frees that aren't there, but don't just "let it go"... when there is a free there pay it!

They're too red hot on 'too high', and 'in the back', which encourages staging.

Yet for some unbeknown, utterly bizarre reason they are way too soft on 'holding the ball'. If they relaxed the other two a bit, and tightened up on incorrect disposal and guys getting caught, the game would be far, far better to watch.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Agree bunk, I think paying more frees around the ball would do lot to reduce congestion.

I'm not suggesting paying frees that aren't there, but don't just "let it go"... when there is a free there pay it!

They're too red hot on 'too high', and 'in the back', which encourages staging.

Yet for some unbeknown, utterly bizarre reason they are way too soft on 'holding the ball'. If they relaxed the other two a bit, and tightened up on incorrect disposal and guys getting caught, the game would be far, far better to watch.

My impression was that because it was a wet day, they tried to relax the HTB rule a bit yesterday. The ones paid were blatant and were fair enough. Saw Melbourne players constantly being swung 360 deg and more before getting the ball away so don't agree they were shafted.

At the game so can only remember two in the backs and both looked blatant, and were clumsy by the tackler.

But HTB being tightened would free the contest up a bit. Bit of a dour struggle yesterday though with our constant pressure on the man with the ball and Roos thinking it is 2005 and just flooding for the whole game. Add to that the conditions and about 300 frees could have been paid.

I think the purpose of the OP was to highlight that the umpires seemed to have been given a directive to free up the game where possible. Obviously a bit harder when the day is wet and Roos has 18 behind the ball from the first ball up creating a ugly congested slog all day.

[Johnny Member]

Roos is s***, isn't he.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Roos is s***, isn't he.

I honestly think he is a one trick pony.

On paper the Melbourne recruits are better than ours, and they have been in rebuild mode since 2009.

However he is getting them to just flood as if this is some type of new fangled cutting edge defensive technique.

It may have worked in 2005 with a top team and the AFL compliance but in 2015, the game has changed.

I just don't understand his philosophy. Richo had a far worse group to knock into shape defensive wise. Last year we were just hopeless, a genuine wooden spoon team. But in the course of one preseason, a good run with injury, and maturity of some of the kids, our gameplan based on relentless pressure seems far more attractive.

Actually I'll make this a new thread to start a discussion.

[borderbarry]

Its the 15m distance I hate. They cant get it right, Too often a player sho has marked or been freed, moves back of the mark to have his kick and passes it to a player within 3m of his mark. Then that player after being paid the mark runs 20 -25m without a bounce before disposing of it. Some players like Heath Shaw bounce the ball just about straight away when starting a run, others wont bounce at all. Annoys me.

[matrix]

so they make decisions depending on the weather now?
its not HTB or incorrect disposal because the weather was average?

its either incorrect disposal or it isnt

[Bunk_Moreland]

so they make decisions depending on the weather now?
its not HTB or incorrect disposal because the weather was average?

its either incorrect disposal or it isnt

Oh dear

[matrix]

oh dear what bunk
no need for pretend cryptic

[saintspremiers]

I think they were awful, yet again, in relation to the 'holding the ball' rule.

Melbourne got dudded plenty of times in regards to that one.


It's the most poorly officiated rule in the game. Yet should be so simple.

Agree.

Remember the golden rule which has been in place for decades:

The good games get the good umps.

Bad games the shyte ones

[Fluttz]

I think they were awful, yet again, in relation to the 'holding the ball' rule.

Melbourne got dudded plenty of times in regards to that one.


It's the most poorly officiated rule in the game. Yet should be so simple.

Holding the ball were obviously buzz words for the umpires this weekend.

[gringo]

I think they were awful, yet again, in relation to the 'holding the ball' rule.

Melbourne got dudded plenty of times in regards to that one.


It's the most poorly officiated rule in the game. Yet should be so simple.

I don't know about that they were there on sunday. If you don't pretend to handball it out at least you get a good chance of a free paid against you. The ball got knocked out in tackles and wasn't paid which is correct also. Pulling the ball back in is always holding the ball. Melbourne players would take the ball to ground and sit on it with out even pretending. I agree it was better officiated this week and not just because they mostly went our way.

[plugger66]

I think they were awful, yet again, in relation to the 'holding the ball' rule.

Melbourne got dudded plenty of times in regards to that one.


It's the most poorly officiated rule in the game. Yet should be so simple.

Why is that JM? Do you umpire?

Anyway agree with BM that it was well umpired yesterday.

[plugger66]

so they make decisions depending on the weather now?
its not HTB or incorrect disposal because the weather was average?

its either incorrect disposal or it isnt

Yes the rules are exactly the same whatever the weather is but players tend to make more mistakes in wet weather including giving frees away. I actually wonder if people know the rule on incorrect disposal. Umpires certainly pull the pin to early a lot of the time.

[saynta]

The umpiring was pretty good and even schneids got two free kicks. Now if we can just get them to protect Roo, the umpiring world would be perfect. For now anyway.

[CURLY]

I think they were awful, yet again, in relation to the 'holding the ball' rule.

Melbourne got dudded plenty of times in regards to that one.


It's the most poorly officiated rule in the game. Yet should be so simple.

Why is that JM? Do you umpire?

Anyway agree with BM that it was well umpired yesterday.

What difference does it make if he's a umpire or not? Surely your not suggesting that being an umpire gives you some sort of superior opinion.

[plugger66]

I think they were awful, yet again, in relation to the 'holding the ball' rule.

Melbourne got dudded plenty of times in regards to that one.


It's the most poorly officiated rule in the game. Yet should be so simple.

Why is that JM? Do you umpire?

Anyway agree with BM that it was well umpired yesterday.

What difference does it make if he's a umpire or not? Surely your not suggesting that being an umpire gives you some sort of superior opinion.

No I am not at all Curly. Did I say that? I think if you have umpired you will realise it isn't easy to pay holding the ball because of some factors like being in the right position, being able to see clearly even though 30 players could be around the ball and deciding if they had prior opportunity or if the disposed of it correctly. Is that ok with you? I umpired with a guy last week who had never umpired after the other umpire did his calf. He told me he had never umpired but said it hould be easy as he had played over 200 games. He was terrible and told me after the game he will never do it again.

[Bunk_Moreland]

I think umpiring is terribly hard, but when they are consistent, they make the game fair.

It wasn't the free kick count, but going on the stats we were in front on almost every one so we were obviously first to the ball and numbers at it, so we should get more frees, it was the consistency (except for allowing Roo to be manhandled all day - still he scored three goals, no thanks to the umpires)

[The Fireman]

the umpires can make it easier on themselves by keeping that whistle away from their mouths.

[plugger66]

the umpires can make it easier on themselves by keeping that whistle away from their mouths.

I think the game is better with more frees than less. Over the years frees have dropped off and people say the umpiring is worse. Umpire to the rules and if that means there are 50 frees a game so be it. If it means 30 then fine.

[The Fireman]

the umpires can make it easier on themselves by keeping that whistle away from their mouths.

I think the game is better with more frees than less. Over the years frees have dropped off and people say the umpiring is worse. Umpire to the rules and if that means there are 50 frees a game so be it. If it means 30 then fine.

I disagree, less frees =less bad calls..a more free flowing game, less crowd angst = more enjoyable game , only blow it when the free is absolutely obvious . Many complaints are about over officiating