30-14

[Joffa Burns]

I thought the umpiring was pretty poor and one-sided from all umpires yesterday. I was particularly aggrieved the they missed (or at least I hope they did) Nick Hayne deliberately tripping a player while we were taking a free. It was disgraceful - should've been a 50 mp.

With that said, a few of our defenders need to watch the jumper holding - they will pay those every time.

That is an interesting one as Hayne was the retaliated to a two handed shove in the chest from Battle if I recall correctly.

For me it was way over officiated, particularly for the conditions.

The ruck free against McKernan in the last was totally unnecessary.
Why pay a free kick when the action had no impact whatsoever on the contest or the opposition player?

I really believe if there is no impact or disadvantage it should be play on.

The other thing mentioned in this thread is the defenders & rucks grabbing handful of jumper, they will ping you every time and we have to be better.

Good post.

Yep, Battle shoved him in the chest while on the ground just before Hayne tripped him - get on with it boys.

You've got to have a bit of leeway in the wet and slippery conditions.

If the umpire sees you grab a handful of jumper and then stretch it out, you've made it way too easy for them to pay a free against you, no use complaining, don't infringe next time!

Thanks for this.
Would you please point me to the directive from the Rules Committee to the Umpiring fraternity that 'retaliation' is no longer to be punished.

In my view it was a two way wrestle off the ball and rightfully ignored by the umpires.
To isolate the trip would be as sill as paying a hold against Battle for grappling with Hayne.
It didn't impact the play at all so play on in my book.

[CURLY]

I thought the umpiring was pretty poor and one-sided from all umpires yesterday. I was particularly aggrieved the they missed (or at least I hope they did) Nick Hayne deliberately tripping a player while we were taking a free. It was disgraceful - should've been a 50 mp.

With that said, a few of our defenders need to watch the jumper holding - they will pay those every time.

That is an interesting one as Hayne was the retaliated to a two handed shove in the chest from Battle if I recall correctly.

For me it was way over officiated, particularly for the conditions.

The ruck free against McKernan in the last was totally unnecessary.
Why pay a free kick when the action had no impact whatsoever on the contest or the opposition player?

I really believe if there is no impact or disadvantage it should be play on.

The other thing mentioned in this thread is the defenders & rucks grabbing handful of jumper, they will ping you every time and we have to be better.

Good post.

Yep, Battle shoved him in the chest while on the ground just before Hayne tripped him - get on with it boys.

You've got to have a bit of leeway in the wet and slippery conditions.

If the umpire sees you grab a handful of jumper and then stretch it out, you've made it way too easy for them to pay a free against you, no use complaining, don't infringe next time!

Ok so you can trip a player now.

Steele hit a GWS player in the chin with a half hearted punch with no free paid. Can you hit players in the face now?

Maybe if you had more feel for the game you'd understand better the kinds of things that happen on the field.

Are you allowed to trip was the question you seem to think you can.

[The_Dud]

I thought the umpiring was pretty poor and one-sided from all umpires yesterday. I was particularly aggrieved the they missed (or at least I hope they did) Nick Hayne deliberately tripping a player while we were taking a free. It was disgraceful - should've been a 50 mp.

With that said, a few of our defenders need to watch the jumper holding - they will pay those every time.

That is an interesting one as Hayne was the retaliated to a two handed shove in the chest from Battle if I recall correctly.

For me it was way over officiated, particularly for the conditions.

The ruck free against McKernan in the last was totally unnecessary.
Why pay a free kick when the action had no impact whatsoever on the contest or the opposition player?

I really believe if there is no impact or disadvantage it should be play on.

The other thing mentioned in this thread is the defenders & rucks grabbing handful of jumper, they will ping you every time and we have to be better.

Good post.

Yep, Battle shoved him in the chest while on the ground just before Hayne tripped him - get on with it boys.

You've got to have a bit of leeway in the wet and slippery conditions.

If the umpire sees you grab a handful of jumper and then stretch it out, you've made it way too easy for them to pay a free against you, no use complaining, don't infringe next time!

Thanks for this.
Would you please point me to the directive from the Rules Committee to the Umpiring fraternity that 'retaliation' is no longer to be punished.

Might be near the bit you read saying that 'instigation' should no longer be punished.

[kosifantutti]

, Higgins hitting the post

.

Was that the one that was reviewed by the ARC despite the goal umpire and field umpire being in no doubt that it was a goal? And on review there was absolutely no evidence that it hit the post.

We really got away with one there.

[The_Dud]

I thought the umpiring was pretty poor and one-sided from all umpires yesterday. I was particularly aggrieved the they missed (or at least I hope they did) Nick Hayne deliberately tripping a player while we were taking a free. It was disgraceful - should've been a 50 mp.

With that said, a few of our defenders need to watch the jumper holding - they will pay those every time.

That is an interesting one as Hayne was the retaliated to a two handed shove in the chest from Battle if I recall correctly.

For me it was way over officiated, particularly for the conditions.

The ruck free against McKernan in the last was totally unnecessary.
Why pay a free kick when the action had no impact whatsoever on the contest or the opposition player?

I really believe if there is no impact or disadvantage it should be play on.

The other thing mentioned in this thread is the defenders & rucks grabbing handful of jumper, they will ping you every time and we have to be better.

Good post.

Yep, Battle shoved him in the chest while on the ground just before Hayne tripped him - get on with it boys.

You've got to have a bit of leeway in the wet and slippery conditions.

If the umpire sees you grab a handful of jumper and then stretch it out, you've made it way too easy for them to pay a free against you, no use complaining, don't infringe next time!

Thanks for this.
Would you please point me to the directive from the Rules Committee to the Umpiring fraternity that 'retaliation' is no longer to be punished.

In my view it was a two way wrestle off the ball and rightfully ignored by the umpires.
To isolate the trip would be as sill as paying a hold against Battle for grappling with Hayne.
It didn't impact the play at all so play on in my book.

Exactly.

Glad someone has a bit of feel for the game around here.

[SaintPav]

So Higgins hit the post because the GWS players said so?

That must me good enough for some posters.

[Joffa Burns]

I thought the umpiring was pretty poor and one-sided from all umpires yesterday. I was particularly aggrieved the they missed (or at least I hope they did) Nick Hayne deliberately tripping a player while we were taking a free. It was disgraceful - should've been a 50 mp.

With that said, a few of our defenders need to watch the jumper holding - they will pay those every time.

That is an interesting one as Hayne was the retaliated to a two handed shove in the chest from Battle if I recall correctly.

For me it was way over officiated, particularly for the conditions.

The ruck free against McKernan in the last was totally unnecessary.
Why pay a free kick when the action had no impact whatsoever on the contest or the opposition player?

I really believe if there is no impact or disadvantage it should be play on.

The other thing mentioned in this thread is the defenders & rucks grabbing handful of jumper, they will ping you every time and we have to be better.

Good post.

Yep, Battle shoved him in the chest while on the ground just before Hayne tripped him - get on with it boys.

You've got to have a bit of leeway in the wet and slippery conditions.

If the umpire sees you grab a handful of jumper and then stretch it out, you've made it way too easy for them to pay a free against you, no use complaining, don't infringe next time!

Ok so you can trip a player now.

Quoted totally out of context.

The trip was not in play and isolated by one offender.
It was part of an off the ball wrestle which included holding and shoving.

If that was to be paid so should have the holding of Hayne by Battle.

Play on was the correct call.

[The_Dud]

So Higgins hit the post because the GWS players said so?

That must me good enough for some posters.

You forget we're playing by Curly rules.

[CURLY]

So Higgins hit the post because the GWS players said so?

That must me good enough for some posters.

Yep but when Howard was sure he touched the ball last year against Melbourne he was a lier.

[Joffa Burns]

, Higgins hitting the post

.

Was that the one that was reviewed by the ARC despite the goal umpire and field umpire being in no doubt that it was a goal? And on review there was absolutely no evidence that it hit the post.

We really got away with one there.

Pretty sure all goals are routinely reviewed during the (ad break) reset.
Nothing to see there, have seen plenty of those turned around when warranted.

[The_Dud]

So Higgins hit the post because the GWS players said so?

That must me good enough for some posters.

Yep but when Howard was sure he touched the ball last year against Melbourne he was a lier.

Whether they're lying or telling the truth depends on what coloured shirt they're wearing, isn't that how 'Curly logic' works?

[CURLY]

So Higgins hit the post because the GWS players said so?

That must me good enough for some posters.

Yep but when Howard was sure he touched the ball last year against Melbourne he was a lier.

Whether they're lying or telling the truth depends on what coloured shirt they're wearing, isn't that how 'Curly logic' works?

You just lie basically every post. At least Elani didnt let you down with her rubbish umpiring.

[SaintPav]

, Higgins hitting the post

.

Was that the one that was reviewed by the ARC despite the goal umpire and field umpire being in no doubt that it was a goal? And on review there was absolutely no evidence that it hit the post.

We really got away with one there.

Pretty sure all goals are routinely reviewed during the (ad break) reset.
Nothing to see there, have seen plenty of those turned around when warranted.

*sarcasm alert*

[The_Dud]

So Higgins hit the post because the GWS players said so?

That must me good enough for some posters.

Yep but when Howard was sure he touched the ball last year against Melbourne he was a lier.

Whether they're lying or telling the truth depends on what coloured shirt they're wearing, isn't that how 'Curly logic' works?

You just lie basically every post. At least Elani didnt let you down with her rubbish umpiring.

Nope! Handed us the game on a silver platter in the last minute, thanks Eleni!!

[CURLY]

So Higgins hit the post because the GWS players said so?

That must me good enough for some posters.

Yep but when Howard was sure he touched the ball last year against Melbourne he was a lier.

Whether they're lying or telling the truth depends on what coloured shirt they're wearing, isn't that how 'Curly logic' works?

You just lie basically every post. At least Elani didnt let you down with her rubbish umpiring.

Nope! Handed us the game on a silver platter in the last minute, thanks Eleni!!

After costing us multiple goals she finally gave us a free. Then made him hurry the kick.

[SaintPav]

Can you both just pull your heads in so we just enjoy a win for a change without the constant bickering?

[SaintPav]

So Higgins hit the post because the GWS players said so?

That must me good enough for some posters.

Yep but when Howard was sure he touched the ball last year against Melbourne he was a lier.

Whether they're lying or telling the truth depends on what coloured shirt they're wearing, isn't that how 'Curly logic' works?

You just lie basically every post. At least Elani didnt let you down with her rubbish umpiring.

Nope! Handed us the game on a silver platter in the last minute, thanks Eleni!!

After costing us multiple goals she finally gave us a free. Then made him hurry the kick.

Gotta say that was beautifully handled by Bulter.

The player on the mark ran straight at him and he didn't flinch.

[asiu]

if we were smart
one of the other players woulda been telling him how long was left on the shot clock

that removes the ‘intentionally icing’ possibility

getting on the right side of the ledger with the umps
wouldn’t hurt us

[Impatient Sainter]

Having watched the replay today gees we gave away a lot of soft free kicks just by holding the opponents jumper and those silly rucking frees. On the flip side we could have been paid a lot more frees as GWS constantly dropped the ball when tackled or tackled our blokes without the ball. Having said that we have to be smarter and put some candy on some of the oppositions acts.

[skeptic]

It looked to me like the Higgins one did hit the post

[skeptic]

I thought the umpiring was pretty poor and one-sided from all umpires yesterday. I was particularly aggrieved the they missed (or at least I hope they did) Nick Hayne deliberately tripping a player while we were taking a free. It was disgraceful - should've been a 50 mp.

With that said, a few of our defenders need to watch the jumper holding - they will pay those every time.

That is an interesting one as Hayne was the retaliated to a two handed shove in the chest from Battle if I recall correctly.

For me it was way over officiated, particularly for the conditions.

The ruck free against McKernan in the last was totally unnecessary.
Why pay a free kick when the action had no impact whatsoever on the contest or the opposition player?

I really believe if there is no impact or disadvantage it should be play on.

The other thing mentioned in this thread is the defenders & rucks grabbing handful of jumper, they will ping you every time and we have to be better.

I could not agree more

[Sainter_Dad]

It looked to me like the Higgins one did hit the post

Possibly - but the soft call was a goal - the video evidence was not conclusive to overturn - Simples

[StPeter]

In addition to the unbalanced and unfair free kick count, Eleni paid 3 very doubtful marks to GWS which were never held for sufficient time.

My absolute nightmare game would be one in which Eleni and Nick Foot are umpiring together against us.

[saynta]

In addition to the unbalanced and unfair free kick count, Eleni paid 3 very doubtful marks to GWS which were never held for sufficient time.

My absolute nightmare game would be one in which Eleni and Nick Foot are umpiring together against us.

Plus that "mark"of the round given to that little s*** Green was clearly touched by Hunter. No mark, play on. f*** me.

[The Billings Method]

Eleni is an example of how tokenism doesn't work. She is not up to AFL standard and makes a mockery of umpires in general. To rub salt into the wounds, she received an Australia Day honour. An Order of Australia for her services to umpiring. What services is the first question that comes to mind. The mediocrity of activism at its worst.