Umpiring is corrupt and paid for

[Scollop]

We won the game despite any umpiring indiscretions
This is the way I like it. This is the way we should be. Let’s win these games despite the umpires.

We're on the same wavelength

[CURLY]

Here's the thing though. The umpiring didn't decide the match. It hardly ever does

Only guys like CURLY try and turn every loss into an excuse to blame umpires.

There's no point wallowing in self pity and whinging over every incorrect decision.

We didn't need the umpires to win the game. We needed to play to kick goals. We were behind again and we played an attacking, exciting brand. That should be the standard. It's the reason Hawthorn has been so good recently.

Umpires made some horrendous errors today all when they had a clear choice.

[Scollop]

Here's the thing though. The umpiring didn't decide the match. It hardly ever does

Only guys like CURLY try and turn every loss into an excuse to blame umpires.

There's no point wallowing in self pity and whinging over every incorrect decision.

We didn't need the umpires to win the game. We needed to play to kick goals. We were behind again and we played an attacking, exciting brand. That should be the standard. It's the reason Hawthorn has been so good recently.

Umpires made some horrendous errors today all when they had a clear choice.

What do you expect? Zero mistakes!!! That's fairyland fantasy land thinking

Who are your favourite St Kilda players? Do they ever make mistakes?

What about you? Are you perfect

[CURLY]

Here's the thing though. The umpiring didn't decide the match. It hardly ever does

Only guys like CURLY try and turn every loss into an excuse to blame umpires.

There's no point wallowing in self pity and whinging over every incorrect decision.

We didn't need the umpires to win the game. We needed to play to kick goals. We were behind again and we played an attacking, exciting brand. That should be the standard. It's the reason Hawthorn has been so good recently.

Umpires made some horrendous errors today all when they had a clear choice.

What do you expect? Zero mistakes!!! That's fairyland fantasy land thinking

Who are your favourite St Kilda players? Do they ever make mistakes?

What about you? Are you perfect

Mistakes I accept blatant non calls like Heeney on Webster unacceptable

The free to Fox right before hard time unacceptable

[Killa]

You strive for consistency

Consistency is not an attribute you would ever attribute to the AFL Umpires

And, to the AFL, some sides and some players are more relevant versus other sides and players

Look at the “wailing wall” Match Report on the AFL Website

Really?

This is the Official AFL Website

It contains a summary of St Kilda as a football side, a summary which singles out St Kilda

Noting ALL sides adopt the same tactics across games

So ALL sides defend - and ALL sides pressure

That is how games are won (given consistently with the adjudication of the Umpires)

[King Max]

The strange one was Arie’s sliding mark on the boundary which was paid by the field umpire.
Until the boundary umpire decided he wants to get involved. Stick to your knitting pal.

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

[CURLY]

The strange one was Arie’s sliding mark on the boundary which was paid by the field umpire.
Until the boundary umpire decided he wants to get involved. Stick to your knitting pal.

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Agreed on the Howard touch. The thing is if he had called the NWM one touched also that would have been a point also.

[Jacks Back]

What s***s me is that you can touch the ball but the other player is still payed a mark? (Butler et al). What's the difference? If it's touched it's a point or it's not a mark - touched, Play On! Two rules for the same thing (touched) is a bit strange.

[CURLY]

Watching Warner trying to run through an Owens tackle and drop the ball was the worst he ran forward and kicked a goal. Amazing the different interpretations other teams get of rules.

[Life Long Saint]

What s***s me is that you can touch the ball but the other player is still payed a mark? (Butler et al). What's the difference? If it's touched it's a point or it's not a mark - touched, Play On! Two rules for the same thing (touched) is a bit strange.

Do we really want to go down this path?
There are multiple interpretations for the same act everywhere.
Insufficient intent v deliberate rushed behind.
Marking contest v ruck contest with using your arm to fend off.
I am sure there are others, but the inconsistency in the rule definition is amplified on the field with four different interpretations.

[Yorkeys]

Here's the thing though. The umpiring didn't decide the match. It hardly ever does

Only guys like CURLY try and turn every loss into an excuse to blame umpires.

There's no point wallowing in self pity and whinging over every incorrect decision.

We didn't need the umpires to win the game. We needed to play to kick goals. We were behind again and we played an attacking, exciting brand. That should be the standard. It's the reason Hawthorn has been so good recently.

Umpires made some horrendous errors today all when they had a clear choice.

What do you expect? Zero mistakes!!! That's fairyland fantasy land thinking

Who are your favourite St Kilda players? Do they ever make mistakes?

What about you? Are you perfect

No, fair enough.
At the same time don't pretend umpires decisions have no impact on the results of games. Or that umpires are not human and have biases.

[St Dave]

The strange one was Arie’s sliding mark on the boundary which was paid by the field umpire.
Until the boundary umpire decided he wants to get involved. Stick to your knitting pal.

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Aries mark clearly hit the ground though. The field umpire was unsighted but the boundary ump was in the perfect spot to see it. That is the exact right result if you want the umps to get it right all the time.

[Beno88]

Frees in the last 37 minutes of the match...

St Kilda - 1
Sydney - 10

[CURLY]

Frees in the last 37 minutes of the match...

St Kilda - 1
Sydney - 10

Yep amazing to think they didn't infringe more than once.

[King Max]

The strange one was Arie’s sliding mark on the boundary which was paid by the field umpire.
Until the boundary umpire decided he wants to get involved. Stick to your knitting pal.

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Aries mark clearly hit the ground though. The field umpire was unsighted but the boundary ump was in the perfect spot to see it. That is the exact right result if you want the umps to get it right all the time.

I hear what you're saying but it just brings in inconsistencies. The field umpire decides if a mark has been taken. The reason the mark should not have been paid has got nothing to do with the boundary line and therefore nothing to do with the boundary umpire. If it's juggled over the line that's a different story.
What if Arie stopped a couple of metres before the line? Does the boundary umpire still say I don't think he marked it? What if it happens in the middle of the ground but the boundary umpire still sees it? Does he blow his whistle?

[seano1]

The strange one was Arie’s sliding mark on the boundary which was paid by the field umpire.
Until the boundary umpire decided he wants to get involved. Stick to your knitting pal.

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Aries mark clearly hit the ground though. The field umpire was unsighted but the boundary ump was in the perfect spot to see it. That is the exact right result if you want the umps to get it right all the time.

If anyone should stick to their knitting it’s not the boundary umpire as he did see that non mark he was in perfect of the ball hitting the ground and then Aries trying to claim the mark as he slid across the boundary

[seano1]

The strange one was Arie’s sliding mark on the boundary which was paid by the field umpire.
Until the boundary umpire decided he wants to get involved. Stick to your knitting pal.

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Aries mark clearly hit the ground though. The field umpire was unsighted but the boundary ump was in the perfect spot to see it. That is the exact right result if you want the umps to get it right all the time.

I hear what you're saying but it just brings in inconsistencies. The field umpire decides if a mark has been taken. The reason the mark should not have been paid has got nothing to do with the boundary line and therefore nothing to do with the boundary umpire. If it's juggled over the line that's a different story.
What if Arie stopped a couple of metres before the line? Does the boundary umpire still say I don't think he marked it? What if it happens in the middle of the ground but the boundary umpire still sees it? Does he blow his whistle?

Boundary can alert the field umpire to anything thing he wants and he can like goal umpires report players for serious misconduct but haven’t seen that in awhile

[CURLY]

Watching game now Warner caught red hot charging through Webster
Ball up

Shoemakers caught in the last no opportunity tries to get it out HTB

[St Dave]

The strange one was Arie’s sliding mark on the boundary which was paid by the field umpire.
Until the boundary umpire decided he wants to get involved. Stick to your knitting pal.

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Aries mark clearly hit the ground though. The field umpire was unsighted but the boundary ump was in the perfect spot to see it. That is the exact right result if you want the umps to get it right all the time.

I hear what you're saying but it just brings in inconsistencies. The field umpire decides if a mark has been taken. The reason the mark should not have been paid has got nothing to do with the boundary line and therefore nothing to do with the boundary umpire. If it's juggled over the line that's a different story.
What if Arie stopped a couple of metres before the line? Does the boundary umpire still say I don't think he marked it? What if it happens in the middle of the ground but the boundary umpire still sees it? Does he blow his whistle?

I would imagine even with some spec savers the boundary ups would struggle to see the middle of the field, but as long as the call is right I don't care who makes it. I wouldn't mind if the boundary umpire were used more for incorrect disposal, you see a lot of those little flick passes in stoppages where the ump doing the ball up is unsighted (maybe because they are backing out of the contest trying not to get knocked over) and that's why they get missed all the time.

[The_Dud]

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Uhhh when did I say they were favouring us?

There were 3 goal reviews, all correct decisions, the umpires just called it as they saw it, because believe it or not, they don’t have a dog in the fight!

It’s the clowns like this…

Clearly touched well done NWM

…who continue to embarrass themselves every week with their umpire obsession.

The fact that there are multiple umpiring sooking threads after every week, especially after our best win in a long time, is extremely sad and shows the victim mentality some go thru life with.

[CURLY]

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Uhhh when did I say they were favouring us?

There were 3 goal reviews, all correct decisions, the umpires just called it as they saw it, because believe it or not, they don’t have a dog in the fight!

It’s the clowns like this…

Clearly touched well done NWM

…who continue to embarrass themselves every week with their umpire obsession.

The fact that there are multiple umpiring sooking threads after every week, especially after our best win in a long time, is extremely sad and shows the victim mentality some go thru life with.

Got a s*** run in an even game.

Umpire even ignored a blatant smack in the head.

[The_Dud]

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Uhhh when did I say they were favouring us?

There were 3 goal reviews, all correct decisions, the umpires just called it as they saw it, because believe it or not, they don’t have a dog in the fight!

It’s the clowns like this…

Clearly touched well done NWM

…who continue to embarrass themselves every week with their umpire obsession.

The fact that there are multiple umpiring sooking threads after every week, especially after our best win in a long time, is extremely sad and shows the victim mentality some go thru life with.

Got a s*** run in an even game.

Umpire even ignored a blatant smack in the head.

Wood trips Swans player - ignored

Butler jumps into Swans players back on the ground - ignored

[CURLY]

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Uhhh when did I say they were favouring us?

There were 3 goal reviews, all correct decisions, the umpires just called it as they saw it, because believe it or not, they don’t have a dog in the fight!

It’s the clowns like this…

Clearly touched well done NWM

…who continue to embarrass themselves every week with their umpire obsession.

The fact that there are multiple umpiring sooking threads after every week, especially after our best win in a long time, is extremely sad and shows the victim mentality some go thru life with.

Got a s*** run in an even game.

Umpire even ignored a blatant smack in the head.

Wood trips Swans player - ignored

Butler jumps into Swans players back on the ground - ignored

lol

[Sainter_Dad]

The strange one was Arie’s sliding mark on the boundary which was paid by the field umpire.
Until the boundary umpire decided he wants to get involved. Stick to your knitting pal.

And lol at the dud saying the Howard touched review was the umpires favouring us. That was literally the goal umpire calling a Sydney point a goal and not wanting to review it.

Aries mark clearly hit the ground though. The field umpire was unsighted but the boundary ump was in the perfect spot to see it. That is the exact right result if you want the umps to get it right all the time.

Yeah I agree it touched the ground - but since when are boundary umpires able to overrule the central umpire - and if they are able to do so - why don't they when they see other stuff happening?????

[Scollop]

They award free kicks for out on the full. They also rule in favour of a free if the ball comes off the foot and goes out of bounds.

The boundary is their domain. He clearly saw the ball go out after it wasn't marked. The angle was best for the boundary umpire in this case to see if it was a mark or not.

Boundary umpires do communicate with field umpires don't they?

Surely we're not going to continuously whinge about umpires getting things wrong and then complain when they get it right and it doesn't suit us