-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!
- Thread starter iLoVeNeWmAn
- Start date
Its as if the umps have a random dumb deliberate a week. There was a player in the vicinity for chrissakes. Response from the fans was great. Got one back.
A few ordinary decisions by the umps but it wasn't that bad,
we were just very undisciplined....especially in the back 50, most frees were there.
we were just very undisciplined....especially in the back 50, most frees were there.
I was more disappointed by the inconsistency from the 3 blind mice, Foley pushed in the back while kicking ends up on his face no free, crows player getys pushed in the back while kicking(southern stand side)= free kick! WTF?
Don't give a stuff if the maggots pay one or one hundred frees per game. It would be enjoyable though if umpires made their decisions with a consistent interpretation of the rules.Ian4 said:
Blind bastards ignore throwing or simple dropping of the possession with no actual disposal attempt. They allow scragging and dumping of players simply for being in the vicinity of a loose ball, then pay frees for insignificant inappropriate touching in a marking contest, or penalise for accidentally standing to close to someone who has a free.
Bastards miss obvious frees that are visible from the nose bleed seats, n then pick out boogers that leave everyone scratching their heads wondering what the hell is going on.
Free kicks in home state v interstate visitors, 2002-current:
Cb Gms FFor FAga Diff % Adv
----------------------------
WC 121 2449 1930 +519 +26.89
WB 39 741 591 +151 +25.38
Ca 45 855 722 +133 +18.42
NM 37 696 590 +106 +17.97
Ge 54 1163 987 +176 +17.83
PA 121 2359 2035 +324 +15.92
Co 56 977 882 +95 +10.77
Ha 34 650 589 +61 +10.36
Ad 124 2196 2029 +167 +8.23
Fr 117 2190 2031 +159 +7.83
St 43 795 745 +50 +6.71
Es 46 829 809 +20 +2.47
Br 138 2282 2248 +34 +1.51
Me 48 858 849 +9 +1.06
Sy 138 2476 2478 -2 -0.08
Ri 42 721 724 -3 -0.41
Cb Gms FFor FAga Diff % Adv
----------------------------
WC 121 2449 1930 +519 +26.89
WB 39 741 591 +151 +25.38
Ca 45 855 722 +133 +18.42
NM 37 696 590 +106 +17.97
Ge 54 1163 987 +176 +17.83
PA 121 2359 2035 +324 +15.92
Co 56 977 882 +95 +10.77
Ha 34 650 589 +61 +10.36
Ad 124 2196 2029 +167 +8.23
Fr 117 2190 2031 +159 +7.83
St 43 795 745 +50 +6.71
Es 46 829 809 +20 +2.47
Br 138 2282 2248 +34 +1.51
Me 48 858 849 +9 +1.06
Sy 138 2476 2478 -2 -0.08
Ri 42 721 724 -3 -0.41
Watching the replay, what was with the play on call for the Rance free on the boundary? bloody dumb momentum killer by the ump. Rance wasn't off his line, hadn't played on, was'nt out of bounds, calls play on and throw in????? inept Rucchuito called to the replay to see what happened, then said, 'what? he didn't do anything!'
The umps always call play on the instant Rance gets a free or mark. I'll admit he tends to be twitchy, and sometimes he unnecessarily moves off his line while he's still weighing things up, but he gets called to play on regardless of what he does. sh!ts me right off.
The umps always call play on the instant Rance gets a free or mark. I'll admit he tends to be twitchy, and sometimes he unnecessarily moves off his line while he's still weighing things up, but he gets called to play on regardless of what he does. sh!ts me right off.
tigersnake said:
Yeah I've noticed this happens a lot in our backline. Thinking about it more, it's often Rance who gets called to go.
Had to laugh today when Grigg was "lining up for goal" from 55. In no universe, wet or dry, is Grigg going to cover that sort of distance. In the end he handed off to Lids whose kick was touched on the line.
In the Collingwood game, Deledio was lining up from similar range (a little closer, actually). He got the "move it on" then was called to play on and had to rush his kick. Certainly he's kicked them from similar range in the past. What is the rule? When is a player considered too far out to be having a serious kick for goal and thus denied the obligatory 30 seconds?
Crows 2 more free kicks.
:rofl
I think we are the only team in World sport that gets a negative free kick count on our home ground.
The discrepancy was even worse at 3 quarter time.
I thought that the team that goes in first and tackles hardest gets to earn the free kicks more?
NOT RICHMOND.
JOKE.
:rofl
I think we are the only team in World sport that gets a negative free kick count on our home ground.
The discrepancy was even worse at 3 quarter time.
I thought that the team that goes in first and tackles hardest gets to earn the free kicks more?
NOT RICHMOND.
JOKE.
Ian4 said:
You cannot be serious!
I just watched it again, and it may be hard to tell because it was on the opposite side of the ground to the cameras, but it looks to me like the original trajectory of Newman's kick is AWAY from the boundary line. It was only the arc of the boundary and the bounce of the ball which saw it go out. Surely he can't be held responsible for how an oval-shaped ball is going to bounce?
Just saw the kick from another camera angle a few seconds later - definitely away from the boundary line.