Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Looking at the video above I would say it's 50/50, he did bump him and but he did go down easy. If a free was paid every time someone went down off the ball there'd be dozens a quarter. It also looked like the umpire was setting the mark and had his back to the incident.
They don't pay 50s for someone going to ground. They do pay 50s for someone being bumped in the back off the ball. Which is exactly what happened.
But it's OK because the umpire had his back to the ball. I can't wait until they bring in more than one umpire.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 12 Oct 2020 1:32pm
I think the bigger question is, why did the umpires give us multiple shots at goal from free kicks and 50m penalties when they know there's an AFL backed conspiracy against us?!?
Heads will roll!
Tell us when this occurred please. I suggest your lying.
For someone who apparently pays so much attention to the game and umpiring (to the point where on your couch at home you know what's happening better than people 2 meters away), you seem to miss a lot.
Off the top of my head, Steele's goal from a deliberate out of bounds call, and Marshall's missed shot from a 50m penalty.
Then there's Battles shot at goal which came from another deliberate OOB call on the wing, Marsh's from an out on the full, Butler's goal kicked 'before' the siren (no review?)
Worst conspiracy ever!
Steele on the boundary yep. Marsh shot from a on the full hard to argue other wise when the ball lands in the stands. The umpire just chose to ignore Kent getting decked by Balta. Clear goal DENIED BY UMPIRE CHEATING. Marshall took a mark then Lynch decked Howard.
Battle took a contested mark please try and get it right.
And how did he end up getting that mark?
Maybe you need to start another umpiring thread about it?
A free kick 120 meters from goal that Battle still had to out mark 3 defenders. gee thanks.
By the way nice diversion from the thread topic. Is that because you can't answer why umpires ignored such blatant 50 meters our way.
The Cotchin one happened almost instantaneously to another player, no 50.
Didn't see or hear anything about the Kent one.
Umpires already did pay a 50 against Lynch, did they see the knee? You know they don't have slow mo replays out on the field?
Are you going to answer why the umps would give us multiple shots at goal if they're instructed to cheat against us?
So you don’t think that Marsh or who ever it was should have been given a 50 after Kent was thrown to the ground?
As I said above, didn't see the incident so I can't comment.
If you didn’t see it, you didn’t see it but a bit of faith in your fellow Saints fans would be nice.
The kick should have been brought to the top of the goal square which would have made it a certain goal.
There's a difference between having faith in my fellow Saints fans and going off the word of a bloke who has time and time again proven to have no credibility on this subject.
Looking at the video above I would say it's 50/50, he did bump him and but he did go down easy. If a free was paid every time someone went down off the ball there'd be dozens a quarter. It also looked like the umpire was setting the mark and had his back to the incident.
It’s a 50 no doubt.
I think you can be pretty blinkered too at times.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
SaintPav wrote: ↑Mon 12 Oct 2020 4:17pm
It’s a 50 no doubt.
I think you can be pretty blinkered too at times.
Maybe. Like I said, if it was paid I'd be fine, and if it wasn't I'd be fine. It happened behind the umpire in shot's back, I don't know where the others were.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 12 Oct 2020 4:02pm
Did he or did he not get a 50 meter penalty that resulted in a shot at goal?
Did Steele get or not get a shot at goal from a deliberate out of bounds free kick?
Does that not equal 2 shots at goal?
One from a free the other a mark. You still haven't told us why AFL umpires allowed our players to be attacked without awarding 50 meter penalties.
And you haven't told me why we received multiple shots at goal from the umpires if they're instructed by the AFL to cheat against us?
We received one free with in 45 meters of goal. Just looking through the rule book now about being allowed to bash a player after a free is awarded against your team.
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 12 Oct 2020 4:02pm
Did he or did he not get a 50 meter penalty that resulted in a shot at goal?
Did Steele get or not get a shot at goal from a deliberate out of bounds free kick?
Does that not equal 2 shots at goal?
One from a free the other a mark. You still haven't told us why AFL umpires allowed our players to be attacked without awarding 50 meter penalties.
And you haven't told me why we received multiple shots at goal from the umpires if they're instructed by the AFL to cheat against us?
We received one free with in 45 meters of goal. Just looking through the rule book now about being allowed to bash a player after a free is awarded against your team.
So are you saying Marshall didn't get a shot at goal as the result of a 50m penalty, and Steele didn't get a shot from a deliberate out of bounds?
Like I said, different reality.
And just for context, here was your response to the 50m penalty Long gave away last week, which was more blatant than any of the 'missed' ones you're claiming, and similar to the one paid against Boyd
CURLY wrote: ↑Sat 03 Oct 2020 7:22pm
Yep umpires f*** you
Yep, totally objective.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 12 Oct 2020 4:02pm
Did he or did he not get a 50 meter penalty that resulted in a shot at goal?
Did Steele get or not get a shot at goal from a deliberate out of bounds free kick?
Does that not equal 2 shots at goal?
One from a free the other a mark. You still haven't told us why AFL umpires allowed our players to be attacked without awarding 50 meter penalties.
And you haven't told me why we received multiple shots at goal from the umpires if they're instructed by the AFL to cheat against us?
We received one free with in 45 meters of goal. Just looking through the rule book now about being allowed to bash a player after a free is awarded against your team.
So are you saying Marshall didn't get a shot at goal as the result of a 50m penalty, and Steele didn't get a shot from a deliberate out of bounds?
Like I said, different reality.
And just for context, here was your response to the 50m penalty Long gave away last week, which was more blatant than any of the 'missed' ones you're claiming, and similar to the one paid against Boyd
CURLY wrote: ↑Sat 03 Oct 2020 7:22pm
Yep umpires f*** you
Yep, totally objective.
Yep exactly they paid a free to Steele for dropping the ball on the tight angle.
Marsh got a free when Balta kicked the ball out on the full. Umpire can't ignore those. He then allowed Balta to bash into Kent no 50 costing us a goal.
Marshall took a mark on the wing Lynch then head locked and slung Howard clear 50 took him to 40 out. Hardly a gift although he allowed Lynch to then knee Howard in the head.
Yes Long got pinned for 50 exactly my point they pinned him the least of all incidents we are talking about yet bang Hunter dives and they pay 50.
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 12 Oct 2020 1:32pm
I think the bigger question is, why did the umpires give us multiple shots at goal from free kicks and 50m penalties when they know there's an AFL backed conspiracy against us?!?
Heads will roll!
Tell us when this occurred please. I suggest your lying.
For someone who apparently pays so much attention to the game and umpiring (to the point where on your couch at home you know what's happening better than people 2 meters away), you seem to miss a lot.
Off the top of my head, Steele's goal from a deliberate out of bounds call, and Marshall's missed shot from a 50m penalty.
Then there's Battles shot at goal which came from another deliberate OOB call on the wing, Marsh's from an out on the full, Butler's goal kicked 'before' the siren (no review?)
Worst conspiracy ever!
Steele on the boundary yep. Marsh shot from a on the full hard to argue other wise when the ball lands in the stands. The umpire just chose to ignore Kent getting decked by Balta. Clear goal DENIED BY UMPIRE CHEATING. Marshall took a mark then Lynch decked Howard.
Battle took a contested mark please try and get it right.
And how did he end up getting that mark?
Maybe you need to start another umpiring thread about it?
A free kick 120 meters from goal that Battle still had to out mark 3 defenders. gee thanks.
By the way nice diversion from the thread topic. Is that because you can't answer why umpires ignored such blatant 50 meters our way.
The Cotchin one happened almost instantaneously to another player, no 50.
Didn't see or hear anything about the Kent one.
Umpires already did pay a 50 against Lynch, did they see the knee? You know they don't have slow mo replays out on the field?
Are you going to answer why the umps would give us multiple shots at goal if they're instructed to cheat against us?
I am sure the umpire was waiting for a St Kilda player to push Cotchin over so he could reverse the kick from Billings.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 12 Oct 2020 1:32pm
I think the bigger question is, why did the umpires give us multiple shots at goal from free kicks and 50m penalties when they know there's an AFL backed conspiracy against us?!?
Heads will roll!
Tell us when this occurred please. I suggest your lying.
For someone who apparently pays so much attention to the game and umpiring (to the point where on your couch at home you know what's happening better than people 2 meters away), you seem to miss a lot.
Off the top of my head, Steele's goal from a deliberate out of bounds call, and Marshall's missed shot from a 50m penalty.
Then there's Battles shot at goal which came from another deliberate OOB call on the wing, Marsh's from an out on the full, Butler's goal kicked 'before' the siren (no review?)
Worst conspiracy ever!
Steele on the boundary yep. Marsh shot from a on the full hard to argue other wise when the ball lands in the stands. The umpire just chose to ignore Kent getting decked by Balta. Clear goal DENIED BY UMPIRE CHEATING. Marshall took a mark then Lynch decked Howard.
Battle took a contested mark please try and get it right.
And how did he end up getting that mark?
Maybe you need to start another umpiring thread about it?
A free kick 120 meters from goal that Battle still had to out mark 3 defenders. gee thanks.
By the way nice diversion from the thread topic. Is that because you can't answer why umpires ignored such blatant 50 meters our way.
The Cotchin one happened almost instantaneously to another player, no 50.
Didn't see or hear anything about the Kent one.
Umpires already did pay a 50 against Lynch, did they see the knee? You know they don't have slow mo replays out on the field?
Are you going to answer why the umps would give us multiple shots at goal if they're instructed to cheat against us?
I am sure the umpire was waiting for a St Kilda player to push Cotchin over so he could reverse the kick from Billings.
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 12 Oct 2020 1:32pm
I think the bigger question is, why did the umpires give us multiple shots at goal from free kicks and 50m penalties when they know there's an AFL backed conspiracy against us?!?
Heads will roll!
Tell us when this occurred please. I suggest your lying.
For someone who apparently pays so much attention to the game and umpiring (to the point where on your couch at home you know what's happening better than people 2 meters away), you seem to miss a lot.
Off the top of my head, Steele's goal from a deliberate out of bounds call, and Marshall's missed shot from a 50m penalty.
Then there's Battles shot at goal which came from another deliberate OOB call on the wing, Marsh's from an out on the full, Butler's goal kicked 'before' the siren (no review?)
Worst conspiracy ever!
Steele on the boundary yep. Marsh shot from a on the full hard to argue other wise when the ball lands in the stands. The umpire just chose to ignore Kent getting decked by Balta. Clear goal DENIED BY UMPIRE CHEATING. Marshall took a mark then Lynch decked Howard.
Battle took a contested mark please try and get it right.
And how did he end up getting that mark?
Maybe you need to start another umpiring thread about it?
A free kick 120 meters from goal that Battle still had to out mark 3 defenders. gee thanks.
By the way nice diversion from the thread topic. Is that because you can't answer why umpires ignored such blatant 50 meters our way.
The Cotchin one happened almost instantaneously to another player, no 50.
Didn't see or hear anything about the Kent one.
Umpires already did pay a 50 against Lynch, did they see the knee? You know they don't have slow mo replays out on the field?
Are you going to answer why the umps would give us multiple shots at goal if they're instructed to cheat against us?
So you don’t think that Marsh or who ever it was should have been given a 50 after Kent was thrown to the ground?
As I said above, didn't see the incident so I can't comment.
Fair enough.
It was very difficult to spot.
There are three umpires not just the one setting the mark.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 12 Oct 2020 1:32pm
I think the bigger question is, why did the umpires give us multiple shots at goal from free kicks and 50m penalties when they know there's an AFL backed conspiracy against us?!?
Heads will roll!
Tell us when this occurred please. I suggest your lying.
For someone who apparently pays so much attention to the game and umpiring (to the point where on your couch at home you know what's happening better than people 2 meters away), you seem to miss a lot.
Off the top of my head, Steele's goal from a deliberate out of bounds call, and Marshall's missed shot from a 50m penalty.
Then there's Battles shot at goal which came from another deliberate OOB call on the wing, Marsh's from an out on the full, Butler's goal kicked 'before' the siren (no review?)
Worst conspiracy ever!
Steele on the boundary yep. Marsh shot from a on the full hard to argue other wise when the ball lands in the stands. The umpire just chose to ignore Kent getting decked by Balta. Clear goal DENIED BY UMPIRE CHEATING. Marshall took a mark then Lynch decked Howard.
Battle took a contested mark please try and get it right.
And how did he end up getting that mark?
Maybe you need to start another umpiring thread about it?
A free kick 120 meters from goal that Battle still had to out mark 3 defenders. gee thanks.
By the way nice diversion from the thread topic. Is that because you can't answer why umpires ignored such blatant 50 meters our way.
The Cotchin one happened almost instantaneously to another player, no 50.
Didn't see or hear anything about the Kent one.
Umpires already did pay a 50 against Lynch, did they see the knee? You know they don't have slow mo replays out on the field?
Are you going to answer why the umps would give us multiple shots at goal if they're instructed to cheat against us?
So you don’t think that Marsh or who ever it was should have been given a 50 after Kent was thrown to the ground?
As I said above, didn't see the incident so I can't comment.
Fair enough.
It was very difficult to spot.
LOL.
I'm sure The Comrade can't remember this one in his press conference tomorrow.
<1 week ban for multiple political posts on the footy forum>
Want to watch the most boring and devious thing on television and probably in mankind's history, then tune into a daily live press conference at 11am.
Yes we got screwed by the umpires. But Jesus people sound delusional claiming conspiracy theories. In fact the bloke running the show supports us. He got Lethlain to come to the club to straighten things up when he ended up in hot water. If Gil wanted us to fail so much why wouldn’t he get Simon to tear us down from the inside??
Take a breath, we got screwed it happens we also screwed ourselves with woeful kicking in front of goals ( maybe our players were on the take?? )
I understand bitching about umpiring decisions but this “Town Hall” doesn’t want us to win is stupid and ridiculous. If your gonna pull that crap at least go full conspiracy nut and claim that underlord lizard people are scheming to keep the Stkilda football club down at least that is entertaining and just as truthful as the other garbage being rolled out.
DJKCR wrote: ↑Tue 13 Oct 2020 4:59am
Yes we got screwed by the umpires. But Jesus people sound delusional claiming conspiracy theories. In fact the bloke running the show supports us. He got Lethlain to come to the club to straighten things up when he ended up in hot water. If Gil wanted us to fail so much why wouldn’t he get Simon to tear us down from the inside??
Take a breath, we got screwed it happens we also screwed ourselves with woeful kicking in front of goals ( maybe our players were on the take?? )
I understand bitching about umpiring decisions but this “Town Hall” doesn’t want us to win is stupid and ridiculous. If your gonna pull that crap at least go full conspiracy nut and claim that underlord lizard people are scheming to keep the Stkilda football club down at least that is entertaining and just as truthful as the other garbage being rolled out.
I still maintain the umpires are coached and come into games with a mindset and this has a unintended impact on decision making.
When you are the team that is the massive underdog and not expected to win then the umpires ARE looking out for how you are going to level the playing field.
So they are on the lookout for players holding on to Richmond midfielders or holding or blocking Richmond forwards.
On the flip side they are not looking out for the same things to be paid to the underdog.
End result is that Steele and King were not paid blatant free kicks. King especially should have been paid 2 obvious free kicks.
And Lynch got paid a couple of absolute soft free kicks.
In a game of inches This has an impact.
There was an incident that actually showed the umpires mindset that Richmond tried to milk. I think it was the Richmond game but could have been the Dogs game. I shall try to find it on the replay if I can. But it was when the Saints has a free and two Saints players remonstrated with the opposition who took the opportunity to grab both their jumpers and be the only one pushing and shoving and the Saints players actually had their hands in the air - with the umpire yelling “let go / break it up / you’ve already got the free etc” clearly thinking it was the Saints players continuing the scuffling. It shows state of mind vs relying on their eyes and assessing ONLY the actions in front of them.
I ADMIT to being one eyed AND having a shocking memory but that’s how I saw that incident at the time and remember thinking that it really shows how umpires come into games with a mindset.
AwayInUSA no longer ... have based myself back in Melbourne for a decade of Saintsational Success (with regular trips back to the USA)
