What a suprise. Cheats.
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6607
- Joined: Sat 11 Jun 2011 4:52pm
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 1324 times
- Been thanked: 467 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
That was a real momentum stopper.thejiggingsaint wrote:I was disgusted more with the decision to review the Tom Curren goal. How in God's name can a goal umpire who is in a perfect position, and nearer to the ball than anyone, doubt that it was a goal?
As ex-president Peter Summers said:
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
St Kilda - At least we have a Crest!
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
St Kilda - At least we have a Crest!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9373
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
- busso mick
- Club Player
- Posts: 1212
- Joined: Wed 17 Mar 2004 8:57pm
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
From umpire Jimeoin? It whistled right over the goal umpires head, he was the only officiating person at the ground who would know whether it hit the post or not. But Jimeoin thought he would delay the game and get some free publicity for his new show.thejiggingsaint wrote:I was disgusted more with the decision to review the Tom Curren goal. How in God's name can a goal umpire who is in a perfect position, and nearer to the ball than anyone, doubt that it was a goal?
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
The reality is umpires have an unconscious bias to teams higher up the ladder (in their head they are a better team). How many games did you walk away from when we were at the top and think we got dudded in frees? Not many and other teams complained a lot. That is also to do with the players being first at the footy getting the frees. No surprise that after quarter time we went in a lot harder and the free kick count turned around.
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
Bluthy wrote:The reality is umpires have an unconscious bias to teams higher up the ladder (in their head they are a better team). How many games did you walk away from when we were at the top and think we got dudded in frees? Not many and other teams complained a lot. That is also to do with the players being first at the footy getting the frees. No surprise that after quarter time we went in a lot harder and the free kick count turned around.
Stats dont support that at all. i suggest when we win we care less about the umpiring and when we lose we care more.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9373
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
In the final analysis, if our boys had brought some of that second-half ticker they showed, to the FIRST quarter then the "umpire/cheating" complaint would be academic! WE PLAYED ABOUT AS BAD AS I'VE EVER SEEN IN THAT FIRST HALF! NO HIDING AWAY FROM THAT!
St Kilda forever ( God help me)
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
plugger66 wrote:Bluthy wrote:The reality is umpires have an unconscious bias to teams higher up the ladder (in their head they are a better team). How many games did you walk away from when we were at the top and think we got dudded in frees? Not many and other teams complained a lot. That is also to do with the players being first at the footy getting the frees. No surprise that after quarter time we went in a lot harder and the free kick count turned around.
Stats dont support that at all. i suggest when we win we care less about the umpiring and when we lose we care more.
More garbage.
It's insulting to people's intelligence to suggest that they only notice bad umpiring when their team wins.
The AFL rules and the umpiring itself are pitiful. The standard in our game on Saturday night was just awful. Both ways.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12421
- Joined: Tue 24 Mar 2009 11:05pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 296 times
- Been thanked: 55 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
rodgerfox wrote:plugger66 wrote:Bluthy wrote:The reality is umpires have an unconscious bias to teams higher up the ladder (in their head they are a better team). How many games did you walk away from when we were at the top and think we got dudded in frees? Not many and other teams complained a lot. That is also to do with the players being first at the footy getting the frees. No surprise that after quarter time we went in a lot harder and the free kick count turned around.
Stats dont support that at all. i suggest when we win we care less about the umpiring and when we lose we care more.
More garbage.
It's insulting to people's intelligence to suggest that they only notice bad umpiring when their team wins.
The AFL rules and the umpiring itself are pitiful. The standard in our game on Saturday night was just awful. Both ways.
I actually agree with Plugger though. When you win you don't hate them so much. The pain of that loss just highlights how with a bit less umpiring we could have won. I left games under Ross Lyon unhappy that we had been screwed by them but because we won I was to busy celebrating to mire myself in umpire hating. You can forgive everyone after a win Plugger and Stinger even get along better.
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
rodgerfox wrote:plugger66 wrote:Bluthy wrote:The reality is umpires have an unconscious bias to teams higher up the ladder (in their head they are a better team). How many games did you walk away from when we were at the top and think we got dudded in frees? Not many and other teams complained a lot. That is also to do with the players being first at the footy getting the frees. No surprise that after quarter time we went in a lot harder and the free kick count turned around.
Stats dont support that at all. i suggest when we win we care less about the umpiring and when we lose we care more.
More garbage.
It's insulting to people's intelligence to suggest that they only notice bad umpiring when their team wins.
The AFL rules and the umpiring itself are pitiful. The standard in our game on Saturday night was just awful. Both ways.
As i said stats dont support it. I wont call your post garbage, I will go with rubbish but its good to have you back. I missed a good laugh.
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
Umpiring was ordinary ...both ways..the trip was tiggy touchwood and the mark was clearly Hickeys'. Sunday Footy Show panellists were in agreeance with that.
However..I cant remember the last time I thought to myself "Oh God we got out of jail there" so many times at a game. I reckon 1/2 doz clear frees against us werent paid. Those tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists will never see them of course. Never happy unless the free count is 55-0 in our favour
Oh and before anyone pulls the "we have the worst free kick ratio in the comp" card...yes we do..but theres another stat that maybe partially explains it. Weve given away more free kicks inside D50 than any other team. Our defenders are undersized and are giving away chopping and scragging frees trying to compete with much bigger bodies
However..I cant remember the last time I thought to myself "Oh God we got out of jail there" so many times at a game. I reckon 1/2 doz clear frees against us werent paid. Those tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists will never see them of course. Never happy unless the free count is 55-0 in our favour
Oh and before anyone pulls the "we have the worst free kick ratio in the comp" card...yes we do..but theres another stat that maybe partially explains it. Weve given away more free kicks inside D50 than any other team. Our defenders are undersized and are giving away chopping and scragging frees trying to compete with much bigger bodies
THE BUBBLE HAS BURST
2011 player sponsor
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
50 against Dal was absolutely correct.
Players of his experience should know you cannot grab or hit the ball when in the hand of a player going back to take a free kick. Forget that he 'dropped it', the 50 should have been paid simply for Dal's stupidity of even getting his hand near the ball.
Senior players should not be making these mistakes with all the kids in our side learning from them.
Players of his experience should know you cannot grab or hit the ball when in the hand of a player going back to take a free kick. Forget that he 'dropped it', the 50 should have been paid simply for Dal's stupidity of even getting his hand near the ball.
Senior players should not be making these mistakes with all the kids in our side learning from them.
They walk amongst us...
- dragit
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13047
- Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2010 11:56am
- Has thanked: 605 times
- Been thanked: 315 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
Apologies for the above links…dragit wrote:If you are going to award a 50 metre penalty which changes the result of the game, then I just think you need to be certain… That one was dubious at very best.
http://www.afl.com.au/video/smart-repla ... ality=high
nothing in the armitage fend off either
http://www.afl.com.au/video/smart-repla ... ality=high
Hope we end up with an absolute superstar because of all these heart breaking losses
I grabbed them from the video of our game, but now they are pointing to the WCE v Sydney game… no idea why.
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
If the 50 was paid for Dal's stupidity, then it wasn't absolutely correct.HSVKing wrote:50 against Dal was absolutely correct.
Players of his experience should know you cannot grab or hit the ball when in the hand of a player going back to take a free kick. Forget that he 'dropped it', the 50 should have been paid simply for Dal's stupidity of even getting his hand near the ball.
There is no rule that says an umpire can pay a 50 for a player being stupid.
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
rodgerfox wrote:If the 50 was paid for Dal's stupidity, then it wasn't absolutely correct.HSVKing wrote:50 against Dal was absolutely correct.
Players of his experience should know you cannot grab or hit the ball when in the hand of a player going back to take a free kick. Forget that he 'dropped it', the 50 should have been paid simply for Dal's stupidity of even getting his hand near the ball.
There is no rule that says an umpire can pay a 50 for a player being stupid.
Really. thanks for those words.
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
The stupidity shown was hitting the ball...rodgerfox wrote:If the 50 was paid for Dal's stupidity, then it wasn't absolutely correct.HSVKing wrote:50 against Dal was absolutely correct.
Players of his experience should know you cannot grab or hit the ball when in the hand of a player going back to take a free kick. Forget that he 'dropped it', the 50 should have been paid simply for Dal's stupidity of even getting his hand near the ball.
There is no rule that says an umpire can pay a 50 for a player being stupid.
You're not really being serious now, are you?
They walk amongst us...
- dragit
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13047
- Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2010 11:56am
- Has thanked: 605 times
- Been thanked: 315 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
BT's actual comments
"That was not 50 and it has cost them a goal"
Dal Santo might have been silly to try and knock the ball - yes. But the fact is he didn't knock the ball away, the ball stayed in his hands and then he dropped it, so the call was wrong.
You can't start paying free's for stupidity, either he knocked the ball out of his hands or he didn't. He didn't.
Reminds me of the Rhys Stanley 50 metres that Hampson got, he pushed him square in the back, well before the ball arrived… but still got 50? Once again it was a stupid thing to do, but it's not 50
These screen grabs clearly show Pittard still holding the ball with Dal's hand no-where near it.
"That was not 50 and it has cost them a goal"
Dal Santo might have been silly to try and knock the ball - yes. But the fact is he didn't knock the ball away, the ball stayed in his hands and then he dropped it, so the call was wrong.
You can't start paying free's for stupidity, either he knocked the ball out of his hands or he didn't. He didn't.
Reminds me of the Rhys Stanley 50 metres that Hampson got, he pushed him square in the back, well before the ball arrived… but still got 50? Once again it was a stupid thing to do, but it's not 50
These screen grabs clearly show Pittard still holding the ball with Dal's hand no-where near it.
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
HSVKing wrote:The stupidity shown was hitting the ball...rodgerfox wrote:If the 50 was paid for Dal's stupidity, then it wasn't absolutely correct.HSVKing wrote:50 against Dal was absolutely correct.
Players of his experience should know you cannot grab or hit the ball when in the hand of a player going back to take a free kick. Forget that he 'dropped it', the 50 should have been paid simply for Dal's stupidity of even getting his hand near the ball.
There is no rule that says an umpire can pay a 50 for a player being stupid.
You're not really being serious now, are you?
I am being serious.
The decision was incorrect.
What Dal did was not illegal.
Stupid? Yes. Illegal? No. 50m penalty? No.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12795
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 802 times
- Been thanked: 432 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
What did the umpire pay the 50 for?
Dal hitting the ball out of the Port players hands
or
entering the 'protected area'.
If it was scenario #1, then he has been conned by the Port player
If it was scenario #2, then he was being extremely harsh and technical on Dal
The 50 on top of a very poor free kick in the first place just seemed to compound the glaring umpiring error.
IMHO the replay clearly showed Stanley tackling the running Port player, who then cause the tackle to slip down to his feet by his forward motion.
Again IMHO it was akin to a player charging at an opponent with his head down and when contact is made is paid a free kick for contact above the shoulders. The action of the player with the footy caused the infraction and was rewarded by the umpire.
Dal hitting the ball out of the Port players hands
or
entering the 'protected area'.
If it was scenario #1, then he has been conned by the Port player
If it was scenario #2, then he was being extremely harsh and technical on Dal
The 50 on top of a very poor free kick in the first place just seemed to compound the glaring umpiring error.
IMHO the replay clearly showed Stanley tackling the running Port player, who then cause the tackle to slip down to his feet by his forward motion.
Again IMHO it was akin to a player charging at an opponent with his head down and when contact is made is paid a free kick for contact above the shoulders. The action of the player with the footy caused the infraction and was rewarded by the umpire.
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
He paid it once the ball dropped out of the player's hand.
Simply put, the umpire didn't see the actual incident. He paid a 50 for something he didn't actual see.
Poor umpiring.
Wasn't the only instance on the night though.
Simply put, the umpire didn't see the actual incident. He paid a 50 for something he didn't actual see.
Poor umpiring.
Wasn't the only instance on the night though.
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
rodgerfox wrote:He paid it once the ball dropped out of the player's hand.
Simply put, the umpire didn't see the actual incident. He paid a 50 for something he didn't actual see.
Poor umpiring.
Wasn't the only instance on the night though.
No it wasnt as its been like since I started watching the game 43 years ago. matter of fact the umpiring then was 10 times as bad and there was no real packs back then.
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8583
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 527 times
- Been thanked: 1532 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
Dal got off far too easily on this. It was a stupid, stupid thing to do for a senior player.HSVKing wrote:50 against Dal was absolutely correct.
Players of his experience should know you cannot grab or hit the ball when in the hand of a player going back to take a free kick. Forget that he 'dropped it', the 50 should have been paid simply for Dal's stupidity of even getting his hand near the ball.
Senior players should not be making these mistakes with all the kids in our side learning from them.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
+1.... the maggots are doing okay in games against us......that's about their fifth win....CURLY wrote:Game decided by a cheating umpire. Watched the Port player drop the ball himself and awards him the match winning goal. Blatant cheat but not a suprise after the goal they took off us in the first and gave them a goal.
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5212
- Joined: Mon 07 Aug 2006 9:50pm
- Location: Queensland - Beautiful one day ... you know the rest
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 318 times
Re: What a suprise. Cheats.
its staggering that the people complaining about this arent equally complaining about Armo taking a dive and getting 50mt in the firstkosifantutti wrote:Dal got off far too easily on this. It was a stupid, stupid thing to do for a senior player.
ONLY difference is Armitage missed his shot on goal.
Seeya
*************
*************