You should choof away more often.
The umpires tonight
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19099
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: The umpires tonight
You should choof away more often.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Sun 02 May 2010 6:24pm
- Location: Adelaide, SA
- Has thanked: 49 times
- Been thanked: 56 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Ken Hinkley the next coach to bitch about the umpires. Watch his press conference. I agree with most of what he said because the rules shouldnt change week to week, but what specifically was he talking about when he said this was a 'strange' game?
- Sainter_Dad
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6339
- Joined: Thu 05 Jun 2008 1:04pm
- Has thanked: 263 times
- Been thanked: 1124 times
Re: The umpires tonight
The explanation is easy - Saturday Night - Ladder Leader v Contender - FTA game - we got better - more consistent umpiring
Our fate is in our hands - be the Best - get the Best!
If we play attractive football - and don't get relegated to Sunday afternoon - we get the better umpires.
Not a conspiracy - just a fact - You don't send a barrister to plead 'no contest' to a parking ticket.
Our fate is in our hands - be the Best - get the Best!
If we play attractive football - and don't get relegated to Sunday afternoon - we get the better umpires.
Not a conspiracy - just a fact - You don't send a barrister to plead 'no contest' to a parking ticket.
“Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown, ignorance can be educated, and drunkenness sobered, but stupid lasts forever.”
― Aristophanes
If you have a Bee in your Bonnet - I can assist you with that - but it WILL involve some smacking upside the head!
― Aristophanes
If you have a Bee in your Bonnet - I can assist you with that - but it WILL involve some smacking upside the head!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1303
- Joined: Thu 22 Jun 2006 4:03pm
- Location: StKilda East
- Has thanked: 50 times
- Been thanked: 233 times
- Contact:
Re: The umpires tonight
Probably the best display of umpiring we have had for a very long time and maybe even the rub of the green went our way for a change.
I am sure last week's display, the subsequent publicity and dropping of at least one of the officiating umpires helped us last night.
Obviously, for a change, a very biased home crowd wasn't allowed to influence the decisions.
I am sure last week's display, the subsequent publicity and dropping of at least one of the officiating umpires helped us last night.
Obviously, for a change, a very biased home crowd wasn't allowed to influence the decisions.
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2133
- Joined: Fri 22 Jul 2005 9:27am
- Location: Rockville
- Has thanked: 587 times
- Been thanked: 178 times
Re: The umpires tonight
That’s a good point. I also think that better teams get a better run from the umpires. Never heard Clarko mention umpires when the Hawks were winning flags.Sainter_Dad wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 9:13am The explanation is easy - Saturday Night - Ladder Leader v Contender - FTA game - we got better - more consistent umpiring
Our fate is in our hands - be the Best - get the Best!
If we play attractive football - and don't get relegated to Sunday afternoon - we get the better umpires.
Not a conspiracy - just a fact - You don't send a barrister to plead 'no contest' to a parking ticket.
Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got one.
- johnearljames
- Club Player
- Posts: 995
- Joined: Tue 21 Jul 2020 1:25pm
- Has thanked: 102 times
- Been thanked: 155 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Umps were really good. Have to get one out of ten right I guess.
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.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19099
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: The umpires tonight
No.
This one result proves that we haven't been hard done by at interstate venues over the last 20 years.
This one result proves that we haven't been hard done by at interstate venues over the last 20 years.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Mon 12 Sep 2011 6:08pm
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 8 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Wrong, so wrong, about the position I hold in the legal community- but no surprises there.
You have already made me regret engaging a bit more on this forum. Having not done so much over the years I am less familiar than many with the “personality” of posters. I have since gone back to have a look at a sample of your posts over recent times on various topics. The approach you have demonstrated above of attacking the person rather than the argument is prevalent.
All I can say is that I hope your SaintPav persona is where you choose to vent your negative traits and that you are capable of being a less objectionable person to those who have contact with you in “real life”. I suspect you may be beyond the point of serious self-reflection and change as this can be more difficult with age but I nevertheless would encourage you to take a good look at the way you behave on this site.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1058
- Joined: Tue 08 Feb 2005 1:18pm
- Location: Malvern East
- Has thanked: 86 times
- Been thanked: 34 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Probably because the Umpires manager phoned the saints to apologise about the quality of umpiring last week. All the umpies would be aware of that.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1303
- Joined: Thu 22 Jun 2006 4:03pm
- Location: StKilda East
- Has thanked: 50 times
- Been thanked: 233 times
- Contact:
Re: The umpires tonight
Kane Cornes on The Sunday Footy Show was complaining about last night's umpires and felt it was an over-correction from last week.StPeter wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 9:28am Probably the best display of umpiring we have had for a very long time and maybe even the rub of the green went our way for a change.
I am sure last week's display, the subsequent publicity and dropping of at least one of the officiating umpires helped us last night.
Obviously, for a change, a very biased home crowd wasn't allowed to influence the decisions.
He highlighted several decisions that resulted in Saint's goals.
I watched a relay of the last quarter this morning and we definitely got the best of the decisions in that quarter.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19099
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: The umpires tonight
LOL.St.Roly wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 10:37amWrong, so wrong, about the position I hold in the legal community- but no surprises there.
You have already made me regret engaging a bit more on this forum. Having not done so much over the years I am less familiar than many with the “personality” of posters. I have since gone back to have a look at a sample of your posts over recent times on various topics. The approach you have demonstrated above of attacking the person rather than the argument is prevalent.
All I can say is that I hope your SaintPav persona is where you choose to vent your negative traits and that you are capable of being a less objectionable person to those who have contact with you in “real life”. I suspect you may be beyond the point of serious self-reflection and change as this can be more difficult with age but I nevertheless would encourage you to take a good look at the way you behave on this site.
Ok, sorry Your Honour.
Apart from being innumerate, it appears that you have very poor reasoning skills.
I believe the legal term for this is called self-righteous, hypocritical and selective bollocks.
For starters, who came on here last night trolling Curly and others about umpires?
And, who attacked me about the legal PRINCIPLE of ’wilful ignorance’? You couldn't even articulate a proper counter-argument or explain why it was wrong; you just played the condescending ”I'm the legal expert” card ”what would you know”. That is just the height of arrogance.
What you claim to do in real life is irrelevant on here Roly Poly, but with your critical thinking skills on display, no wonder our legal system is so farked.
Like I said, very hypocritical, selective and arrogant so make sure your own behaviour on here is squeaky clean before dishing out advice to others. Thanks.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18635
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1979 times
- Been thanked: 865 times
Re: The umpires tonight
For once we had a decent run interstate.
I suspect umpires have been directed to be aware of “the noise of affirmation” - a crackdown on home-town decisions.
Also because we are earning respect as a team on the up. Often, it’s been easy for the umps to think, “It’s only St Kilda”.
I suspect umpires have been directed to be aware of “the noise of affirmation” - a crackdown on home-town decisions.
Also because we are earning respect as a team on the up. Often, it’s been easy for the umps to think, “It’s only St Kilda”.
- desertsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10427
- Joined: Sun 27 Apr 2008 2:02pm
- Location: out there
- Has thanked: 190 times
- Been thanked: 713 times
Re: The umpires tonight
thought it went foot-hand-foot myself.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5928
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: Outside Lucky Burgers
- Has thanked: 857 times
- Been thanked: 801 times
Re: The umpires tonight
To be fair I didn't see too much wrong with the interpretations against the Dockers, thought we just played badly for the last three quarters.
Last night was good, umpiring wise and every other way as well, tbh.
Next week we play the Swans who I think have a far greater case for unfair bias against them than we do. I reckon they get a large proportion of 50/50s paid against them.
And I grew up as a little kid in a household who were all card carrying members of St Kilda (VFL) (hated South - historically way back from the Lake premiership days) and were Port Melbourne members (VFA) - and all Port supporters despised South Melbourne. A real inter code rivalry there.
Needless to say I was barracking for the 'Dogs in 2016 and even I could see it, with only one eye open.
So, next week no excuses - although it will be tougher without Hannebury and Ross.
Last night was good, umpiring wise and every other way as well, tbh.
Next week we play the Swans who I think have a far greater case for unfair bias against them than we do. I reckon they get a large proportion of 50/50s paid against them.
And I grew up as a little kid in a household who were all card carrying members of St Kilda (VFL) (hated South - historically way back from the Lake premiership days) and were Port Melbourne members (VFA) - and all Port supporters despised South Melbourne. A real inter code rivalry there.
Needless to say I was barracking for the 'Dogs in 2016 and even I could see it, with only one eye open.
So, next week no excuses - although it will be tougher without Hannebury and Ross.
Your friendly neighbourhood samurai.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23139
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9080 times
- Been thanked: 3942 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Come across dozens of suburban solicitors during my working life. Most of them are as dumb as dog s***. The young ones, particularly the females, are a tad better but only a tad.
- ralphsmith
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2420
- Joined: Sat 25 Jul 2009 10:36pm
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 17 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Normally we would have lost that game due to umpiring.
Mainly due to umpiring decisions that did not go our way. Last night they went our way, fairly.
Mainly due to umpiring decisions that did not go our way. Last night they went our way, fairly.
What is dead may never die, but rises again harder and stronger.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10457
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 148 times
- Been thanked: 1329 times
Re: The umpires tonight
It’s amazing when we get a decent run it cops a section on a Footy Show. We have copped far worse for years with nothing at all said. The ruck frees are and always be a shambles but last we got a fair run not a cheat like run.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2133
- Joined: Fri 22 Jul 2005 9:27am
- Location: Rockville
- Has thanked: 587 times
- Been thanked: 178 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Only from Kane Cornes, who is a deadset lunatic.
Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got one.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Mon 12 Sep 2011 6:08pm
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 8 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Another vitriolic post heavily reliant on personal attacks.SaintPav wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 11:41amLOL.St.Roly wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 10:37amWrong, so wrong, about the position I hold in the legal community- but no surprises there.
You have already made me regret engaging a bit more on this forum. Having not done so much over the years I am less familiar than many with the “personality” of posters. I have since gone back to have a look at a sample of your posts over recent times on various topics. The approach you have demonstrated above of attacking the person rather than the argument is prevalent.
All I can say is that I hope your SaintPav persona is where you choose to vent your negative traits and that you are capable of being a less objectionable person to those who have contact with you in “real life”. I suspect you may be beyond the point of serious self-reflection and change as this can be more difficult with age but I nevertheless would encourage you to take a good look at the way you behave on this site.
Ok, sorry Your Honour.
Apart from being innumerate, it appears that you have very poor reasoning skills.
I believe the legal term for this is called self-righteous, hypocritical and selective bollocks.
For starters, who came on here last night trolling Curly and others about umpires?
And, who attacked me about the legal PRINCIPLE of ’wilful ignorance’? You couldn't even articulate a proper counter-argument or explain why it was wrong; you just played the condescending ”I'm the legal expert” card ”what would you know”. That is just the height of arrogance.
What you claim to do in real life is irrelevant on here Roly Poly, but with your critical thinking skills on display, no wonder our legal system is so farked.
Like I said, very hypocritical, selective and arrogant so make sure your own behaviour on here is squeaky clean before dishing out advice to others. Thanks.
Innumerate? - really, I made a light-hearted joke about just passing first-year stats at uni and you have since repeatedly tried, with no basis whatsoever, to generally deride me in this regard.
I'm not exactly sure what the definition of trolling is really but I hope/suspect that making a general observation like the one I made above that sought to highlight what I regarded as multiple demonstrations of the flaws in the umpiring-conspiracy line is not reasonably regarded as such. I am not sure that I can rely on your advice in relation to this.
I'm sorry if it came off as arrogant when I elected not to attempt to explain to you why wilful blindness cannot be equated to intentional conduct at law. Frankly, I thought it might seem more arrogant to set the explanation out and wondered whether the forum was the place to do so. Anyway, I now really doubt that you actually want to know.
Roly Poly - is this anything other that a schoolyard fat joke? Also, I think that my line of work (not claimed - real) and expertise can have some relevance on here when, as sometimes occurs, discussions move into areas in which the law and legal concepts can provide some guidance and rigour.
Finally, just FYI - Saintkid has also, independently, offered you the same advice about not resorting to personal attacks on the Hannebery FB post thread.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19099
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: The umpires tonight
You are aware that you are guilty of the same behaviours you are accusing me of?St.Roly wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 12:29pmAnother vitriolic post heavily reliant on personal attacks.SaintPav wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 11:41amLOL.St.Roly wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 10:37amWrong, so wrong, about the position I hold in the legal community- but no surprises there.
You have already made me regret engaging a bit more on this forum. Having not done so much over the years I am less familiar than many with the “personality” of posters. I have since gone back to have a look at a sample of your posts over recent times on various topics. The approach you have demonstrated above of attacking the person rather than the argument is prevalent.
All I can say is that I hope your SaintPav persona is where you choose to vent your negative traits and that you are capable of being a less objectionable person to those who have contact with you in “real life”. I suspect you may be beyond the point of serious self-reflection and change as this can be more difficult with age but I nevertheless would encourage you to take a good look at the way you behave on this site.
Ok, sorry Your Honour.
Apart from being innumerate, it appears that you have very poor reasoning skills.
I believe the legal term for this is called self-righteous, hypocritical and selective bollocks.
For starters, who came on here last night trolling Curly and others about umpires?
And, who attacked me about the legal PRINCIPLE of ’wilful ignorance’? You couldn't even articulate a proper counter-argument or explain why it was wrong; you just played the condescending ”I'm the legal expert” card ”what would you know”. That is just the height of arrogance.
What you claim to do in real life is irrelevant on here Roly Poly, but with your critical thinking skills on display, no wonder our legal system is so farked.
Like I said, very hypocritical, selective and arrogant so make sure your own behaviour on here is squeaky clean before dishing out advice to others. Thanks.
Innumerate? - really, I made a light-hearted joke about just passing first-year stats at uni and you have since repeatedly tried, with no basis whatsoever, to generally deride me in this regard.
I'm not exactly sure what the definition of trolling is really but I hope/suspect that making a general observation like the one I made above that sought to highlight what I regarded as multiple demonstrations of the flaws in the umpiring-conspiracy line is not reasonably regarded as such. I am not sure that I can rely on your advice in relation to this.
I'm sorry if it came off as arrogant when I elected not to attempt to explain to you why wilful blindness cannot be equated to intentional conduct at law. Frankly, I thought it might seem more arrogant to set the explanation out and wondered whether the forum was the place to do so. Anyway, I now really doubt that you actually want to know.
Roly Poly - is this anything other that a schoolyard fat joke? Also, I think that my line of work (not claimed - real) and expertise can have some relevance on here when, as sometimes occurs, discussions move into areas in which the law and legal concepts can provide some guidance and rigour.
Finally, just FYI - Saintkid has also, independently, offered you the same advice about not resorting to personal attacks on the Hannebery FB post thread.
Can I suggest, that you or anyone else for that matter, go back and read your caustic and personal attack against me via Saynta on umpiring bias and ‘wilful ignorance’ from the other night.
AND yes, you trolled the board last night on the umpiring ‘conspiracy‘ smear.
But of course, it didn’t happen because butter just doesn’t melt in your mouth, does it?
Your one dimensional and simplistic single variate analysis using AFL tables on free kick counts to demonstrate umpiring bias is not an issue suggested statistical analysis isn’t one of your strengths. Sorry this offended you but you can appreciate that this is a point of fact, which you were at least big enough to admit to.
But, I guess it was ok for you to get personal when you attacked and disparaged my knowledge of the law and my work, which by the way, is both substantial and of a technical nature. I still think your interpretation is contestable as we hadn’t defined any parameters and if we were talking about the criminal act or corporate law (Trade Practices Act) etc, but it’s still about liability under the law.
Saintkid probably means well, but unfortunately is misinformed about a particular poster and irrelevant to our dispute here, so sorry, I don’t buy that as a valid argument.
Bygones for the playful word play on your name, and sorry it offended you.
But like I said, I reckon you are being very selective and hypocritical here, so maybe it is you that needs to self reflect.
Last edited by SaintPav on Sun 26 Jul 2020 4:40pm, edited 2 times in total.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23139
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9080 times
- Been thanked: 3942 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Kane Cornes is an absolute flog. And his brother doing a rain dance and mouthing off to the maggots after a deliberate call when a power player stepped over the line, on purpose, I might add, is a f***wit.StPeter wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 11:39amKane Cornes on The Sunday Footy Show was complaining about last night's umpires and felt it was an over-correction from last week.StPeter wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 9:28am Probably the best display of umpiring we have had for a very long time and maybe even the rub of the green went our way for a change.
I am sure last week's display, the subsequent publicity and dropping of at least one of the officiating umpires helped us last night.
Obviously, for a change, a very biased home crowd wasn't allowed to influence the decisions.
He highlighted several decisions that resulted in Saint's goals.
I watched a relay of the last quarter this morning and we definitely got the best of the decisions in that quarter.
Take no notice. Sour grapes is all.
- Sainter_Dad
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6339
- Joined: Thu 05 Jun 2008 1:04pm
- Has thanked: 263 times
- Been thanked: 1124 times
Re: The umpires tonight
I wish all the PA supporters who are baying for blood regarding the last quarter umpiring look to Chad mouthing off to the Umpires - if anything is going to have an impact - this is it.
“Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown, ignorance can be educated, and drunkenness sobered, but stupid lasts forever.”
― Aristophanes
If you have a Bee in your Bonnet - I can assist you with that - but it WILL involve some smacking upside the head!
― Aristophanes
If you have a Bee in your Bonnet - I can assist you with that - but it WILL involve some smacking upside the head!
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19099
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Was it Dorkoff who just walked it over the line? That’s deliberate every day of the week.Sainter_Dad wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 4:39pmI wish all the PA supporters who are baying for blood regarding the last quarter umpiring look to Chad mouthing off to the Umpires - if anything is going to have an impact - this is it.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23139
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9080 times
- Been thanked: 3942 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Not according to Kane. Flog that he is.SaintPav wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 4:42pmWas it Dorkoff who just walked it over the line? That’s deliberate every day of the week.Sainter_Dad wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 4:39pmI wish all the PA supporters who are baying for blood regarding the last quarter umpiring look to Chad mouthing off to the Umpires - if anything is going to have an impact - this is it.
Anyway, the guy probably can't help it. Who the f*** in their right mind calls a kid Kane or Caine. f****** nuff nuffs.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19099
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: The umpires tonight
Trolls the board, then pleads ignorance.saynta wrote: ↑Sun 26 Jul 2020 12:09pmCome across dozens of suburban solicitors during my working life. Most of them are as dumb as dog s***. The young ones, particularly the females, are a tad better but only a tad.
Begins a dispute and attacks me (you read it) and because he can’t hack it, has a hissy fit and accuses me of behaviours he is guilty of.
Total hypocrisy that must makes you want to throw up.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.