AFL must explain Eleni

[saynta]

So looking at those stats, over the 15 year period the umpires pay 1 more free kicks to our opposition than us every second game...

Damn you umpires!!!! *shakes fist*

No. Not good at maths mate?

10 out of 15 is two out of three ffs.

I
I’m no good at maths but that looks like 16 years to me.
16 x 22 = 352
Add about 15 finals.
187/367 is about 0.51.

Or in other words. About 1 free every 2 weeks.

Not that I think free kick count is any indicator of how good/ bad the umpiring is.

Sorry i was relying on duds word that it was 15 years. Forgot it was 16.

Not good at maths mate?

Free kick difference divided by games played. Not sure what 10 out of 15/16 has to do with it.

Not good at apologies either mate?

Go away.

[st.byron]

It does show the perfect storm the Western Bulldogs conjured in 2016...

First year of the Bye pre finals...players requiring that week to return.

PLUS

The most incredible run with umpiring, especially through the finals series.

Can make a difference once the umpires get caught up in the euphoria of the game & the story.

Would have loved a similar run / trend in 2010. That's a difference of 172 free kicks...now that can make a difference in a drawn game.

Good spotting GL. That number really does stand out in the table as an outlier. Also check out WCE from 2006 - 2015.

[st.byron]

Stats from 2004 - 2018 :

We are sixth worst. West Coast easily the best. Surprise surprise.

Backe up my argument , not yours.

We were in negative ground on 10 out of those 15 years, with the worst years being the last 10.

In 7 of the past 10 years we have been royally screwed.

You explain to me how there can be an 1106 differential between west coast and the Saints

It’s a good question; explain to me how there can be such a differential between the Saints and WCE? But not from the perspective of us being screwed but from the perspective of how the f*** can WCE be SO far in front of the rest of the comp?
If the above figures prove your point about us being screwed, then it logically follows that the five teams below us on the free kick differential are being more deliberately screwed than us.
So there’s a deliberate conspiracy theory against at least 6 teams in the competition, of which we are one?

Proves to me that some teams get the rough end of the pineapple....consistently...year after year.

Do the maggots cheat, lay bets, grow up following certain teams, let the crowd influence their decisions, play favourites, dislike certain teams an individuals?

Probably a combination of all those factors. who knows.

What I can say without fear of contradiction, is that it is not a level playing field where maggot are concerned.

Hence my extreme dislike for them.

When you say it’s not a level playing field, do you mean that umpires deliberately try and fluency games one way or another and is that in your view, happening consistently in an organised way?

[Linton Lodger]

We have had a competence issue with Umpires for some time and yet the AFL wants to dilute any talent even further, by playing absurd new wave feminist politics.

Disagree entirely.

By giving a woman an opportunity, they're potentially increasing the talent pool by 50%.

She's not the worst in the caper, and even if she was - it'd probably be about a 2% decrease in performance across the umpiring department at worst.

So a tiny short term hit to performance, with the potential for enormous gain in the future.

Its nothing about increasing the talent pool. Far more women than men don't give a hoot about AFL, so forget anything like 50% This is about attracting women as consumers by sucking up to them with 3rd Wave Feminist doctrines. Such as gender quotas. Trouble is, a great many women don't give a hoot about the 3rd Wave of Feminism.

Possibly.

Considering the AFL is an entertainment business that measures its success on audiences and revenue - what are you complaining about?

She's clearly the "best person for the role".

Well, I doubt the strategy in which she plays a role is any use. In the meantime, we get games disrupted by a growing number of incompetent Umpires.

You can doubt the strategy as much as you like. The AFL isn't measured on how accurate decisions are or how many people like the umpires - they measure themselves on how many people watch.

That's their business. They sell a product for people to watch.

They want to expand their audience - and including Sudanese players, Irish guys, and women in officiating roles achieves that.


People screaming about the "best person for the role" are naive, and very short sighted.

She's the ideal person the role.

Crowds are down and television ratings are down. So perhaps the AFL nongers don't realise it isn't working. I don't get the recruiting of players from Ireland, how many have been roaring successes. Sudanese players, well there happens to be a large influx of Sudanese migrants and like the migrants before them, some of them will play footy. The athleticism of the Sudanese makes them more likely to make good AFL players. Nothing to do with strategy.

I watched the replay of the game today. Eleni's performance was beyond squalid and incompetent.

The decision she made that the other Umpire tried to rightfully overrule, clearly demonstrated her total lack of aptitude and feel of the game.Then when overruled (despite what she may have thought), did she prudently & graciously allow it to slide? Particularly given that she was overruled by an Umpire that hadn't been dropped 4 times already! No, she got petulant and overruled it back! Never seen that before myself, extraordinary.

And she was absolutely wrong! For that alone she should be sacked.

[kosifantutti]

We have had a competence issue with Umpires for some time and yet the AFL wants to dilute any talent even further, by playing absurd new wave feminist politics.

Disagree entirely.

By giving a woman an opportunity, they're potentially increasing the talent pool by 50%.

She's not the worst in the caper, and even if she was - it'd probably be about a 2% decrease in performance across the umpiring department at worst.

So a tiny short term hit to performance, with the potential for enormous gain in the future.

Its nothing about increasing the talent pool. Far more women than men don't give a hoot about AFL, so forget anything like 50% This is about attracting women as consumers by sucking up to them with 3rd Wave Feminist doctrines. Such as gender quotas. Trouble is, a great many women don't give a hoot about the 3rd Wave of Feminism.

Possibly.

Considering the AFL is an entertainment business that measures its success on audiences and revenue - what are you complaining about?

She's clearly the "best person for the role".

Well, I doubt the strategy in which she plays a role is any use. In the meantime, we get games disrupted by a growing number of incompetent Umpires.

You can doubt the strategy as much as you like. The AFL isn't measured on how accurate decisions are or how many people like the umpires - they measure themselves on how many people watch.

That's their business. They sell a product for people to watch.

They want to expand their audience - and including Sudanese players, Irish guys, and women in officiating roles achieves that.


People screaming about the "best person for the role" are naive, and very short sighted.

She's the ideal person the role.

Crowds are down and television ratings are down. So perhaps the AFL nongers don't realise it isn't working. I don't get the recruiting of players from Ireland, how many have been roaring successes. Sudanese players, well there happens to be a large influx of Sudanese migrants and like the migrants before them, some of them will play footy. The athleticism of the Sudanese makes them more likely to make good AFL players. Nothing to do with strategy.

I watched the replay of the game today. Eleni's performance was beyond squalid and incompetent.

The decision she made that the other Umpire tried to rightfully overrule, clearly demonstrated her total lack of aptitude and feel of the game.Then when overruled (despite what she may have thought), did she prudently & graciously allow it to slide? Particularly given that she was overruled by an Umpire that hadn't been dropped 4 times already! No, she got petulant and overruled it back! Never seen that before myself, extraordinary.

And she was absolutely wrong! For that alone she should be sacked.

She was right beside it and made a call on a 50/50. It was the other umpire’s total lack of understanding what had happened that caused the confusion.

But nobody’s organised a lynch mob for him yet.

[Linton Lodger]

We have had a competence issue with Umpires for some time and yet the AFL wants to dilute any talent even further, by playing absurd new wave feminist politics.

Disagree entirely.

By giving a woman an opportunity, they're potentially increasing the talent pool by 50%.

She's not the worst in the caper, and even if she was - it'd probably be about a 2% decrease in performance across the umpiring department at worst.

So a tiny short term hit to performance, with the potential for enormous gain in the future.

Its nothing about increasing the talent pool. Far more women than men don't give a hoot about AFL, so forget anything like 50% This is about attracting women as consumers by sucking up to them with 3rd Wave Feminist doctrines. Such as gender quotas. Trouble is, a great many women don't give a hoot about the 3rd Wave of Feminism.

Possibly.

Considering the AFL is an entertainment business that measures its success on audiences and revenue - what are you complaining about?

She's clearly the "best person for the role".

Well, I doubt the strategy in which she plays a role is any use. In the meantime, we get games disrupted by a growing number of incompetent Umpires.

You can doubt the strategy as much as you like. The AFL isn't measured on how accurate decisions are or how many people like the umpires - they measure themselves on how many people watch.

That's their business. They sell a product for people to watch.

They want to expand their audience - and including Sudanese players, Irish guys, and women in officiating roles achieves that.


People screaming about the "best person for the role" are naive, and very short sighted.

She's the ideal person the role.

Crowds are down and television ratings are down. So perhaps the AFL nongers don't realise it isn't working. I don't get the recruiting of players from Ireland, how many have been roaring successes. Sudanese players, well there happens to be a large influx of Sudanese migrants and like the migrants before them, some of them will play footy. The athleticism of the Sudanese makes them more likely to make good AFL players. Nothing to do with strategy.

I watched the replay of the game today. Eleni's performance was beyond squalid and incompetent.

The decision she made that the other Umpire tried to rightfully overrule, clearly demonstrated her total lack of aptitude and feel of the game.Then when overruled (despite what she may have thought), did she prudently & graciously allow it to slide? Particularly given that she was overruled by an Umpire that hadn't been dropped 4 times already! No, she got petulant and overruled it back! Never seen that before myself, extraordinary.

And she was absolutely wrong! For that alone she should be sacked.

She was right beside it and made a call on a 50/50. It was the other umpire’s total lack of understanding what had happened that caused the confusion.

But nobody’s organised a lynch mob for him yet.

No, Wilkie's tackle was legal and his opponent was stuffed before Wilkie's hand went anywhere near his shoulder. It was holding the ball. Her decision was overly technical and wrong. The other Umpire although further away had a good view of it, he saw the tackle, where Wilkie grabbed his opponent and saw them hit the ground. He likely overruled because he felt she'd got it wrong. There was no misunderstanding, they disagreed on each other's calls. Even if Eleni thought she was right, she should have erred on the side of caution and let it go.

[The_Dud]

We have had a competence issue with Umpires for some time and yet the AFL wants to dilute any talent even further, by playing absurd new wave feminist politics.

Disagree entirely.

By giving a woman an opportunity, they're potentially increasing the talent pool by 50%.

She's not the worst in the caper, and even if she was - it'd probably be about a 2% decrease in performance across the umpiring department at worst.

So a tiny short term hit to performance, with the potential for enormous gain in the future.

Its nothing about increasing the talent pool. Far more women than men don't give a hoot about AFL, so forget anything like 50% This is about attracting women as consumers by sucking up to them with 3rd Wave Feminist doctrines. Such as gender quotas. Trouble is, a great many women don't give a hoot about the 3rd Wave of Feminism.

Possibly.

Considering the AFL is an entertainment business that measures its success on audiences and revenue - what are you complaining about?

She's clearly the "best person for the role".

Well, I doubt the strategy in which she plays a role is any use. In the meantime, we get games disrupted by a growing number of incompetent Umpires.

You can doubt the strategy as much as you like. The AFL isn't measured on how accurate decisions are or how many people like the umpires - they measure themselves on how many people watch.

That's their business. They sell a product for people to watch.

They want to expand their audience - and including Sudanese players, Irish guys, and women in officiating roles achieves that.


People screaming about the "best person for the role" are naive, and very short sighted.

She's the ideal person the role.

Crowds are down and television ratings are down. So perhaps the AFL nongers don't realise it isn't working. I don't get the recruiting of players from Ireland, how many have been roaring successes. Sudanese players, well there happens to be a large influx of Sudanese migrants and like the migrants before them, some of them will play footy. The athleticism of the Sudanese makes them more likely to make good AFL players. Nothing to do with strategy.

I watched the replay of the game today. Eleni's performance was beyond squalid and incompetent.

The decision she made that the other Umpire tried to rightfully overrule, clearly demonstrated her total lack of aptitude and feel of the game.Then when overruled (despite what she may have thought), did she prudently & graciously allow it to slide? Particularly given that she was overruled by an Umpire that hadn't been dropped 4 times already! No, she got petulant and overruled it back! Never seen that before myself, extraordinary.

And she was absolutely wrong! For that alone she should be sacked.

Give an actual example.

The high tackle was high, she was right there, correct decision, the other umpire 50m away was wrong, and conceded.

And if that is a sackable offense, why word you must hate women umpiring. How about the non 50 to Matera, much worse decision, where’s the outrage?

Dropped 4 times? Link please. No one has actually showed where this info came from.

[Linton Lodger]

We have had a competence issue with Umpires for some time and yet the AFL wants to dilute any talent even further, by playing absurd new wave feminist politics.

Disagree entirely.

By giving a woman an opportunity, they're potentially increasing the talent pool by 50%.

She's not the worst in the caper, and even if she was - it'd probably be about a 2% decrease in performance across the umpiring department at worst.

So a tiny short term hit to performance, with the potential for enormous gain in the future.

Its nothing about increasing the talent pool. Far more women than men don't give a hoot about AFL, so forget anything like 50% This is about attracting women as consumers by sucking up to them with 3rd Wave Feminist doctrines. Such as gender quotas. Trouble is, a great many women don't give a hoot about the 3rd Wave of Feminism.

Possibly.

Considering the AFL is an entertainment business that measures its success on audiences and revenue - what are you complaining about?

She's clearly the "best person for the role".

Well, I doubt the strategy in which she plays a role is any use. In the meantime, we get games disrupted by a growing number of incompetent Umpires.

You can doubt the strategy as much as you like. The AFL isn't measured on how accurate decisions are or how many people like the umpires - they measure themselves on how many people watch.

That's their business. They sell a product for people to watch.

They want to expand their audience - and including Sudanese players, Irish guys, and women in officiating roles achieves that.


People screaming about the "best person for the role" are naive, and very short sighted.

She's the ideal person the role.

Crowds are down and television ratings are down. So perhaps the AFL nongers don't realise it isn't working. I don't get the recruiting of players from Ireland, how many have been roaring successes. Sudanese players, well there happens to be a large influx of Sudanese migrants and like the migrants before them, some of them will play footy. The athleticism of the Sudanese makes them more likely to make good AFL players. Nothing to do with strategy.

I watched the replay of the game today. Eleni's performance was beyond squalid and incompetent.

The decision she made that the other Umpire tried to rightfully overrule, clearly demonstrated her total lack of aptitude and feel of the game.Then when overruled (despite what she may have thought), did she prudently & graciously allow it to slide? Particularly given that she was overruled by an Umpire that hadn't been dropped 4 times already! No, she got petulant and overruled it back! Never seen that before myself, extraordinary.

And she was absolutely wrong! For that alone she should be sacked.

Give an actual example.

The high tackle was high, she was right there, correct decision, the other umpire 50m away was wrong, and conceded.

Dropped 4 times? Link please. No one has actually showed where this info came from.

It was holding the ball any day of the week. And whether she was right or wrong, the overruling of the overruling was outrageous. Sort it out in the rooms after the game and with the Umpire's boss.

She has not got the temperament to be an Arbitrator.

[kosifantutti]

We have had a competence issue with Umpires for some time and yet the AFL wants to dilute any talent even further, by playing absurd new wave feminist politics.

Disagree entirely.

By giving a woman an opportunity, they're potentially increasing the talent pool by 50%.

She's not the worst in the caper, and even if she was - it'd probably be about a 2% decrease in performance across the umpiring department at worst.

So a tiny short term hit to performance, with the potential for enormous gain in the future.

Its nothing about increasing the talent pool. Far more women than men don't give a hoot about AFL, so forget anything like 50% This is about attracting women as consumers by sucking up to them with 3rd Wave Feminist doctrines. Such as gender quotas. Trouble is, a great many women don't give a hoot about the 3rd Wave of Feminism.

Possibly.

Considering the AFL is an entertainment business that measures its success on audiences and revenue - what are you complaining about?

She's clearly the "best person for the role".

Well, I doubt the strategy in which she plays a role is any use. In the meantime, we get games disrupted by a growing number of incompetent Umpires.

You can doubt the strategy as much as you like. The AFL isn't measured on how accurate decisions are or how many people like the umpires - they measure themselves on how many people watch.

That's their business. They sell a product for people to watch.

They want to expand their audience - and including Sudanese players, Irish guys, and women in officiating roles achieves that.


People screaming about the "best person for the role" are naive, and very short sighted.

She's the ideal person the role.

Crowds are down and television ratings are down. So perhaps the AFL nongers don't realise it isn't working. I don't get the recruiting of players from Ireland, how many have been roaring successes. Sudanese players, well there happens to be a large influx of Sudanese migrants and like the migrants before them, some of them will play footy. The athleticism of the Sudanese makes them more likely to make good AFL players. Nothing to do with strategy.

I watched the replay of the game today. Eleni's performance was beyond squalid and incompetent.

The decision she made that the other Umpire tried to rightfully overrule, clearly demonstrated her total lack of aptitude and feel of the game.Then when overruled (despite what she may have thought), did she prudently & graciously allow it to slide? Particularly given that she was overruled by an Umpire that hadn't been dropped 4 times already! No, she got petulant and overruled it back! Never seen that before myself, extraordinary.

And she was absolutely wrong! For that alone she should be sacked.

She was right beside it and made a call on a 50/50. It was the other umpire’s total lack of understanding what had happened that caused the confusion.

But nobody’s organised a lynch mob for him yet.

No, Wilkie's tackle was legal and his opponent was stuffed before Wilkie's hand went anywhere near his shoulder. It was holding the ball. Her decision was overly technical and wrong. The other Umpire although further away had a good view of it, he saw the tackle, where Wilkie grabbed his opponent and saw them hit the ground. He likely overruled because he felt she'd got it wrong. There was no misunderstanding, they disagreed on each other's calls. Even if Eleni thought she was right, she should have erred on the side of caution and let it go.

Err on the side of caution?
What does that mean?
I should let the guy with a worse view than me make a decision. That would be erring on the side of stupidity.

[The_Dud]

I’m sure it doesn’t have anything to do with “the man said this, so why didn’t she just concede like she’s supposed to?!”

But I’m sure, nothing to do with that at all...

[amusingname]

We have had a competence issue with Umpires for some time and yet the AFL wants to dilute any talent even further, by playing absurd new wave feminist politics.

Disagree entirely.

By giving a woman an opportunity, they're potentially increasing the talent pool by 50%.

She's not the worst in the caper, and even if she was - it'd probably be about a 2% decrease in performance across the umpiring department at worst.

So a tiny short term hit to performance, with the potential for enormous gain in the future.

Its nothing about increasing the talent pool. Far more women than men don't give a hoot about AFL, so forget anything like 50% This is about attracting women as consumers by sucking up to them with 3rd Wave Feminist doctrines. Such as gender quotas. Trouble is, a great many women don't give a hoot about the 3rd Wave of Feminism.

Possibly.

Considering the AFL is an entertainment business that measures its success on audiences and revenue - what are you complaining about?

She's clearly the "best person for the role".

Well, I doubt the strategy in which she plays a role is any use. In the meantime, we get games disrupted by a growing number of incompetent Umpires.

You can doubt the strategy as much as you like. The AFL isn't measured on how accurate decisions are or how many people like the umpires - they measure themselves on how many people watch.

That's their business. They sell a product for people to watch.

They want to expand their audience - and including Sudanese players, Irish guys, and women in officiating roles achieves that.


People screaming about the "best person for the role" are naive, and very short sighted.

She's the ideal person the role.

Crowds are down and television ratings are down. So perhaps the AFL nongers don't realise it isn't working. I don't get the recruiting of players from Ireland, how many have been roaring successes. Sudanese players, well there happens to be a large influx of Sudanese migrants and like the migrants before them, some of them will play footy. The athleticism of the Sudanese makes them more likely to make good AFL players. Nothing to do with strategy.

I watched the replay of the game today. Eleni's performance was beyond squalid and incompetent.

The decision she made that the other Umpire tried to rightfully overrule, clearly demonstrated her total lack of aptitude and feel of the game.Then when overruled (despite what she may have thought), did she prudently & graciously allow it to slide? Particularly given that she was overruled by an Umpire that hadn't been dropped 4 times already! No, she got petulant and overruled it back! Never seen that before myself, extraordinary.

And she was absolutely wrong! For that alone she should be sacked.

Give an actual example.

The high tackle was high, she was right there, correct decision, the other umpire 50m away was wrong, and conceded.

Dropped 4 times? Link please. No one has actually showed where this info came from.

It was holding the ball any day of the week. And whether she was right or wrong, the overruling of the overruling was outrageous. Sort it out in the rooms after the game and with the Umpire's boss.

She has not got the temperament to be an Arbitrator.

As far as I am aware, if there is a disputed call between umpires, the controlling umpires call is the prevailing one, which was Elani, so she had the call.

[Teflon]

Male or female. Couldn’t give ashit just hope she is taken to task and asked to explain her decisions

Problem is you don’t ask for the other two umpires to be taken to task, and they were worse today.

You probably don’t even know the other two umpires names. Simply because blend into the established group.

So your male or female opener doesn’t hold. There’s a natural bias because she is recognisable and what’s worse for some people, different.

Why couldn’t he simply just think she was particularly bad before jump to politically correct spin of the situation?

[Jacks Back]

Most people on here support the Saints. Some only seem to support the umpires. I wish they would go to Umpiresational.com.fu

[Linton Lodger]

We have had a competence issue with Umpires for some time and yet the AFL wants to dilute any talent even further, by playing absurd new wave feminist politics.

Disagree entirely.

By giving a woman an opportunity, they're potentially increasing the talent pool by 50%.

She's not the worst in the caper, and even if she was - it'd probably be about a 2% decrease in performance across the umpiring department at worst.

So a tiny short term hit to performance, with the potential for enormous gain in the future.

Its nothing about increasing the talent pool. Far more women than men don't give a hoot about AFL, so forget anything like 50% This is about attracting women as consumers by sucking up to them with 3rd Wave Feminist doctrines. Such as gender quotas. Trouble is, a great many women don't give a hoot about the 3rd Wave of Feminism.

Possibly.

Considering the AFL is an entertainment business that measures its success on audiences and revenue - what are you complaining about?

She's clearly the "best person for the role".

Well, I doubt the strategy in which she plays a role is any use. In the meantime, we get games disrupted by a growing number of incompetent Umpires.

You can doubt the strategy as much as you like. The AFL isn't measured on how accurate decisions are or how many people like the umpires - they measure themselves on how many people watch.

That's their business. They sell a product for people to watch.

They want to expand their audience - and including Sudanese players, Irish guys, and women in officiating roles achieves that.


People screaming about the "best person for the role" are naive, and very short sighted.

She's the ideal person the role.

Crowds are down and television ratings are down. So perhaps the AFL nongers don't realise it isn't working. I don't get the recruiting of players from Ireland, how many have been roaring successes. Sudanese players, well there happens to be a large influx of Sudanese migrants and like the migrants before them, some of them will play footy. The athleticism of the Sudanese makes them more likely to make good AFL players. Nothing to do with strategy.

I watched the replay of the game today. Eleni's performance was beyond squalid and incompetent.

The decision she made that the other Umpire tried to rightfully overrule, clearly demonstrated her total lack of aptitude and feel of the game.Then when overruled (despite what she may have thought), did she prudently & graciously allow it to slide? Particularly given that she was overruled by an Umpire that hadn't been dropped 4 times already! No, she got petulant and overruled it back! Never seen that before myself, extraordinary.

And she was absolutely wrong! For that alone she should be sacked.

She was right beside it and made a call on a 50/50. It was the other umpire’s total lack of understanding what had happened that caused the confusion.

But nobody’s organised a lynch mob for him yet.

No, Wilkie's tackle was legal and his opponent was stuffed before Wilkie's hand went anywhere near his shoulder. It was holding the ball. Her decision was overly technical and wrong. The other Umpire although further away had a good view of it, he saw the tackle, where Wilkie grabbed his opponent and saw them hit the ground. He likely overruled because he felt she'd got it wrong. There was no misunderstanding, they disagreed on each other's calls. Even if Eleni thought she was right, she should have erred on the side of caution and let it go.

Err on the side of caution?
What does that mean?
I should let the guy with a worse view than me make a decision. That would be erring on the side of stupidity.

He had a clear view, maybe she should have thought that he may have seen something she didn't or felt she'd got it wrong. If it turned out to be wrong it would have been his bad call not hers. She was overruled and she basically told the overruling Umpire to stick it. Also important is the fact that his call came after hers. He'd seen her call and overruled, it wasn't a matter of him blowing first and getting it wrong.

[Devilhead]

The front on contact to Billings in the Freo goal square (last quarter) and the high hit on Steven by Fyfe diving in on the wing (last quarter) were both missed by her

Absolute shocking non calls

[desertsaint]

Stats from 2004 - 2018 :

We are sixth worst. West Coast easily the best. Surprise surprise. If anyone should be getting upset about corruption and inequity it’s the whole competition re the bias towards West Coast. Not one year with less frees for than against. Staggering inequity in those figures.
And look at Hawks and Sydney, the supposed love child of head office. Sydney by miles the worst ratio.

i'll say it again. there is one clear factor in that list. the only team not containing that factor are collingwood.
they are high in other factors - crowd size, successful, powerful and rich. look at the factor - it is psychological.
The predominant colour of the top four and six of the top seven, is blue.
They are the only predominantly blue teams in the whole list. None lower than 7th of 18. It is the major tieing factor. The colour of success, professionalism, calmness. the colour of the ribbon the winner in school sports received.
even clubs low in other factors (north, dogs, and carlton to a lesser extent) are looked after. west coast have all factors in their favour. We have none. Hence the disparity.

[bigcarl]

Stats from 2004 - 2018 :

We are sixth worst. West Coast easily the best. Surprise surprise. If anyone should be getting upset about corruption and inequity it’s the whole competition re the bias towards West Coast. Not one year with less frees for than against. Staggering inequity in those figures.
And look at Hawks and Sydney, the supposed love child of head office. Sydney by miles the worst ratio.

i'll say it again. there is one clear factor in that list. the only team not containing that factor are collingwood.
they are high in other factors - crowd size, successful, powerful and rich. look at the factor - it is psychological.
The predominant colour of the top four and six of the top seven, is blue.
They are the only predominantly blue teams in the whole list. None lower than 7th of 18. It is the major tieing factor. The colour of success, professionalism, calmness. the colour of the ribbon the winner in school sports received.
even clubs low in other factors (north, dogs, and carlton to a lesser extent) are looked after. west coast have all factors in their favour. We have none. Hence the disparity.

Interesting theory. What about Melbourne? Does the red in their colours trigger umpires?

[st.byron]

Stats from 2004 - 2018 :

We are sixth worst. West Coast easily the best. Surprise surprise. If anyone should be getting upset about corruption and inequity it’s the whole competition re the bias towards West Coast. Not one year with less frees for than against. Staggering inequity in those figures.
And look at Hawks and Sydney, the supposed love child of head office. Sydney by miles the worst ratio.

i'll say it again. there is one clear factor in that list. the only team not containing that factor are collingwood.
they are high in other factors - crowd size, successful, powerful and rich. look at the factor - it is psychological.
The predominant colour of the top four and six of the top seven, is blue.
They are the only predominantly blue teams in the whole list. None lower than 7th of 18. It is the major tieing factor. The colour of success, professionalism, calmness. the colour of the ribbon the winner in school sports received.
even clubs low in other factors (north, dogs, and carlton to a lesser extent) are looked after. west coast have all factors in their favour. We have none. Hence the disparity.

Interesting take on it

[kosifantutti]

He had a clear view, maybe she should have thought that he may have seen something she didn't or felt she'd got it wrong. If it turned out to be wrong it would have been his bad call not hers. She was overruled and she basically told the overruling Umpire to stick it. Also important is the fact that his call came after hers. He'd seen her call and overruled, it wasn't a matter of him blowing first and getting it wrong.

This was impossible to read on Tapatalk, so I’ve cut it down to the last quote.

What I think actually happened.

Eleni is about 15m away and has control of the game, you see her calling play on in the foreground a couple of seconds earlier.
The Wilkie tackle is highish. 50/50 call in my opinion. She blows the whistle and pays the free to Freo.
It was clear immediately that Freo has had an advantage and you don’t hear Eleni say anything but maybe that’s the protocol, and the priority is to call play on. You can’t see her on screen so there’s no indication if she pointed in any direction before calling advantage.

Nameless Male Umpire (NMU) sees the incident, and this is all just conjecture by me, thinks it’s a Saints free and that she has called the advantage the wrong way. So either she’s paid the free to Freo and correctly called advantage or she’s paid it to the Saints and made a huge f*** up and called advantage the wrong way. That’s when he blows the whistle and says it was a St Kilda free. He’s not over ruling her high tackle call he’s misinterpreted her original call and is overruling the advantage call.

She says no I paid the free to Freo for a high tackle and NMU says “sorry” All a bit hard to hear with Dwayne commentating.

I don’t know if she did anything wrong with the process and communication, but the problem has arisen when NMU makes the wrong assumption.

Maybe he read the threads on Saintsational before the game and was ready to make the worst assumptions on every decision she made.

[saintspremiers]

If there is confusion amongst the Dumbpires, why don’t they just do a ball up?
Another pet peeve is when they signal one way then the other.

Most sports the umpires signal in the direction of the free kick team is going - we for some reason do the opposite!

[Sainter_Dad]

Most sports the umpires signal in the direction of the free kick team is going - we for some reason do the opposite!

The way it was explained to me when I asked the question of my Umpires Advisor was:

"Most sports take the penalty/free kick from the point of the infringement, V(A)FL sets the mark at that point - so the Umpire generally is pointing to the player behind the mark as to who gets the free - therefore we indicate the opposite direction of the free"

FWIW

[saynta]

Stats from 2004 - 2018 :

We are sixth worst. West Coast easily the best. Surprise surprise. If anyone should be getting upset about corruption and inequity it’s the whole competition re the bias towards West Coast. Not one year with less frees for than against. Staggering inequity in those figures.
And look at Hawks and Sydney, the supposed love child of head office. Sydney by miles the worst ratio.

i'll say it again. there is one clear factor in that list. the only team not containing that factor are collingwood.
they are high in other factors - crowd size, successful, powerful and rich. look at the factor - it is psychological.
The predominant colour of the top four and six of the top seven, is blue.
They are the only predominantly blue teams in the whole list. None lower than 7th of 18. It is the major tieing factor. The colour of success, professionalism, calmness. the colour of the ribbon the winner in school sports received.
even clubs low in other factors (north, dogs, and carlton to a lesser extent) are looked after. west coast have all factors in their favour. We have none. Hence the disparity.

Interesting.

[freely]

Would be interesting to see ladder position against these stats. I notice we were +60 in 2009. Is there any correlation other years? other teams?

[desertsaint]

Stats from 2004 - 2018 :

We are sixth worst. West Coast easily the best. Surprise surprise. If anyone should be getting upset about corruption and inequity it’s the whole competition re the bias towards West Coast. Not one year with less frees for than against. Staggering inequity in those figures.
And look at Hawks and Sydney, the supposed love child of head office. Sydney by miles the worst ratio.

i'll say it again. there is one clear factor in that list. the only team not containing that factor are collingwood.
they are high in other factors - crowd size, successful, powerful and rich. look at the factor - it is psychological.
The predominant colour of the top four and six of the top seven, is blue.
They are the only predominantly blue teams in the whole list. None lower than 7th of 18. It is the major tieing factor. The colour of success, professionalism, calmness. the colour of the ribbon the winner in school sports received.
even clubs low in other factors (north, dogs, and carlton to a lesser extent) are looked after. west coast have all factors in their favour. We have none. Hence the disparity.

Interesting theory. What about Melbourne? Does the red in their colours trigger umpires?

have a look at the red teams. red in oz means second, violence, anger. melbournes red chest and shoulders appears more prominent than their blue. it would be the main colour umps see in a flash.
and even then, even with them having no other factors in their favour - the blue balances the ledger for them so that their are seven teams below them - all with red, orange, yellow, brown, or purple dominant.

[Sainter_Dad]

An even bigger issue than Eleni (if that is possible according to some on here):

Ray Chamberlain admitted to getting a decision wrong, because, he was expecting Jack Ziebell to go harder, and as he didn't he did not award the free kick.
In his own words he said the free was there and was a mistake - but his bias (against soft players and/or staging) led him not to pay it.

"I don’t like paying free kicks when players put a little bit on it. It’s a free kick every day, there’s no question, it’s a missed free kick."
“If I reflect on that, it was my mentality there that was my error and that’s why I didn’t pay the free kick. I’m disappointed in myself about that.”

I wonder how many other decisions/umpires have been affected by this bias!!!

In admitting to the bias surely he is now compromised (we all know they are biased - I choose to believe unconsciously so) but the admission means that every non-call will now be scrutinized and I do not think he can continue umpiring.

"The_Dud" what is your opinion on an Umpire admitting to a bias - no matter how much we all share that bias?
Should Ray be allowed to continue umpiring?