cats whinge about umpiring
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18607
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1950 times
- Been thanked: 854 times
cats whinge about umpiring
http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/sc ... 31984.html
GEELONG'S Matthew Scarlett has questioned a controversial umpiring decision in the dying minutes of yesterday's loss to St Kilda that cost Geelong a crucial goal.
Geelong's Joel Corey was awarded a free-kick about 40 metres from the Cats' goal in the forward pocket for a high tackle from St Kilda's Raphael Clark, when the ball dribbled from the contest towards Corey's teammate Travis Varcoe. Umpire Ray Chamberlain paid Geelong the advantage when the Cats were not in possession of the ball. The ball went out of bounds and St Kilda rebounded the pill to the other end of the ground, where Michael Gardiner took a huge mark and kicked the match-winning goal.
Although he did not say much about the crucial decision, Scarlett managed to say a lot. "Was it an advantage?," he asked. "I'm asking you, was there an advantage there or not?"
GEELONG'S Matthew Scarlett has questioned a controversial umpiring decision in the dying minutes of yesterday's loss to St Kilda that cost Geelong a crucial goal.
Geelong's Joel Corey was awarded a free-kick about 40 metres from the Cats' goal in the forward pocket for a high tackle from St Kilda's Raphael Clark, when the ball dribbled from the contest towards Corey's teammate Travis Varcoe. Umpire Ray Chamberlain paid Geelong the advantage when the Cats were not in possession of the ball. The ball went out of bounds and St Kilda rebounded the pill to the other end of the ground, where Michael Gardiner took a huge mark and kicked the match-winning goal.
Although he did not say much about the crucial decision, Scarlett managed to say a lot. "Was it an advantage?," he asked. "I'm asking you, was there an advantage there or not?"
- saintdooley
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4571
- Joined: Mon 20 Feb 2006 2:32pm
Re: cats whinge about umpiring
i saw it, and no there wasnt...but what are you going to do about it now! hahabigcarl wrote:http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/sc ... 31984.html
GEELONG'S Matthew Scarlett has questioned a controversial umpiring decision in the dying minutes of yesterday's loss to St Kilda that cost Geelong a crucial goal.
Geelong's Joel Corey was awarded a free-kick about 40 metres from the Cats' goal in the forward pocket for a high tackle from St Kilda's Raphael Clark, when the ball dribbled from the contest towards Corey's teammate Travis Varcoe. Umpire Ray Chamberlain paid Geelong the advantage when the Cats were not in possession of the ball. The ball went out of bounds and St Kilda rebounded the pill to the other end of the ground, where Michael Gardiner took a huge mark and kicked the match-winning goal.
Although he did not say much about the crucial decision, Scarlett managed to say a lot. "Was it an advantage?," he asked. "I'm asking you, was there an advantage there or not?"
"Another storied win in Robert Harvey's career. They say he is the embodiment of their motto of strength through loyalty, and on the day he became just the tenth man to play 350 league games the saints reward him with a seemingly impossible victory."
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6440
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 11:13pm
Re: cats whinge about umpiring
Last edited by aussierules0k on Tue 06 Apr 2010 2:21am, edited 1 time in total.
- bigred
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11463
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 7:39am
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 609 times
I thought the umpires fkn crucified us!@!
I really think they were the fkn lowlight of the game. Seriously, they get three out of ten for that performance.
And Scarlett can take a big gulp from the cup of shut the fcuk up in my opinion.
I really think they were the fkn lowlight of the game. Seriously, they get three out of ten for that performance.
And Scarlett can take a big gulp from the cup of shut the fcuk up in my opinion.
"Now the ball is loose, it gives St. Kilda a rough chance. Black. Good handpass. Voss. Schwarze now, the defender, can run and from a long way".....
- matrix
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 21475
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 1:55pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
there was one in the first quarter where milney got a free for in the back
he was 60 out
ump calls play on (after the allotted time frame of milney looking for a pass)
and the cat player leiterally 2 or 3 meters behind him tackles him and its called holding the ball.....
now arent they usually telling players to get away??
u cant just sit there waiting and then pounce.....i thought it was a 'u have to be at least 5 meters away'.
bigred is right...i thought the umps killed us too
he was 60 out
ump calls play on (after the allotted time frame of milney looking for a pass)
and the cat player leiterally 2 or 3 meters behind him tackles him and its called holding the ball.....
now arent they usually telling players to get away??
u cant just sit there waiting and then pounce.....i thought it was a 'u have to be at least 5 meters away'.
bigred is right...i thought the umps killed us too
- The Fireman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13273
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:54pm
- Has thanked: 655 times
- Been thanked: 1942 times
- Life Long Saint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5517
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:54pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 481 times
- Contact:
Selwood was there because BJ was there and the rule says that you are allowed to be closer than the 5m if your opponent is too.matrixcutter wrote:there was one in the first quarter where milney got a free for in the back
he was 60 out
ump calls play on (after the allotted time frame of milney looking for a pass)
and the cat player leiterally 2 or 3 meters behind him tackles him and its called holding the ball.....
now arent they usually telling players to get away??
u cant just sit there waiting and then pounce.....i thought it was a 'u have to be at least 5 meters away'.
bigred is right...i thought the umps killed us too
The umpire kept telling BJ to get out of the area but was duly ignored.
- matrix
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 21475
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 1:55pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
ok thanks for thatLife Long Saint wrote:Selwood was there because BJ was there and the rule says that you are allowed to be closer than the 5m if your opponent is too.matrixcutter wrote:there was one in the first quarter where milney got a free for in the back
he was 60 out
ump calls play on (after the allotted time frame of milney looking for a pass)
and the cat player leiterally 2 or 3 meters behind him tackles him and its called holding the ball.....
now arent they usually telling players to get away??
u cant just sit there waiting and then pounce.....i thought it was a 'u have to be at least 5 meters away'.
bigred is right...i thought the umps killed us too
The umpire kept telling BJ to get out of the area but was duly ignored.
i was just thinking that when they take a shot i hear the umps say 'get out' doesnt matter who it is
if thats the rule then thats the rule and BJ should been shielding milne
but granted was prob looking for the handball to roost one from 55.
understandable
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12782
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 793 times
- Been thanked: 427 times
Juat curious, How long do you reckon Selwood had the tackle on Milne before the umpire called holding the ball?Life Long Saint wrote:Selwood was there because BJ was there and the rule says that you are allowed to be closer than the 5m if your opponent is too.matrixcutter wrote:there was one in the first quarter where milney got a free for in the back
he was 60 out
ump calls play on (after the allotted time frame of milney looking for a pass)
and the cat player leiterally 2 or 3 meters behind him tackles him and its called holding the ball.....
now arent they usually telling players to get away??
u cant just sit there waiting and then pounce.....i thought it was a 'u have to be at least 5 meters away'.
bigred is right...i thought the umps killed us too
The umpire kept telling BJ to get out of the area but was duly ignored.
As long as Selwood continually got before he threw the ball out?
As long as GAblett got everytimr he was tackled? You know - 360 degree turn. After he's dinked and tried to sidestep 3 players.
Just wondering that's all.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1521
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 8:38pm
- Been thanked: 25 times
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: Sun 27 Mar 2005 8:29pm
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
In my unbiased opinion the Cats had a good run with the umpires. There were plenty of missed decisions that went their way.
Not to mention the Gary Ablett rule...
Gary Ablett Junior is to be given special consideration by all umpires
i. Junior is allowed an extra second or 2 to dispose of the ball.
ii. Less attention is paid to how he diposes of the ball.
iii. And Ablett is not allowed to be touched by an oposition player while not in posession.
Not to mention the Gary Ablett rule...
Gary Ablett Junior is to be given special consideration by all umpires
i. Junior is allowed an extra second or 2 to dispose of the ball.
ii. Less attention is paid to how he diposes of the ball.
iii. And Ablett is not allowed to be touched by an oposition player while not in posession.
Last edited by Leo.J on Mon 06 Jul 2009 9:59am, edited 1 time in total.
- kosifantutti23
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: Fri 26 Sep 2008 12:55am
- Location: Horgen
And when Ablett finally was pinged for holding the ball, the umpire again called advantage when there was nothing there. Hayes kicking quickly to a contest is not advantage.Leo.J wrote:In my unbiased opinion the Cats had a good run with the umpires. There were plenty of missed decisions that went their way.
Not to mention the Gary Ablett rule...
Gary Ablett Junior is to be given special consideration by all umpires
i. Junior is allowed an extra second or 2 dispose of the ball.
ii. Less attention is paid to how he diposes of the ball.
iii. And Ablett is not allowed to be touched by an oposition player while not in posession.
Furtius Quo Rdelious
- Grimfang
- Club Player
- Posts: 1431
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:30am
- Location: Tecoma, Vic.
- Been thanked: 1 time
Remember in the 90's there was all the talk of the "Crow Throw"?
After watching Geelong continually get away with the same yesterday (Selwood especially); Mrs. Grimfang named it the "Pussy Pass" (in honour of the late Molly Sugden).
After watching Geelong continually get away with the same yesterday (Selwood especially); Mrs. Grimfang named it the "Pussy Pass" (in honour of the late Molly Sugden).
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons; for you are a quick and tasty morsel.
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9040
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 351 times
Mr Scarlett needs to read the rules. The advantage can only be called back if the umpire thinks there is no advantage IN THE HANDS OF THE PLAYER WHO HAS THE ADVANTAGE. If the second player to handle it fails to take it then it can't be called back. This is what happened. The first player looked like taking clean possession and advantage was called because there were two Cats players together. The first got a half handpass to the second who fumbled it, clearly no advantage to him or the Cats, BUT it could not be called back. Whether the umpire should have let play continue in the first place is another matter. Umpires cannot win in these circumstances. Had the Cats player cleanly picked it up and shot a good handpass to someone who bombed a long goal, and the umpire did not allow advantage you can bet Mr Scarlett would be singing a different tune. Given the state of the game, the fact that the Cats were surging, etc., the umpire made a fair call. In fact, Ray Chamberlain was easily the best ump on the field. Michael Vozzo was also good but Brett Rosebury (No 8) was hopeless. He just got too many wrong.
Last edited by perfectionist on Mon 06 Jul 2009 10:11am, edited 1 time in total.
- Hurricane
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4038
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:24pm
- Location: The isle of Besaid, Spira
In the 90's the Adelaide Crows were highlighted for a tactic while they were being tackled they would hand or throw the ball to a team mate. They would usually get away with it because the umps were often obscured by the number of players around the ball.fingers wrote:What was the "crow throw" ?Grimfang wrote:Remember in the 90's there was all the talk of the "Crow Throw"?
After watching Geelong continually get away with the same yesterday (Selwood especially); Mrs. Grimfang named it the "Pussy Pass" (in honour of the late Molly Sugden).
IMHO Geelong have NOTHING to sook about when it comes to the umpires yesterday, they got a huge free ride with about 8 decisions going their way that were 100% wrong.
Suck it up mop head, you had 3 extra and STILL couldnt beat us WHO'S OVERRATED NOW?
BANG BANG
Mitsuharu Misawa 1962 - 2009.
I am vengeance....I am the night...I....AM.....BATMAN
I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass and im all out of bubblegum
I am vengeance....I am the night...I....AM.....BATMAN
I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass and im all out of bubblegum
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18607
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1950 times
- Been thanked: 854 times
those are outrageous stats and make me very angry. clearly someone has a blind spot and there should be an investigation into it.Beno88 wrote:FREE KICKS INSIDE 50
GEELONG : 5
ST.KILDA : 0
50 METRE PENALTIES
GEELONG : 3
ST.KILDA : 0
SCORES FROM FREES OR 50 MTR PENALTIES
GEELONG : 7
ST.KILDA : 0
imagine if we were in the grand final and ran into that sort of incompetence.