| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| The Dumbest Umpire Decisions in Sunday's Game http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20823 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | DownUnderChick [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Dumbest Umpire Decisions in Sunday's Game |
As I posted on a previous thread, why was Rocca's mark and goal allowed in the last quarter, when he clearly had his hands in the back of T-Bird? Why wasn't Maxwell reported for the incident on my Smurph? Continue.......................... |
|
| Author: | seanpb [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
yeah, that was a bit odd, and fraser had his hands pushing waite down when banno cleaned him up and thomas kicked a goal too. oh well, got the win. |
|
| Author: | TruBlueBrad [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Umpires were a lot better yesterday than last week. I don't have many complaints. Didn't notice Roccas hands in the back, but we were 35 points up at the time and I had backed us to win under 39.5 so I wasn't really too disappointed to see him kick a goal at that stage 
|
|
| Author: | Donstuie [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The Medhurst 50 for me. Apparently if a bloke takes a mark, you're supposed to just stand there and scratch your arse when he tries to get around you to play on. |
|
| Author: | kingkerna [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Fev was constantly getting held to the point that he couldn't lead. Setanta getting crashed into on the wing, play on?? 
|
|
| Author: | septembergurl [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Stevens report. |
|
| Author: | ekrem [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
lot of holding the ball decisions that didn't get paid |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
kingkerna wrote: Fev was constantly getting held to the point that he couldn't lead.
What, just yesterday. 
|
|
| Author: | SparkyBlue [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Donstuie wrote: The Medhurst 50 for me. Apparently if a bloke takes a mark, you're supposed to just stand there and scratch your arse when he tries to get around you to play on.
+1. That was the 50 that took him to the goal square, right?! Oh, I was cursing that for the next whole quarter. Any free kick to the Pies - "ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE A 50 WITH THAT?!". |
|
| Author: | TruBlueBrad [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Umpires have been red hot on that this season. If you grab a guy after he's taken the mark you run the risk of it being 50 against you. Thornton should have waited until clearly run off the mark, then tackled Medhurst. Run with him if you have to, to stop him getting too far away. |
|
| Author: | grrofunger [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
TruBlueBrad wrote: Umpires have been red hot on that this season.
If you grab a guy after he's taken the mark you run the risk of it being 50 against you. Thornton should have waited until clearly run off the mark, then tackled Medhurst. Run with him if you have to, to stop him getting too far away. then you get done for overstepping the mark - you cant win |
|
| Author: | Kaptain Kouta [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I said it in the "Shit umpiring" thread. The "decision" against Santy after he was brought down after disposing of the ball, and the whistle went, and for some reason, it was holding the ball against him rather than a late tackle and free to him. |
|
| Author: | TruBlueBrad [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
grrofunger wrote: TruBlueBrad wrote: Umpires have been red hot on that this season. If you grab a guy after he's taken the mark you run the risk of it being 50 against you. Thornton should have waited until clearly run off the mark, then tackled Medhurst. Run with him if you have to, to stop him getting too far away. then you get done for overstepping the mark - you cant win I mean if Medhurst runs forward, then run with him. If he runs back to take his kick, there is nothing can, or should be able to, do to stop that. |
|
| Author: | AIRCAV [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thorntons tackle on Didak. If he'd got boot to ball, and kicked a goal, it would have been allowed. He didn't and it was 'play on'. grrrr |
|
| Author: | vangipuss [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 8:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
heath shaws slip leading to a 'high tackle' from fev in the middle ofr the ground. Bannisters 'high tackle' on Didak. And the time Marty Clarke shit himself when he saw fev coming and just stopped to brace for impact instead of going for the ball thus allowing fev to run into him. If it was a marking or ruck contest he would have been called for sheaperding |
|
| Author: | The_Cranium [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 8:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
a couple of strange ones agreed but i actually thought the umpiring was about as reasonable as you can get yesterday. the one thing i actually really liked was the fact that no-one got pinged for playing the ball and having 20 blokes jump on top of him. from either side. more often than not real tackles were rewarded. a couple still got through that should have been pinged, but it was a vast improvement. the afl should have a good look at yesterdays game in regards to these decisions. would love it to get back to that style of umpiring. |
|
| Author: | Cazzesman [ Tue Apr 15, 2008 7:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
By far the dumbest decision of the decade was the one I saw on the weekend. Centre square bounce. The two ruckman go at it. Fraser vs Cloke Fraser leaps and has eyes on the ball in the air as he is required to do. Cloke decides to not jump but waits on the ground beneath, flat footed. As Fraser flys through the air looking at the ball his knees lands on Clokes shoulder. Fraser taps the ball and the umpire blows the whistle. Free kick to Cloke for 'High Contact' 
WTF!!!!!! Insanity!!!! It was the most stupid, idiotic thing I had seen in minutes by an umpire. What was Fraser suppose to do. Get into the air, realise Cloke was not with him and instantly drop like a stone so he didn't make contact with Cloke. Mind boggling. Absolutely mind boggling. This game is 'Flowered' by grandstanding Umpires. Regards Cazzesman |
|
| Author: | The Duke [ Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hey, Da Man, this is about us - not them. Let them get pissed about the decisions that cost them. We're here to discuss how WE was robbed  .
Whatabout the Kreuuuuuzer rundown and perfect tackle in the last that was a clear 'incorrect disposal' - play on . What about Brown who went to ground and made no effort - Ball up
|
|
| Author: | Cazzesman [ Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The Duke wrote: Hey, Da Man, this is about us - not them. Let them get pissed about the decisions that cost them. We're here to discuss how WE was robbed
.Whatabout the Kreuuuuuzer rundown and perfect tackle in the last that was a clear 'incorrect disposal' - play on . What about Brown who went to ground and made no effort - Ball up Duke you make an excellent point but the Umpires are still a waste of space regardless.
Regards Cazzesman |
|
| Author: | Wild Blue Yonder [ Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
How's the guy who spent the first three quarters learning to bounce in the centre square. No 12 I think? You'd reckon he might've spent a a bit of time learning that prior to getting a league match. Gumby. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|