Umps

[AndrewP6]

For those who defend the monkeys, and say they never abuse players, just listening to the replay from tonights game, on 3/4 time when they disallowed the last kick, Ray Chamberlain could clearly be heard telling a Tigers player to "get your hearing checked, Daniel"....

Will he be subject to scrutiny? Will he be admonished? No, of course not, he's one of the precious ones... my disdain for them grows and grows...

[bulldogtragic]

I don't see the issue myself. At all. What is the issue?

[AndrewP6]

I don't see the issue myself. At all. What is the issue?

The issue is people are always going on about how we must respect the umpires, not criticise them publicly, not go near them etc. Yet it seems the same rules don't apply to them. They are free to make smart arse comments to players, and they (players) are just supposed to cop it. If a player made that sort of remark to an ump, he'd be fined (at least) It's a double standard - and greatly irritates me.

[mighty_west]

I don't have a problem with the umps giving it back to the players, should be like the old days of both umps & players giving as much as they recieve, then have a drink after the game.

[AndrewP6]

I don't have a problem with the umps giving it back to the players, should be like the old days of both umps & players giving as much as they recieve, then have a drink after the game.

If it was give and take, then all good...but you can't so much as breathe on an ump these days before the penalty comes to you.

[bulldogtragic]

I don't have a problem with the umps giving it back to the players, should be like the old days of both umps & players giving as much as they recieve, then have a drink after the game.
I agree. Get rid of the microphones.

I used to just tell players to 'get a kick' when they abused me. I have no issue at all with what was said, it is the over-officious umpires that pay 50 when Johno points at his eyes.

That's an issue with poor decision making by a few, not these fairly tame comments.

[AndrewP6]

Doing something I rarely do tonight, watching a non-Bulldogs game. I wish the umps would stop saying "C'mon, get up" to players after a bounce is called. If one of them is deemed to be deliberately holding play up, pay a penalty. Can't wait to hear one of the players say "Get out of the bloody way!" or something similar... and wait for the uproar.

[bulldogtragic]

Today's 50 was the worst 50m penalty i think i've ever seen paid - which then led to a goal. Not the reason for the loss at all, but worst 50m i can think of.

[AndrewP6]

Today's 50 was the worst 50m penalty i think i've ever seen paid - which then led to a goal. Not the reason for the loss at all, but worst 50m i can think of.

Do you know what it was for?

[bulldogtragic]

Do you know what it was for?
No.

I can't recall the doggies player, but he bumped bodies in a marking contest where the ball was still 'live'.

That umpire should be dropped.

[AndrewP6]

No.

I can't recall the doggies player, but he bumped bodies in a marking contest where the ball was still 'live'.

That umpire should be dropped.

Yeah, I remember it now..

[azabob]

No.

I can't recall the doggies player, but he bumped bodies in a marking contest where the ball was still 'live'.

That umpire should be dropped.

It was Gilbee.

[Rance Fan]

Do you know what it was for?


Looked like a bit of backchat to the ump from where i sat

[westdog54]

Looked like a bit of backchat to the ump from where i sat

Definitely not. Paid the 50 as soon as contact was made. Gilbee didn't even get a chance to talk to him. The most Gilbs had any time for was to just stare in utter disbelief.

[Mofra]

Umpires cop far more abuse than they dish out, so no issue for mine. They're human after all.

[soupman]

This was pretty much right after I arrived. The umpire paid the mark and the 50m for pushing the player, when it should have just been a free for pushing the player, as the player had a lot less of the ball than either Johnson or Addison did down the other end, and both of them were denied their marks. Absolute joke of a decision.

[aker39]

Today's 50 was the worst 50m penalty i think i've ever seen paid - which then led to a goal. Not the reason for the loss at all, but worst 50m i can think of.

I made the comment myself at the time.

And just to make things worse (not for the Dogs), the 50m was about 35m.

[AndrewP6]

What did people think yesterday? Another ordinary performance in my book. Triple M commentators said that the Cats had 19 on the field (Milburn the culprit) at one point early on. Nothing happened. Yet a while back when Welsh did it, the league was in uproar.

[LostDoggy]

Thought they were very average to be honest, especially a free kick they gave in the pocket of the punt road end.

Not sure who the Geelong player was, but he threw the ball out with both hands. But the umpire didn't call that, instead giving Geelong a free for to high.

[Mofra]

The issue is people are always going on about how we must respect the umpires, not criticise them publicly, not go near them etc. Yet it seems the same rules don't apply to them.
When have you heard an umpire publically (ie through the media) bag out a player?

On the field is a different proposition.

[Mantis]

Not sure who the Geelong player was, but he threw the ball out with both hands. But the umpire didn't call that, instead giving Geelong a free for to high.

It was Ling. Shocking decision.

[LostDoggy]

I think the umps were poor but had little influence on the result yesterday. My gripe is the comps leading free fors player in Joel Selwood, would love to how many of those were from him ducking into or going head first into a tackle.

[AndrewP6]

When have you heard an umpire publically (ie through the media) bag out a player?

On the field is a different proposition.

But it shouldn't be... you either show respect to someone all the time, or not at all... the old "what happens on the field stays on the field" should apply to players, not umps... If they are allowed to have a go at players on field, players should be allowed to do the same. But, as we all know, they're not allowed to breathe on an ump.

[craigsahibee]

First quarter, City end. Can't remember if it was a boundary throw in or a bounce but Will got pinged for "touching" the opposition ruckman. Very poor yesterday. Not the difference but very poor.

[AndrewP6]

First quarter, City end. Can't remember if it was a boundary throw in or a bounce but Will got pinged for "touching" the opposition ruckman. Very poor yesterday. Not the difference but very poor.

Yep.. and in today's game, big Rocca got hit with a 50m penalty for an elbow to the chest of Zac Dawson. Which, to quote the commentators, "happens a hundred times every game"...

[Mofra]

But it shouldn't be... you either show respect to someone all the time, or not at all... the old "what happens on the field stays on the field" should apply to players, not umps... If they are allowed to have a go at players on field, players should be allowed to do the same. But, as we all know, they're not allowed to breathe on an ump.
As long as players don't swear, they generally get a little bit of leeway in the heat of the moment (ie just after an umpiring decision). As much as players get emotional, umpires are human too, not robots.
I think everyone should have a little bit of breathing space in terms of reacting the way they do; footy's an empotional game and even the officials are desperate to do as well as they can.

[AndrewP6]

As long as players don't swear, they generally get a little bit of leeway in the heat of the moment (ie just after an umpiring decision). As much as players get emotional, umpires are human too, not robots.
I think everyone should have a little bit of breathing space in terms of reacting the way they do; footy's an empotional game and even the officials are desperate to do as well as they can.

Couple of weeks ago, a 50m penalty was paid, on the grounds of the player's "demeanour"...it's this sort of ridiculous nitpicking that earns my wrath...

And whilst I agree everyone is human, and that you should have some breathing space, from my observations there are too many umps who are too precious and officious... and don't use this sort of discretion...

[jazzadogs]

What did people think yesterday? Another ordinary performance in my book. Triple M commentators said that the Cats had 19 on the field (Milburn the culprit) at one point early on. Nothing happened. Yet a while back when Welsh did it, the league was in uproar.
You can see it on the TV, because there's a boundary throw-in/ball up happening right next to the interchange gates at the same time. Varcoe was definitely involved, not sure if it was Milburn...saw it live at the game, so I was waiting for a comment on the TV but they didnt say anything.

None of the umpiring affected the results, but it was average. I'm losing respect for Selwood, the amount of free kicks he gets from ducking/dropping at the knees. Sure, he's a courageous player, but it irritates me. Not as much as Collingwood shepharding against the man on the mark though!!!

[AndrewP6]

You can see it on the TV, because there's a boundary throw-in/ball up happening right next to the interchange gates at the same time. Varcoe was definitely involved, not sure if it was Milburn...saw it live at the game, so I was waiting for a comment on the TV but they didnt say anything.

None of the umpiring affected the results, but it was average. I'm losing respect for Selwood, the amount of free kicks he gets from ducking/dropping at the knees. Sure, he's a courageous player, but it irritates me. Not as much as Collingwood shepharding against the man on the mark though!!!

Varcoe may have been the extra, did Milburn take himself off? I couldn't see it, but the radio buys were on it right away...One of the Triple M blokes (BT I think) was going nuts about it...50m penalty could've been handy there...

Know what you mean about Selwood. And the umps fall for it...

[jazzadogs]

Varcoe may have been the extra, did Milburn take himself off? I couldn't see it, but the radio buys were on it right away...One of the Triple M blokes (BT I think) was going nuts about it...50m penalty could've been handy there...

Know what you mean about Selwood. And the umps fall for it...
To be honest, can't remember who was doing what...just remember Varcoe hopping back and forth over the line. Obviously the emergency umpire was concentrating too much on the play and not enough on the interchange.

They have to pay Selwood the free kick because he does get tackled high...I just don't agree with his methods.

[boydogs]

They have to pay Selwood the free kick because he does get tackled high...I just don't agree with his methods.

Surely dipping your head and bending your knees are both ducking?

[jazzadogs]

Surely dipping your head and bending your knees are both ducking?
If the player runs into someone with their head bent over, the umps generally don't pay it. Selwood (generally, obviously not every time) waits for contact then drops his knees, meaning that the tackle goes high.

I'm not sure what the rule book actually states, but IMO there is a difference.

[Mofra]

Couple of weeks ago, a 50m penalty was paid, on the grounds of the player's "demeanour"...it's this sort of ridiculous nitpicking that earns my wrath...

And whilst I agree everyone is human, and that you should have some breathing space, from my observations there are too many umps who are too precious and officious... and don't use this sort of discretion...
That's one poor incident in a year in which hundreds of decisions are made. That doesn't add up to a trend, even if you go backa couple of years to the famous "weak dog" 50m penalty.

[LostDoggy]

The 50m penalty against Minson in the first quarter was a joke, cost us a goal, and gave the cats some real momentum.
There were a few frees against us in ruck contests that were pretty bad as well.
Has Selwood been sighted by the match review? that surely has to be a week.

[aker39]

Has Selwood been sighted by the match review? that surely has to be a week.

For what?

A head high tackle

[mighty_west]

Has Selwood been sighted by the match review? that surely has to be a week.

I wouldn't have thought so, free kicks no doubt, but not reportable.

As for Judd, well, him admitting to trying to put pressure on the pressure point rather than eye gauging, that doesn't sound good what so ever, i wouldn't be suprised if the AFL's ears pricked up somewhat after hearing that, had Judd not said that, he would have gotten away with it for lack of clear video footage.

As for the umps in our game, yeah a few not go our way, esepcially in the first, but thats footy and always will be footy, you lose, you make a big deal over it, you win, you hardly give it a second thought.

[bornadog]

I wouldn't have thought so, free kicks no doubt, but not reportable.

As for Judd, well, him admitting to trying to put pressure on the pressure point rather than eye gauging, that doesn't sound good what so ever, i wouldn't be suprised if the AFL's ears pricked up somewhat after hearing that, had Judd not said that, he would have gotten away with it for lack of clear video footage.

As for the umps in our game, yeah a few not go our way, esepcially in the first, but thats footy and always will be footy, you lose, you make a big deal over it, you win, you hardly give it a second thought.

what Judd did is a disgrace to the game. Applying pressure points, surely is playing with fire and is almost worse than a punch in the face.

[mighty_west]

what Judd did is a disgrace to the game. Applying pressure points, surely is playing with fire and is almost worse than a punch in the face.

Seems as though the match review panel agree, 3 weeks, down to 2 with guilty plea.

[AndrewP6]

That's one poor incident in a year in which hundreds of decisions are made. That doesn't add up to a trend, even if you go backa couple of years to the famous "weak dog" 50m penalty.

It's just one that I happened to hear... I'll bet the house that there's plenty more...