Umps

[boydogs]

Re: Umps

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]

Re: Umps

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]

Re: Umps

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]

Re: Umps

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.

[Missing Dog]

Re: Umps

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

For what?

A head high tackle

[mighty_west]

Re: Umps

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]

Re: Umps

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]

Re: Umps

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]

Re: Umps

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...