Autopsy AFL 2021 Round 1 - Tigers v Blues Thurs March 18th 7:25pm AEDT (MCG) Tigercast link in OP!

[GenYBlue]

When you look at things in isolation it goes both ways though, Vlastuin was crunched in the back when the ball wasn't in play no free kick was paid.

I could go pick out every free kick that should've been paid to Richmond but their is no point the umpire didn't pay it so you move on same thing happened with Carlton with some non-free kicks. It's better to focus on what your team did good what they didn't.

Carlton were right in this game but lack of composure hurt turnovers etc poor decision making especially late in the quarters.
McKay set-shot plays on misses, goes down the other end Riewoldt kicks a goal those things are the difference in these games.

No point?

I would argue that the point is crucial... if we don't demand or at the very least expect a higher standard of officiating, incorrect decisions will continue to be made.

Just because errors can and do occur, doesn't mean they should.

Or in a more practical framing: just because they can and do occur, doesn't mean we shouldn't be aiming to reduce the number of incorrect decisions as much as possible.
To not attempt this would be grossly negligent and morally reprehensible.

Your stance seems to be implying that because the umpires are the officiators, they are exempt from outside criticism regarding their own administration of the rules... which if so, is completely false.

Forgive me if I'm putting words in your mouth, feel free to clarify.

I elected not to address the rest of your response, as I feel it doesn't take into consideration the reasoning of my previous post, particularly the idea that we should be able to discern and express the value of impact of our player's actions vs that of unjustified external interference.

 

[10571z]

Blues looked alright, tigers looked the same. I’d be shocked if they aren’t right in it again.

Martin could go down as one of the best of all time IMO

SPS absolute list clogger, Carlton need to move him into the ressies

 

[Daka]

No point?

I would argue that the point is crucial... if we don't demand or at the very least expect a higher standard of officiating, incorrect decisions will continue to be made.

Just because errors can and do occur, doesn't mean they should.

Or in a more practical framing: just because they can and do occur, doesn't mean we shouldn't be aiming to reduce the number of incorrect decisions as much as possible.
To not attempt this would be grossly negligent and morally reprehensible.

Your stance seems to be implying that because the umpires are the officiators, they are exempt from outside criticism regarding their own administration of the rules... which if so, is completely false.

Forgive me if I'm putting words in your mouth, feel free to clarify.

I elected not to address the rest of your response, as I feel it doesn't take into consideration the reasoning of my previous post, particularly the idea that we should be able to discern and express the value of impact of our player's actions vs that of unjustified external interference.

Blame the AFL it's all the rule changes.. Not the umpires it's the hardest game to officiate in the world.

 

[juss]

That was probably the best of these round 1 opening games for some time. Had a real feel of an upset at stages.

Martin and Harry Mackay leaving a couple goals out there was the difference tonight I reckon.

Noah Balta is becoming so important at such a young age. I hate the comparison but it's uncanny how much he reminds me of a young Rance, but Balta is easily ahead at the same age with better athletic attributes and a better kick.

 

[GenYBlue]

Blame the AFL it's all the rule changes.. Not the umpires it's the hardest game to officiate in the world.

I did blame the AFL, in the first sentence of my first post.

They are heinously culpable in this.

However the umpires can't be totally exempt from responsibility (and therefore criticism) because they're still partially culpable as the executors of the rules.

I appreciate your endeavour to protect the well being of the umpires as individuals, but I don't think the umpiring institution should be free of criticism.

 

[CarltonBlooz]

That was probably the best of these round 1 opening games for some time. Had a real feel of an upset at stages.

Martin and Harry Mackay leaving a couple goals out there was the difference tonight I reckon.

Noah Balta is becoming so important at such a young age. I hate the comparison but it's uncanny how much he reminds me of a young Rance, but Balta is easily ahead at the same age with better athletic attributes and a better kick.

He'll be an excellent player done well and good game, better than I expected it to be.

 

[Daka]

I did blame the AFL, in the first sentence of my first post.

They are heinously culpable in this.

However the umpires can't be totally exempt from responsibility (and therefore criticism) because they're still partially culpable as the executors of the rules.

I appreciate your endeavour to protect the well being of the umpires as individuals, but I don't think the umpiring institution should be free of criticism.

They shouldn't be.. I even said they got some decisions wrong both ways, but I have sympathy for them because of all the constant rule changes the AFL keeps bringing in with little support for them. Let's be honest no one wanted the "Stand the Mark" rule in the game.

 

[Lsta062]

I feel you are (understandably) blinded by love for your team, that you can't see that the AFL and the Umpiring fraternity are destroying the game we all love.

The very process of which began much before either the Tigers or even Hawthorn rose to dominance.

Look past the raw numbers of the free kick differential, and consider the isolated incidents and their overall affect on the momentum a team has on the play.

A lot of factors contribute to this:

- Did the free kick result in a goal?
- Did the free kick save a goal?
- Did the free kick go against the grain of play?
- And most importantly, but weighted more heavily if the former conditions are met: was the decision correct as the rules of the game dictate & has that ruling been applied consistently for both teams?

You're less likely to do this when your team is winning and successful, because these things are less impactful when a team can naturally overcome the scoreboard discrepancy through sheer skill alone. However I'm sure you'll remember the darker days of yesteryear for your football club, and perhaps if you had the more astute and cunning mind you have now you might have applied this kind of mental framework to those results.

You could certainly see why such a framework would be useful for a team on the rise, but struggling to net wins, as you need a way to measure how much a result's baring lay on your player's decisions and skills VS dubious umpiring decisions.

Obviously everyone watches their team's games with a bias (and we wouldn't want it any other way), but when you find gross inconsistencies across the board between teams in a single game, and more importantly a plethora of neutral supporters from across the country can clearly see them too, you have take notice.

I'm not saying that the umpires went in with the intent to favor Richmond, but their actions in my view (and clearly those of others on this forum) demonstrate an unconscious bias towards the Tigers during critical moments in the game. And even if you view that as a reach there's undeniably an issue with how the rules are applied consistently across the entire competition. (Otherwise we would not be having this conversation).

Your argument is that the numbers don't lie, but our argument is that they can and do, when judgments of accuracy in regards to interpretation and consistency are applied.
You might not agree with this assessment.

That's okay, but I wouldn't advise labeling those freely discussing it on the general board as embarrassing... there's simply no need over something trivial like a difference of opinion.

All the best.. and here's to a great season for all teams of the AFL.

You know what? I won’t look past the raw free kick numbers of last night. I think that it reflected the game well.
Carlton got away with push in the backs and HTB too, so I don’t think there was an unconscious bias towards Richmond last night. We had a bit of a ride in the 2nd but most of the free kicks (including the 50-metre penalties) were actually there except for the deliberate against Jones and consequently the one not paid against Nankervis in my opinion.

To be honest, how many free kicks did you want Carlton to get? More than 25 free kicks and Richmond less than 15 free kicks? Carlton had plenty of shots at goal from free kicks last night. In Round 1 Carlton got something like 8 goals out of 12 from free kicks so Richmond is probably one of the last teams you can say get treated well by the umpires unconsciously. Our free kick differential is one of the worst almost every year in our Premiership era so if anything our opposition tend to get paid the free kick when we do something against the rule more than others if we don’t want to say that the umpires are unconsciously against us.

 

[queensberryrules]

No point?

I would argue that the point is crucial... if we don't demand or at the very least expect a higher standard of officiating, incorrect decisions will continue to be made.

Just because errors can and do occur, doesn't mean they should.

Or in a more practical framing: just because they can and do occur, doesn't mean we shouldn't be aiming to reduce the number of incorrect decisions as much as possible.
To not attempt this would be grossly negligent and morally reprehensible.

Your stance seems to be implying that because the umpires are the officiators, they are exempt from outside criticism regarding their own administration of the rules... which if so, is completely false.

Forgive me if I'm putting words in your mouth, feel free to clarify.

I elected not to address the rest of your response, as I feel it doesn't take into consideration the reasoning of my previous post, particularly the idea that we should be able to discern and express the value of impact of our player's actions vs that of unjustified external interference.

In other words, a whine and sook in the sand pit.

 

[Thrillhouse!]

So many if, buts and maybes in this thread. Here's mine - richmond clean up there forward entries they win by 10 goals. 75 - 41 inside 50's.

On SM-G781B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[telsor]

Well done Carlton on a hard fought game, they had us for most of it, but fitness late in qtrs and at the end of the game and a little more composure proved the difference in the end. (well, that and Dusty engaging beast mode for the last few minutes).

Should be a better season for you guys this year and I wouldn't be surprised to meet you again in the finals.

 

[JayJ20]

Blues haven't fixed their main issue. Still concede 4-6 goals in a row. Also decisively lost the territory battle (Rich 75 - Carl 41 inside 50s).
If Richmond weren't so sloppy entering the 50, that could have been a thrashing. You don't allow a team 75 entries inside 50, which is Richmond's highest ever inside 50 count. That said, back 6 were good. Absorbed most of the pressure.

Seen it in both preseason games, but Blues really need to work on their team defence and forward pressure to get repeat entries. Tigers took it out of defence way too easily. Also, I do question their fitness levels as well. They dominate the early parts of the quarter, but can't keep that energy late in the quarter. Might get better as the season goes on.

Saad though is an excellent acquisition and Walsh has taken his game to another level.

 

[Dazb86]

Carlton looked good. Bit to like about them this year.

 

[captain blood 17]

Great game last night blue baggers. Was unreal being there. Great atmosphere. It's a pity you all left with 10 minutes to go though.

 

[captain blood 17]

The women would be higher scoring than this.. Richmond look like the bang average side they are on paper at the moment

 

[captain blood 17]

Umps keeping Richmond in this. Some things never change.

 

[captain blood 17]

Seriously fu** these umpires, young team trying to compete against the premiers and they are blantantly walking them back into the game.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Blame the AFL it's all the rule changes.. Not the umpires it's the hardest game to officiate in the world.

I'd argue 2nd.
There's over 700 fouls in quidditch

 

[OffTheBit]

Imagine waking up and the first thing you do is go through a footy thread (way after the fact) on the internet to gloat about beating Carlton lol

 

[Poor Form]

Doesn't change the fact that there were some absolute howlers not paid.

Nankervis rushed behind (inconsistent after paying against Jones the other end).

A few holding the ball.... etc

Objectively wrong decisions

2 reverse and non call favor Carlton, 1 with Astbury there but soft and Vlaustin in the 1st getting decked well after the whistle without Carlton player going for the ball.

Both ended in goals everyone can play that game bro tale of the tape says +10 frees to Carlton, personally I think the scoreboard flattered the blues 75 to 41 I50s says we should have been further in front.

 

[Poor Form]

Imagine waking up and the first thing you do is go through a footy thread (way after the fact) on the internet to gloat about beating Carlton lol

Is this where someone points out that you came in here as a neutral to zing people in the early morning?

 

[sante]

Same old Richmond and same old Carlton

 

[OffTheBit]

Is this where someone points out that you came in here as a neutral to zing people in the early morning?

Where was the zing? The chap quoted my post along with a bunch of others, clearly got up and read through the whole thread multi quoting as he went... kinda sad IMHO but you lot do you

 

[captain blood 17]

Imagine waking up and the first thing you do is go through a footy thread (way after the fact) on the internet to gloat about beating Carlton lol

 

[The Dog]

I feel you are (understandably) blinded by love for your team, that you can't see that the AFL and the Umpiring fraternity are destroying the game we all love.

The very process of which began much before either the Tigers or even Hawthorn rose to dominance.

Look past the raw numbers of the free kick differential, and consider the isolated incidents and their overall affect on the momentum a team has on the play.

A lot of factors contribute to this:

- Did the free kick result in a goal?
- Did the free kick save a goal?
- Did the free kick go against the grain of play?
- And most importantly, but weighted more heavily if the former conditions are met: was the decision correct as the rules of the game dictate & has that ruling been applied consistently for both teams?

You're less likely to do this when your team is winning and successful, because these things are less impactful when a team can naturally overcome the scoreboard discrepancy through sheer skill alone. However I'm sure you'll remember the darker days of yesteryear for your football club, and perhaps if you had the more astute and cunning mind you have now you might have applied this kind of mental framework to those results.

You could certainly see why such a framework would be useful for a team on the rise, but struggling to net wins, as you need a way to measure how much a result's baring lay on your player's decisions and skills VS dubious umpiring decisions.

Obviously everyone watches their team's games with a bias (and we wouldn't want it any other way), but when you find gross inconsistencies across the board between teams in a single game, and more importantly a plethora of neutral supporters from across the country can clearly see them too, you have take notice.

I'm not saying that the umpires went in with the intent to favor Richmond, but their actions in my view (and clearly those of others on this forum) demonstrate an unconscious bias towards the Tigers during critical moments in the game. And even if you view that as a reach there's undeniably an issue with how the rules are applied consistently across the entire competition. (Otherwise we would not be having this conversation).

Your argument is that the numbers don't lie, but our argument is that they can and do, when judgments of accuracy in regards to interpretation and consistency are applied.
You might not agree with this assessment.

That's okay, but I wouldn't advise labeling those freely discussing it on the general board as embarrassing... there's simply no need over something trivial like a difference of opinion.

All the best.. and here's to a great season for all teams of the AFL.

Probably the best post I’ve read on this topic. Well said


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com