Brisbane v Port Adelaide

[truebelievers]

You've got to be kidding! That was the most one-sided display of umpiring I have seen. They gave them everything and us nothing. It was 25 to 7 in the third quarter and we were 40 points ahead. The commentators pointed it out on numerous occassions that we were unlucky and they were lucky. that 50m penalty was the only thing we got all night. Disgusting.

 

[Herbs]

Things were starting to look promising for Brissy's forwardline when Clark started playing, but I think he's still injured, which is a shame because he's going to be a star.

 

[don vito of fitzroy]

A great final quarter by the Lions. Brizzie didn't play with flair or grace but they showed some great spirit and run. The main differences in the match were Motlop's goals and Port's tighter defence.

What was up with that 50-metre penalty to Port?

 

[BWST]

You've got to be kidding! That was the most one-sided display of umpiring I have seen. They gave them everything and us nothing. It was 25 to 7 in the third quarter and we were 40 points ahead. The commentators pointed it out on numerous occassions that we were unlucky and they were lucky. that 50m penalty was the only thing we got all night. Disgusting.

Whatever. We won ?.....what are you trying to do, ruin a good, clean, high scoring game ?

The only faults in that whole game i can pick, is our last quarter. And its not a one off.

 

[BWST]

Watch the game again, and watch the umpy's free kicks. Their all around the mark.

We scragged to win that......thus the free kick count.

You get that with young blokes......they tried their hearts out.

 

[Herbs]

Sure, the umps missed Merrett holding Tredrea's arm, but otherwise, it wasn't too bad. At least they were better with HTB decisions than the Geelong-Sydney game this arvo.

 

[Snuka]

You've got to be kidding! That was the most one-sided display of umpiring I have seen. They gave them everything and us nothing. It was 25 to 7 in the third quarter and we were 40 points ahead. The commentators pointed it out on numerous occassions that we were unlucky and they were lucky. that 50m penalty was the only thing we got all night. Disgusting.

I'd listen to your gracious fellow supporters if I were you...you've only mentioned one incident which went Port's way...why don't you take us through all the bad decisions that went against Port in detail?

 

[truebelievers]

I'd listen to your gracious fellow supporters if I were you...you've only mentioned one incident which went Port's way...why don't you take us through all the bad decisions that went against Port in detail?

Thanks for the advise mate. It's hard to be gracious when it's such a lopsided and unjust display. All we want is an attempt at fairness.And I think it was just one of our supporters, if you check out the port board you'll see a different story. A few that I noticed:

*Tredrea's free in our forward line in the first few minutes.
*Hands in the back against Westhoff who'd just scored a goal when the same was not paid the other way.
*A holding the ball decision not paid to Motlop in our forward line - but the one against Cornes less blatant and was paid - goal to Brisbane.
*Terrible decision against Wilson where he tackled Begley? the ball was basically dead, begley lifts wilbur onto his back and then falls forward - in the back. That was amateur stuff.
*Brisbane player runs into cassisi's leg - free kick to Brisbane player.
*Tredrea's "high" bump against Adcock.
*numerous ruck decisions against Lade but the most bizarre was when he jumped for the ball and charmers didn't - free kick to charmers. Lade was dumstruck.

Brisbane players just had to ask for the free and they got it.

A terrible display no ifs no buts and if it was against your side, you'd be "ungracious" too.

 

[MacMum]

You guys won, we were very proud of our guys efforts, was a great game in the end...and you guys still whinge!!

 

[tribey]

Watch the game again, and watch the umpy's free kicks. Their all around the mark.

I've already outlined 5 or 6 ludicrous individual decisions on the relevant match thread on the Port board so I won't repeat myself here, but gee whiz, to say they were 'all around the mark' is akin to standing in front of a big 'Mission Accomplished' banner on an aircraft carrier. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[tribey]

You guys won, we were very proud of our guys efforts, was a great game in the end...and you guys still whinge!!

I could understand your sentiments if there was a lineball discrepancy in the freekick count (say a difference of 5-7 frees) or certain calls themselves were stiff but could be argued for by the letter of the law, but gee whiz.

An overall difference in the count of 16 frees and there were at least 6 I was able to immediately recall after the game which were undeniably wrong to the point of mindboggling.

When the reigning All-Australian ruckman is giving away centre bounce and boundary throw-in infringement frees for simply besting his opposite number with superior strength and positioning questions need to be asked.

There was a reason Lade looked shellshocked rather than frustrated.

 

[BigCat2]

If you're talking about that one where Lade jumped and was deemed to have used his knee on Charman (with eyes on the footy) then yeah, it shouldn't have been a free.

What confuses me though is why a free kick count ever included as 'evidence' for biased umpiring. Say Team A is full of thugs and performs 100 high tackles in a game while Team B doesn't commit anything at all. So the free kick count should be 100-0, yet that's fair. Now if 5 'coathangers' by Team A are missed by the umpire, resulting in only a 95-0 free kick count in favour of Team B, Team B should still feel ripped off.

Makes sense? You can only talk about the specific instances where kicks were paid when they shouldn't have, or not paid when they should have. Totals are meaningless.

 

[tribey]

If you're talking about that one where Lade jumped and was deemed to have used his knee on Charman (with eyes on the footy) then yeah, it shouldn't have been a free.

My word it shouldn't have been. One of the most disgraceful calls I've ever seen - especially given the umpire is right there and the two men are going head to head unobstructed by others. Bottom line, there can be no excuse for a decision that poor, be it interpretation, line of sight or positioning. The sort of call that shouldn't and wouldn't be made in Amateur C Grade.

What confuses me though is why a free kick count ever included as 'evidence' for biased umpiring. Say Team A is full of thugs and performs 100 high tackles in a game while Team B doesn't commit anything at all. So the free kick count should be 100-0, yet that's fair. Now if 5 'coathangers' by Team A are missed by the umpire, resulting in only a 95-0 free kick count in favour of Team B, Team B should still feel ripped off.

Makes sense? You can only talk about the specific instances where kicks were paid when they shouldn't have, or not paid when they should have. Totals are meaningless.

What you're saying certainly rings true if the count difference is at worst say 5-7 apart (the figure I previously gave), because everything tends to even out give or take a handful - the ones that aren't paid and should've been and the ones that were paid and shouldn't have been - for both sides.

But a free kick difference of 16 against the winning side is rank incompetence - especially when I can name 6 frees off the top of my head that Port shouldn't have given away and 1 that they should've got.

That's 7 in Port's favour, which goes beyond the margin of error even before we factor in the ones that Brisbane shouldn't have given away or missed out on.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not crying 'bias' - I'm crying 'clownshoes' here.

We'd all agree the umpires and their new interpretations have been rotten for some time now - Saturday night was one of the starkest examples we've had to date.

Luckily for Derek Humphrey-Smith White Line Fever is no longer.