Is Nick Riewoldt deliberately favoured by umpires?

[campbell]

So if people are concerned about diving why not talk about Goodes?

Personally I'm more concerned about the umpires willingness to allow Sydney to throw the ball than I am about players who are stupid enough to be goaded into a giving away a stupid free kick - one that is in the laws of the game.

Oh, it's probably worth pointing out too how bitter and ignorant Luke Darcy is. No doubt this discussion has been fuelled by his completely biased & bitter interpretation of the rules. Would seem he has a few equally ignorant (&bitter) fans here on BF.

mmm, both sides did this.

I dont like the way, your team kick off the ground at all costs to get the ball moving on. Kicking in danger was called, and should have been pinged a few more times. What is is going to take, a person getting injured from a kick to the head, for this to be stopped.

 

[JeffDunne]

Goodes is just as bad but he doesn't seem to kick as many goals as a result of it.

He does if you open both eyes.

FWIW, I'd give up every Nick Riewoldt free kick for the umpires paying every time Sydney threw the ball.

We'd then be ahead in that equation by a factor of 10.

Just on Goodes too, not only did he constantly dive last night, he pulled a 'Fevola' in terms of dissent and didn't even bother chasing the ball.

Yet not a word here about it.

Why? Morons here are incpabale of their own analysis and simply react to the biased calling of f/wits like Luke Darcey.

Goodes should be embarrassed by his performance last night yet Throbbie Walls couldn't put his old-fella away talking up the 'big' bloke.

 

[JeffDunne]

mmm, both sides did this.

No doubt, yet one team was penalised while the other wasn't.

That's the point campbell.

I dont like the way, your team kick off the ground at all costs to get the ball moving on.

Did you actually watch the game with both eyes open?

We were the only team kicking the ball off the ground last night?

Which brings back to my earlier question - why not criticise Goodes for this as he probably did it more often than any other player on the ground? Seriously, the inconsistencies and completely biased 'analysis' in these threads beggars belief.

Maybe there's a bit of projection happening?

 

[campbell]

Jeff, I did watch it. Its easier to be fair and balanced, when your team is not playing the game imo.

You seem to have a thing against Goodes, why is this?

 

[JeffDunne]

You seem to have a thing against Goodes, why is this?

Why do you reckon?

I'm sure you're smart enough to work it out (especially given the thread)

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Whether Riewoldt dives, or whether he receives free kicks is not the issue for me. I have no problem with Riewoldt. I just want other key forwards in the competition to get the same free kicks when they occur, but they don't. Simple as that.

 

[Buddy Goes Bang]

Riewoldt's worst effort was matched soon after by Goodes in his own F50.

FWIW, the AFL is clutching at straws attempting to regulate this behaviour. As with the 'rushed behind' free kick, it's a knee jerk reaction and one that will only be used in exceptional circumstances (and even then it will be massively controversial due to inconsistent application).

The media should assume much greater responsibility in highlighting incidents of staging. Name and shame, keep stats on the worst offenders, ask direct questions about it when interviewing players and coaches, publicly deride the worst offenders' reputations and keep their progress in the papers (that umpires also read).

 

[Buddy Goes Bang]

Whether Riewoldt dives, or whether he receives free kicks is not the issue for me. I have no problem with Riewoldt. I just want other key forwards in the competition to get the same free kicks when they occur, but they don't. Simple as that.

If Franklin played under the same rules as Riewoldt, he'd kick 150 no probs.

 

[Kicka]

Last nights game only proved what had happened in the prelim final last year: umps are always favouring Riewoldt.

 

[Axcellence]

If Franklin played with discipline and in front as Riewoldt, he'd kick 150 no probs.

Edited for accuracy

 

[Buddy Goes Bang]

Edited for accuracy

Thanks.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Riewoldt gets a lot of free kicks which are correct to the letter of the law, but no other forwards get the same treatment by the umpires.

 

[TheGoatBaron]

NO - All reiwoldt is IS the BEST CHF in the league.

Seriously how good is this kid???

Best captain... most courageous player in the leaugue no mark he wouldnt go for.

ON YA SAINTS ... 9-0 so much for the carlton and richmond comebacks... face it boys your window has well and truly started and you still suk!! time to rebuild.. AGAIN??

A couragous player doesn't dive like he does.

Jonathan Brown is the most couragous player in the league and the best Centre Half-Forward not Riewoldt.

 

[RedWhite4Ever]

Jeff, I did watch it. Its easier to be fair and balanced, when your team is not playing the game imo.

You seem to have a thing against Goodes, why is this?

Clutching at the straws mate.

Hey Jeff, seeing as you watched the game with both eyes open - no mention of the blatant free in front of the Swans goals THAT WAS NOT PAID when Gilbert had Goodes in a bear hug though.

Regards.

 

[TheGoatBaron]

Why do you reckon?

I'm sure you're smart enough to work it out (especially given the thread)

So you attack another player, trying to defend one of your own?

Riewoldt will never be a champion in my eyes. Stages for too many free kicks, cries too much and is a down right sook, who should drink some cement!

Just take a look at the statistics, the OP supplied, he does get favoured, even last night 4 free kicks to 1. If that went the same throughout the season, his free kick count would be 88 for and 22 against.

His holding the man free kick, was a pathetic one and you know it!

And I'm not jealous that I don't have him in my team, so dont bring that immature argument into it, like a lot of Saints supporters do.

 

[Bombers_Forever]

Riewoldt's worst effort was matched soon after by Goodes in his own F50.

FWIW, the AFL is clutching at straws attempting to regulate this behaviour. As with the 'rushed behind' free kick, it's a knee jerk reaction and one that will only be used in exceptional circumstances (and even then it will be massively controversial due to inconsistent application).

The media should assume much greater responsibility in highlighting incidents of staging. Name and shame, keep stats on the worst offenders, ask direct questions about it when interviewing players and coaches, publicly deride the worst offenders' reputations and keep their progress in the papers (that umpires also read).

Well said

 

[JeffDunne]

So you attack another player, trying to defend one of your own?

Attack?

I'm amazed you have the nerve to call anyone a sook.

(actually, since you're a Swans supporter, ignorance doesn't surprise me in the least)

Riewoldt will never be a champion in my eyes.

There we go, a perfect example.

And I'm not jealous that I don't have him in my team, so dont bring that immature argument into it . . .

I didn't.

You did.

 

[giantsully]

Riewoldt was comfortably best on ground and probably would have won the game for the Saints.

Which just makes it more galling that umps felt it necessary to give him several bollocks free kicks at a crucial time in the game just to get him over the line. Protected species - can only assume he does a great job "towelling down" the umps after the game.

 

[JeffDunne]

Hey Jeff, seeing as you watched the game with both eyes open - no mention of the blatant free in front of the Swans goals THAT WAS NOT PAID when Gilbert had Goodes in a bear hug though.

Sorry, was that the one where Goodes did a 'Fev' and cracked the shits and refused to chase?

If so, then 1) I really can't believe you have the nerve to have a go at anyone for staging & sooking & 2) you don't have a problem with umpires paying nonsense free kicks, you just have a problem when they're paid against you.

I'm the first to admit the umpires were typically terrible last night.

What I don't understand is why there is so much focus on one player who plays in front and goes for the ball not the player 99% of the time.

There were a stack of frees missed last night and a heap of BS calls made.

How Sydney can feel hard done by because of one or two they didn't get when they got away with so many, simply tells me their entitlement attitude from years, sorry decades, of handouts, shows no signs of abating anytime soon!

 

[wolvesjr34]

I'm not going to say Riewoldt gets favoured by the umpires, but I am going to say that if the umpires watched contests between Franklin and his defenders the same way (not talking about the contests he gives away frees either)... he'd have 10 shots at goal a game minimum, some days kicking 10 and some days kicking 1.9... but he doesn't have his contests viewed the same way, tug on his jumper all you want, hold him down and punch him in the mouth all you want, jump all over him all you want... because his name isn't Riewoldt.

 

[Bombers_Forever]

Nick, Goodes etc all dive but they are being rewarded for it. If they don't get free kicks, they won't do it. Simple. That is the part that frustrates fans - rewarding players for diving is what is wrong. If the umpires do thier job properly, this is not an issue.

 

[The Fireman]

I'm not sure but their has to be a reason...surely

 

[giantsully]

How Sydney can feel hard done by because of one or two they didn't get when they got away with so many, simply tells me their entitlement attitude from years, sorry decades, of handouts, shows no signs of abating anytime soon!

Easy. When the game was up for grabs, the umps fell over themselves to give two craps frees to your precious princess. It's pretty damn obvious - indeed so damn obvious that my mate the Saints fan admitted the umps got them over the line.

Sometimes it's cathartic to confront your demons - give it a crack, you might feel better.

 

[JeffDunne]

I'm not going to say Riewoldt gets favoured by the umpires, but I am going to say that if the umpires watched contests between Franklin and his defenders the same way (not talking about the contests he gives away frees either)... he'd have 10 shots at goal a game minimum, some days kicking 10 and some days kicking 1.9... but he doesn't have his contests viewed the same way, tug on his jumper all you want, hold him down and punch him in the mouth all you want, jump all over him all you want... because his name isn't Riewoldt.

See, that argument holds no sway with me.

Players aren't all umpired the same and it happens within a team.

If Milne received the free kicks Roo gets he'd be having 10 shots a game too. He almost needs to be decapitated to get a free.

Do you seriously think Steven Baker or Kosi received the same for the umps as Roo?

 

[TheGoatBaron]

Attack?

I'm amazed you have the nerve to call anyone a sook.

(actually, since you're a Swans supporter, ignorance doesn't surprise me in the least)


There we go, a perfect example.


I didn't.

You did.

Ignorance. That's what St.Kilda practices a lot because of their pathetic history, they try and be ignorant about their history and try to be better than they normally are. Suck it up, Riewoldt does get looked after and the Umps won St.Kilda another game last night, just like the Preliminary Final. Deal with it and learn how to cope with it. The more you defend this crap, the more stupid you look, because you simply cannot defend the last quarter crapfest, even the 50 metre penalty, you cannot defend.