Umpiring North v Carlton Good Friday Game Umpiring ‘Discussion’

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Are Carlton supporters seriously in here defending last night's umpiring?

Blues got the rub of the green. Still would’ve won and were the better side. I reckon the North’s supporters blaming the umpires on the loss is more laughable.

 

[sherb]

The calling was s**t and clearly favoured one team. Twice Carlton players were rewarded for intentionally not picking up the ball and then getting holding calls.

But we didn't help ourselves with our kicking. You shouldn't be losing a game of AFL footy when you get 29 scoring shots.

What should the umpires have done in these instances?

 

[sherb]

Lol at all the Carlton supporters with their impartial and reasoned takes on what a reasonable job the umpires did.

Carlton supporters are as capable of an impartial and reasoned take on the job the umpires did as North Melbourne supporters are.

 

[Roachy8]

AFL will smell the breeze today - fan backlash about key forwards getting the rub of the green……

Tom Lynch will have 5 blokes hacking his arms all afternoon for no gain

 

[TheBigHorne]

What should the umpires have done in these instances?

Not rewarding players who are clearly playing for the free kick?

 

[sherb]

Not rewarding players who are clearly playing for the free kick?

Only until one of your players gets held playing for a free kick of course.

Anyway, that's just adding another judgment call to the umpires' responsibilities and another chance for them to stuff it up. Which is the last thing we need I would have thought.

Eg - player genuinely fumbles and fails to picks it up, gets blatantly held - umpire - "played for the free kick, play on!".

If you are going to whinge about the umpiring, at least do it in line with the rules currently in place, not ones you would like to see implemented.

 

[Sqotty from office works]

TBH I haven't seen many blatantly wrong decisions, just a lot of 50-50's going Carlton's way.

2016 GF there were quite a few decisions that were just 100% wrong.

Quoted for accuracy.

 

[Juddernaut08]

Lot of frees paid, but they were all there. Curnow and McKay were just too big and the North backmen shat themselves.

Cripps was scragged constantly and got nothing, so it evens out I guess.

 

[Outtatym]

AFL will smell the breeze today - fan backlash about key forwards getting the rub of the green……

Tom Lynch will have 5 blokes hacking his arms all afternoon for no gain

Ah there it is-the Richmond supporter in every thread making it about Richmond

 

[Roachy8]

Ah there it is-the Richmond supporter in every thread making it about Richmond

Nup - not about us.
Last night it was about your guys getting the opportunity to compete taken away in the 3rd by umpires suddenly finding reason to favour blues

My post was more about the fall out that often follows….

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Corr on CC is pretty soft. Its the sort that gets payed by an ump looking to pay free kicks. And CC is clearly playing for the frees, along with Hollands, Motlop (I think, awesome dive by whoever but unfortunately for him no obe was close enough for the ump to get away with playing it,) and others.

But the real questions most North people have is wtf is this:





Why was this a free at the most crucial moment in the third?



There are more but the games over. Its done now. Even with our most important KPDs out and the umps playing for the other side it was still really our terrible kicking for goal that cost us the game against the ladder leaders. Considering where we were last year that's a great sign for the future.

He whips the arm up and causes the high contact. Yes, those are called high a lot of the time, but they shouldn't be.

McKay was punched in the face during a spoil and didn't get a free. In fact, he didn't get one all game.

The running too far one I thought was bad, but if you look at where he took his last bounce and where he ended up, if that was a kick, it likely would've been paid a mark for being 15m.

The Cunnington one he used his forearm to try and fend (prior), then just let go of the ball. That's incorrect disposal.

 

[fusion]

Some absolutely baffling decisions that all went against one team. Fortunately the result ended up being a blow out, so it didn't affect the result. In the end Carlton had two absolutely dominant forwards who did most of the damage taking marks between wing and CHF and moving the ball quickly to a 1:1 contest.

But it did ruin an entertaining game, as I'd rather the focus be on how we've improved and not about the umpires, who were just shithouse.

 

[DocSholl]

He whips the arm up and causes the high contact. Yes, those are called high a lot of the time, but they shouldn't be.

Here is the starting point of the tackle, before Zurhaar's arm goes up. We all have some level of bias but I'm not sure you genuinely believe what you posted.

If the umpire thought he lifted the tackle rather than trying to dispose he should have called holding the ball.

 

[JyeDye]

If the umpire thought he lifted the tackle rather than trying to dispose he should have called holding the ball.

That's not how it works.

Zurhaar probably should have got a free kick anyway, but lifting his arm up like that made the ump second guess. If he just played normally he would have got it but instead tried to play it up and it cost him.

 

[Stamos]

Here is the starting point of the tackle, before Zurhaar's arm goes up. We all have some level of bias but I'm not sure you genuinely believe what you posted.

If the umpire thought he lifted the tackle rather than trying to dispose he should have called holding the ball.

The arm came up high straight away, which is why the ump made the mistake, he saw the arm in the air. Given that mistake, he should have called holding-the-ball, the ball up was having a bet each way.
North got the goal anyway, so it didn't have any influence.

 

[ferball]

He whips the arm up and causes the high contact. Yes, those are called high a lot of the time, but they shouldn't be.

McKay was punched in the face during a spoil and didn't get a free. In fact, he didn't get one all game.

The running too far one I thought was bad, but if you look at where he took his last bounce and where he ended up, if that was a kick, it likely would've been paid a mark for being 15m.

The Cunnington one he used his forearm to try and fend (prior), then just let go of the ball. That's incorrect disposal.

As the Good Doc pointed out above, the tackle starts around his neck.

Anyway, while we're on the subject Chadwiko on the North board put this together for us to all compare.



Its laughable. The first instance is actually a shrug (the McGovern free,) exactly what the ump pretended Zurhaar did. Yet its a free against Zurhaar that time.

The second one is the coat hanger on Zurhaar and he doesn't get a free for it.

At least the umpiring is consistent. Its consistently anti Cam.

 

[Fadge]

Corr on CC is pretty soft. Its the sort that gets payed by an ump looking to pay free kicks. And CC is clearly playing for the frees, along with Hollands, Motlop (I think, awesome dive by whoever but unfortunately for him no obe was close enough for the ump to get away with playing it,) and others.

But the real questions most North people have is wtf is this:





Why was this a free at the most crucial moment in the third?



There are more but the games over. Its done now. Even with our most important KPDs out and the umps playing for the other side it was still really our terrible kicking for goal that cost us the game against the ladder leaders. Considering where we were last year that's a great sign for the future.

I reckon it would have been a cherry on top if the umpire paid a free against Zurhaar for dissent for 'the way he looked at him'...

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

As the Good Doc pointed out above, the tackle starts around his neck.

Anyway, while we're on the subject Chadwiko on the North board put this together for us to all compare.



Its laughable. The first instance is actually a shrug (the McGovern free,) exactly what the ump pretended Zurhaar did. Yet its a free against Zurhaar that time.

The second one is the coat hanger on Zurhaar and he doesn't get a free for it.

At least the umpiring is consistent. Its consistently anti Cam.

Definitely agree Zurhaar copped it rough on Friday, however I reckon he is one of those players who cops it rough from the umpires cause he often backchats them.

Its been like that for a 100 years, umpires are petty that way

 

[ferball]

I reckon it would have been a cherry on top if the umpire paid a free against Zurhaar for dissent for 'the way he looked at him'...

It will probably happen soon to someone, not necessarily Cam.

 

[ferball]

Definitely agree Zurhaar copped it rough on Friday, however I reckon he is one of those players who cops it rough from the umpires cause he often backchats them.

Its been like that for a 100 years, umpires are petty that way

Yeah it does work that way a bit.

I've heard some of the exchanges Carey had with umpires. Its no wonder he never won a Brownlow given the shit he gave them. And it creates a feedback loop where the ump doesn't pay 50/50 frees, the player mouths off at some point and the ump is less likely to pay those same frees and might even ignore obvious ones.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Worst was in about 2013 (maybe a bit earlier or later). In successive weeks the roos won the free kick count 30-10 (vs hawks and port)

 

[ferball]

BTW With carey and the umps the abuse went both ways. I've heard umps give as good as they got and I'm sure I head well saw the ump call him a campaigner more than once. Its an easy word to lip read.

 

[ferball]

Worst was in about 2013 (maybe a bit earlier or later). In successive weeks the roos won the free kick count 30-10 (vs hawks and port)

There there. You lot won the ****en flag that year. Why do you care?

 

[Mitchell Madness]

There there. You lot won the *en flag that year. Why do you care?

Ummm, the thread is about the most one-sided umpiring... I provided evidence on the contrary

 

[ferball]

Ummm, the thread is about the most one-sided umpiring... I provided evidence on the contrary

No its just a discussion about the umpiring.

Didn't you say there'd only be about three thousand people turn up to this game? Kind makes it hard to trust your judgement or your ability with numbers.