Roast Preliminary Final Umpiring Thread

[Yippy Yi Yeo]

And how far away were you up in the 2nd tier? Further away than the camera shot that is for sure.

You have no idea. As I previously posted piss off.

No mate, not sure at all haha. You think some centre wing commentary box camera is closer than a block directly in line with the incident? I was in the 2nd row of the 2nd tier, directly behind the goals which allowed me to actually see the holding going on, something the far away centre wing camera shot from side on didn't allow you to see. Either way believe it or don't, i was there, i know what happened and you're just guessing because of what a few flog commentators said.

 

[GeordieRoo]

If you read my posts I said i watched the replag, maybe you should too instead of basing it on what everyone else is saying. His torso made contact with shueys head like the sky is blue, it happened get over it. Where were you lot when boomer harvery got a shoddy free kick and 50 metre penalty in round 10 that actually could have been the deciding factor?

That was one incident wasn't it...not 3. Lol .

 

[QueenslandRoo]

Look, I'm not saying the umpiring was rigged, but I DID think having the umpires hand out West Coast Eagles footballs to kids in the crowd at the end the match was probably a bad look.

 

[ThePezDispenser]

If you read my posts I said i watched the replay, maybe you should too instead of basing it on what everyone else is saying. His torso made contact with shueys head like the sky is blue, it happened get over it. Where were you lot when boomer harvery got a shoddy free kick and 50 metre penalty in round 10 that actually could have been the deciding factor?

I can see how a decision in Round 10 is comparable to one in a prelim final...

 

[Yippy Yi Yeo]

One eyed idiot supporter sees something from 200 meters away!! I'm convinced...

It was called a horrific decision because it was. That contact happens in every forward contest.

Where did you get 200 metres from? The only people who would've been closer were the people in the first tier in front of me, the incident literally occurred in line with qgere u was sitting, i was looking down on it, you had same pleb centre wing camera shot that doesn't even show what actually went on, and you're telling me I'm wrong? Keep drinking the kool aid.

 

[Horace]

If you read my posts I said i watched the replag, maybe you should too instead of basing it on what everyone else is saying. His torso made contact with shueys head like the sky is blue, it happened get over it. Where were you lot when boomer harvery got a shoddy free kick and 50 metre penalty in round 10 that actually could have been the deciding factor?

You clearly were using the same spectacles as the boys from OPSM. I have seen that incident on the replay so many times and it doesn't change. There is minimal if any contact by Nicky Dal on Shuey. Have a listen to the commentators. Everyone, repeat everyone, and just for your benefit, everyone, sees it as contact not worthy of a free.

As for the round 10 game, Priddis got smart and held the ball behind his back, deliberately time wasting. Boomer was just a bit smarter - well actually a lot smarter - and done him over. 50 was warranted as well as having nothing to do with last nights game.

Now toddle off, we don't want your opinions here any longer. The only bright spot you have brought for me is that I am now firmly behind the Hawks next Saturday. Thanks for helping me with that.

 

[Luuuc]

I haven't read the whole thread but I will say that being at the game, I did feel like we got some good decisions and the better run with the umps overall. They missed an obvious high one against Shuey but then invented the Dal Santo one, so that's a wash to me. The Darling hold was there, but a strange one to pay when other similar ones get let go all over the place. Especially costly when the one they do pay is in the forward 50. The trip + holding the ball was just bizarre. I don't know WTF the ump was thinking on either of those decisions, let alone how 2 monumental ****ups could be combined to produce a WCE free out of a NM free.

I don't think bad umpiring was the difference in the result, but I do think that it puts the whole thing up in the air. It definitely takes some of the shine off the win. It's much easier to fully enjoy a win when you know everything was fair & square, and you just never know how much momentum shift could have been caused had things been called differently. I was at the Dockers game the night before and there's no doubt in my mind that Freo was hurt by those 2 early goals gifted to the Hawks when Freo had all the momentum. What would have changed about the outcome? We'll never know, and that's exactly the problem.

So I fully understand the frustration in this thread. It's justified. I don't pay much attention to which umps made which calls, but I'm guessing that it will be much easier for the AFL to know who to drop for the GF than who to keep.

 

[Horace]

Aka when a bunch of commentators who are notorious for saying stupid shit say it was wrong because of their far away, poor angle camera shot shows a glimpse of what happened, take their word for it over somebody who had the best possible view in the stadium? Jog on dickhead.

Rubbish, absolute rubbish.

MODS CAN THIS FLOG BE BANNED? He/she is just causing trouble here. Please get rid of him.

 

[ThePezDispenser]

What a raw deal on the commentary lol

This Muppet misspelled weagles?

You could have just started a new account with the correct spelling instead of coming across as even more stupid than you are!

 

[AGC]

I think the worst decision was when the Eagles bloke coathangered spitter on the mark, and it wasn't overturned.

 

[Yippy Yi Yeo]

That was one incident wasn't it...not 3. Lol .

1 incident in a close game is a bit different to "3" ( 2 correct calls i may add) in a non close game.

 

[Schrodinger]

Hello everyone,

While I acknowledge that posting on an opposition supporters' post-game umpire venting thread will be as popular as a vegan at a paleo convention, I thought I might make a couple of points which, depending on the person, will either comfort or further enrage.

As someone with more than a passing interest in cognitive biases (I am lucky enough that a book I wrote on this topic allows me to spend far too much time lurking on BF), I have a macabre hobby of reading as many post-game threads (preferably non-West Coast games - see above point on cognitive bias) to read the various anti-umpire comments. Here are some general observations -

• I can't remember seeing a post-game (hereafter PG) thread without supporters complaining about calls that went against them (they must exist so will guess at least 95%)
• There is a near-perfect correlation between whether your team lost and how much of the discussion centres on umpiring
• In close games, these supporters will claim that the decisions "probably cost us the game"
• In games with margins beyond that which could be claimed to be influenced by umpiring alone, supporters will talk about calls early in the game, or when their team was fighting back as being "momentum killers"
• In games where a supporter's team loses the free kick count, the supporter points to the count without identifying the information which would make this stat meaningful - a) For each free, was it there or not? b) Once you have confirmed this, what happens when you add in the frees not paid to both sides. Once you have done this, you have "useful" data
• In games where the losing team's free count was equal to or higher than the winning team's, supporters will talk about "where the frees occurred" or when in the context of the game
• Teams who lose often give away silly frees out of panic (for example, I haven't looked at any stats however would hazard a guess that Nic Nat has received the most frees for the Eagles due to opposition trying to stop him from jumping) or because they are second to the ball
• When a supporter's team loses to West Coast, Hawthorn, Collingwood or Richmond, there will be talk of a conspiracy of some kind

And now some general points regarding biases in general -

• When someone becomes highly emotional, a part of their brain called the amygdala "hijacks" the part of your brain responsible for rational thought and decision making
• I would therefore expect to see more anti-umpire and conspiracy posts in finals (and further increase with each game closer to the GF)
• If you even just read the Wikipedia entry on cognitive biases, it makes for fascinating reading as you can see common examples from footy fans
• Just to give an example - notice how most people think they always seem to choose the slowest moving queue in Coles? This is because a slow queue makes as angry and a fast queue is never noticed. So we only ever remember the slow queues. How many times can you remember thinking "wow, we were really lucky today with umpiring" versus the times you thought the umps were favouring the other team?
• By the way, there is even a version of survivorship bias or selection bias with the creation of threads like these. If anyone here has had the misfortune of suffering depression and needing to take medication, you may have noticed that all you ever see on internet forums is people talking about how terrible "drug x" was. People whose depression has been successfully treated by this drug are rarely motivated to spend their days on depression forums. Same goes for supporters whose team has won the game or the free kick count.

I will make only one specific comment regarding last night. (Disclosure - I am an Eagles fan so this will be biased, not matter how hard I try - look up "bias blind spot" on the Wiki article). After watching Dockers/Hawks the night before, you may recall one of the commentators calling it a "whistle fest" at one point, with the umps getting trigger happy (that Ballantyne bump off the ball...wow...just wow). I thought the umps may have gotten a spray by their bosses who then may have warned last night's umps not to do the same. This was evident from the get-go last night, with the umps appearing to have decided to let it go more than usual. I saw dozens of frees each way that weren't paid.

What this means is that focusing on frees that weren't paid in isolation is meaningless. An unbiased observer would need to tally everything that was paid, which of these were actually frees or not, and then which ones were not paid. Then we at least have the beginnings of truly useful and interesting data. This cuts both ways mind you. I am more than prepared to accept that fans' complaints are justified, once I see the data presented as per above. And I am also prepared to accept that 43000 rabid Eagles supporters influence umpires' behaviour (they are human). However I have seen just the opposite apply, like the Eagles game against Collingwood earlier this year (for you "free kick count means everything" buffs, have a quick gander at the free count that day).

TLDR version - The venting in this thread may prove warranted, however the reasons posited are riddled with cognitive biases due to being formed in a highly emotional state.

 

[Benno_900]

I knew we were in trouble as soon as Freo didn't get the rub of the green on the Friday night and commentators thought the need to mention it.

Of the decisions the one's that really stood out for me:

1. Free against Waite for in the back, despite it being a nudge to the side, whilst in the motion of going for a mark. This was awarded by the umpire off the ball.

2. The non reversal of possession after the high tackle on Swallow who was manning the mark.

3. The Shuey free kick for too high

4. The Jack Darling free against Tarrant for no apparent reason

5. The non decision when Jacobs leg just about snapped in half

Can anyone think of any other shockers that I may have forgot?

Do they also publicise which umpires gave or failed to give free's?

Shuey running 25 metres without taking a bounce and kicking a goal.

 

[Horace]

I haven't read the whole thread but I will say that being at the game, I did feel like we got some good decisions and the better run with the umps overall. They missed an obvious high one against Shuey but then invented the Dal Santo one, so that's a wash to me. The Darling hold was there, but a strange one to pay when other similar ones get let go all over the place. Especially costly when the one they do pay is in the forward 50. The trip + holding the ball was just bizarre. I don't know WTF the ump was thinking on either of those decisions, let alone how 2 monumental ****ups could be combined to produce a WCE free out of a NM free.

I don't think bad umpiring was the difference in the result, but I do think that it puts the whole thing up in the air. It definitely takes some of the shine off the win. It's much easier to fully enjoy a win when you know everything was fair & square, and you just never know how much momentum shift could have been caused had things been called differently. I was at the Dockers game the night before and there's no doubt in my mind that Freo was hurt by those 2 early goals gifted to the Hawks when Freo had all the momentum. What would have changed about the outcome? We'll never know, and that's exactly the problem.

So I fully understand the frustration in this thread. It's justified. I don't pay much attention to which umps made which calls, but I'm guessing that it will be much easier for the AFL to know who to drop for the GF than who to keep.

Brilliant post and well done to come over here and say that. I tend to agree that we probably would not have won, but you are absolutely right, "we'll never know and that's exactly the problem".

 

[Yippy Yi Yeo]

You clearly were using the same spectacles as the boys from OPSM. I have seen that incident on the replay so many times and it doesn't change. There is minimal if any contact by Nicky Dal on Shuey. Have a listen to the commentators. Everyone, repeat everyone, and just for your benefit, everyone, sees it as contact not worthy of a free.

As for the round 10 game, Priddis got smart and held the ball behind his back, deliberately time wasting. Boomer was just a bit smarter - well actually a lot smarter - and done him over. 50 was warranted as well as having nothing to do with last nights game.

Now toddle off, we don't want your opinions here any longer. The only bright spot you have brought for me is that I am now firmly behind the Hawks next Saturday. Thanks for helping me with that.

Well you're either lying or blind yourself, if you think "if any" contact occurred, it happened, end of story, and it was caused by dal santo so its a free kick.

 

[Horace]

Hello everyone,

While I acknowledge that posting on an opposition supporters' post-game umpire venting thread will be as popular as a vegan at a paleo convention, I thought I might make a couple of points which, depending on the person, will either comfort or further enrage.

As someone with more than a passing interest in cognitive biases (I am lucky enough that a book I wrote on this topic allows me to spend far too much time lurking on BF), I have a macabre hobby of reading as many post-game threads (preferably non-West Coast games - see above point on cognitive bias) to read the various anti-umpire comments. Here are some general observations -

• I can't remember seeing a post-game (hereafter PG) thread without supporters complaining about calls that went against them (they must exist so will guess at least 95%)
• There is a near-perfect correlation between whether your team lost and how much of the discussion centres on umpiring
• In close games, these supporters will claim that the decisions "probably cost us the game"
• In games with margins beyond that which could be claimed to be influenced by umpiring alone, supporters will talk about calls early in the game, or when their team was fighting back as being "momentum killers"
• In games where a supporter's team loses the free kick count, the supporter points to the count without identifying the information which would make this stat meaningful - a) For each free, was it there or not? b) Once you have confirmed this, what happens when you add in the frees not paid to both sides. Once you have done this, you have "useful" data
• In games where the losing team's free count was equal to or higher than the winning team's, supporters will talk about "where the frees occurred" or when in the context of the game
• Teams who lose often give away silly frees out of panic (for example, I haven't looked at any stats however would hazard a guess that Nic Nat has received the most frees for the Eagles due to opposition trying to stop him from jumping) or because they are second to the ball
• When a supporter's team loses to West Coast, Hawthorn, Collingwood or Richmond, there will be talk of a conspiracy of some kind

And now some general points regarding biases in general -

• When someone becomes highly emotional, a part of their brain called the amygdala "hijacks" the part of your brain responsible for rational thought and decision making
• I would therefore expect to see more anti-umpire and conspiracy posts in finals (and further increase with each game closer to the GF)
• If you even just read the Wikipedia entry on cognitive biases, it makes for fascinating reading as you can see common examples from footy fans
• Just to give an example - notice how most people think they always seem to choose the slowest moving queue in Coles? This is because a slow queue makes as angry and a fast queue is never noticed. So we only ever remember the slow queues. How many times can you remember thinking "wow, we were really lucky today with umpiring" versus the times you thought the umps were favouring the other team?
• By the way, there is even a version of survivorship bias or selection bias with the creation of threads like these. If anyone here has had the misfortune of suffering depression and needing to take medication, you may have noticed that all you ever see on internet forums is people talking about how terrible "drug x" was. People whose depression has been successfully treated by this drug are rarely motivated to spend their days on depression forums. Same goes for supporters whose team has won the game or the free kick count.

I will make only one specific comment regarding last night. (Disclosure - I am an Eagles fan so this will be biased, not matter how hard I try - look up "bias blind spot" on the Wiki article). After watching Dockers/Hawks the night before, you may recall one of the commentators calling it a "whistle fest" at one point, with the umps getting trigger happy (that Ballantyne bump off the ball...wow...just wow). I thought the umps may have gotten a spray by their bosses who then may have warned last night's umps not to do the same. This was evident from the get-go last night, with the umps appearing to have decided to let it go more than usual. I saw dozens of frees each way that weren't paid.

What this means is that focusing on frees that weren't paid in isolation is meaningless. An unbiased observer would need to tally everything that was paid, which of these were actually frees or not, and then which ones were not paid. Then we at least have the beginnings of truly useful and interesting data. This cuts both ways mind you. I am more than prepared to accept that fans' complaints are justified, once I see the data presented as per above. And I am also prepared to accept that 43000 rabid Eagles supporters influence umpires' behaviour (they are human). However I have seen just the opposite apply, like the Eagles game against Collingwood earlier this year (for you "free kick count means everything" buffs, have a quick gander at the free count that day).

TLDR version - The venting in this thread may prove warranted, however the reasons posited are riddled with cognitive biases due to being formed in a highly emotional state.

Thanks mate but stick with Schrodinger's cat. Nearly as "exciting" as your book on "cognitive biases" I suspect.

And by the way, think about your own "cognitive bias" if you are prepared to say "(that Ballantyne bump off the ball...wow...just wow)".

 

[nelroo]

Look, I'm not saying the umpiring was rigged, but I DID think having the umpires hand out West Coast Eagles footballs to kids in the crowd at the end the match was probably a bad look.

What? Did this really happen?

 

[yebiga]

View attachment 177989

Touch and go on wellingham being their best but ok

 

[yebiga]

Last night the longer the game went the more the umpires became the crowds bitch

 

[Flawed Genius]

Zero interest in WC posters coming over here on a morning we're all obviously hurting, and trying to explain the rules to us, calling our posters fools, idiots & plebs.

Let the body of one serve as a warning. Not interested in your opinion at all.

 

[Luuuc]

Brilliant post and well done to come over here and say that. I tend to agree that we probably would not have won, but you are absolutely right, "we'll never know and that's exactly the problem".

Surely there isn't a single fan of the game who hasn't experienced the wrong end of that.
I honestly don't understand why fans from the winning team go to such extremes to downplay it all the time.
Schrodinger's post above was very good, and rings very true to me. Those are general points about human behaviour though.

I love footy and I love my team. Their success genuinely brings me joy, especially when it is unexpected success like it has been this season.
Success that is assisted, is less satisfying. When an opponent has valid reasons for feeling handicapped, then it doesn't stop me spending 3 hours cheering, and going apeshit when we win, but the satisfaction level isn't as high. Why am I even in this thread? It's because not everything felt right to me and I was curious to see everyone else's take.

"May the best team win" is how it needs to be. Maybe the best team did win. The best team probably won? Everyone from both sides would walk away a lot more able to move forward if that question mark could be erased. The umpiring this weekend was really disappointing.

Should I just put my Eagles blinkers on and take the win? Hell no. If there is the widespread perception that we got a great ride, which there undoubtedly is, then does that make the umps go into a grand final thinking "Gee, the Eagles get things too nicely lately. Let's make sure that doesn't happen today" ... and result in us potentially getting screwed over in the GF? What Eagles fan would want that? Therefore no Eagles fan should be pleased with last night's umpiring, or attempting to make light of it. Because just watch & see how quickly and violently these "give it a rest" type people backflip if that happens to us next weekend!!

 

[GoNorth]

As a Bulldogs supporter who incidentally really dislikes the often patronizing attitude north fans have towArds us

The umpiring last night significantly significantly advantaged west coast

The umpires are just cowards - the parochial crowd clearly intimidates them in big games that they are incapable of not falling for the crowds demands and become fearful of the reaction they would get for making big calls against them

Whilst west coast were the dominant team in the second half - there were 4 horrible calls in the second half which either gave them goals or cost north goals

Absent these decisions / non decisions the game goes down to the wire
And it becomes too close to call

Honestly feel for you guys
Just a pissy way to end your season with that crap

Pity you had to spoil an otherwise good post with the 'norf' crap.

Edit: now fixed GN - TT

 

[Groucho]

Surely there isn't a single fan of the game who hasn't experienced the wrong end of that.
I honestly don't understand why fans from the winning team go to such extremes to downplay it all the time.
Schrodinger's post above was very good, and rings very true to me. Those are general points about human behaviour though.

I love footy and I love my team. Their success genuinely brings me joy, especially when it is unexpected success like it has been this season.
Success that is assisted, is less satisfying. When an opponent has valid reasons for feeling handicapped, then it doesn't stop me spending 3 hours cheering, and going apeshit when we win, but the satisfaction level isn't as high. Why am I even in this thread? It's because not everything felt right to me and I was curious to see everyone else's take.

"May the best team win" is how it needs to be. Maybe the best team did win. The best team probably won? Everyone from both sides would walk away a lot more able to move forward if that question mark could be erased. The umpiring this weekend was really disappointing.

Should I just put my Eagles blinkers on and take the win? Hell no. If there is the widespread perception that we got a great ride, which there undoubtedly is, then does that make the umps go into a grand final thinking "Gee, the Eagles get things too nicely lately. Let's make sure that doesn't happen today" ... and result in us potentially getting screwed over in the GF? What Eagles fan would want that? Therefore no Eagles fan should be pleased with last night's umpiring, or attempting to make light of it. Because just watch & see how quickly and violently these "give it a rest" type people backflip if that happens to us next weekend!!

In a contest of two its "may the better team win". This was the only part I read and you got it wrong!

 

[Horace]

Surely there isn't a single fan of the game who hasn't experienced the wrong end of that.
I honestly don't understand why fans from the winning team go to such extremes to downplay it all the time.
Schrodinger's post above was very good, and rings very true to me. Those are general points about human behaviour though.

I love footy and I love my team. Their success genuinely brings me joy, especially when it is unexpected success like it has been this season.
Success that is assisted, is less satisfying. When an opponent has valid reasons for feeling handicapped, then it doesn't stop me spending 3 hours cheering, and going apeshit when we win, but the satisfaction level isn't as high. Why am I even in this thread? It's because not everything felt right to me and I was curious to see everyone else's take.

"May the best team win" is how it needs to be. Maybe the best team did win. The best team probably won? Everyone from both sides would walk away a lot more able to move forward if that question mark could be erased. The umpiring this weekend was really disappointing.

Should I just put my Eagles blinkers on and take the win? Hell no. If there is the widespread perception that we got a great ride, which there undoubtedly is, then does that make the umps go into a grand final thinking "Gee, the Eagles get things too nicely lately. Let's make sure that doesn't happen today" ... and result in us potentially getting screwed over in the GF? What Eagles fan would want that? Therefore no Eagles fan should be pleased with last night's umpiring, or attempting to make light of it. Because just watch & see how quickly and violently these "give it a rest" type people backflip if that happens to us next weekend.

Absolute quality post and I must say, I also feel exactly the same way after a win like that.

FWIW i wish the free had been paid against Cunnington in the EF. I think that was pretty close to the worst non-decision in that game. I think the Tigers got a couple of lucky ones, but no decision as bad as the one the umpires missed when Cunners dropped the ball. I also think. even if the Tigers had have converted, we would still have won and that would have provided me with total satisfaction.

 

[Horace]

In a contest of two its "may the better team win". This was the only part I read and you got it wrong!

Groucho, I think you should read all of Luuuc's post and his earlier one. I think he is absolutely on the money.