The Bulldogs and Umpires: Time for a Royal Commission?

[faible]

Go back and check the Saad trade thread.

I think we comprehensively answered who won that trade.

 

[Daksian]

De-lurking to make the same point I made five years ago. If the 2016 Bulldogs premiership has an * beside it with a GF final score of 89 to 67 and a free kick count differential of +12 then the 1966 St Kilda premiership must have a similar * with a GF final score of 74 to 73 and a free kick count differential of +13. I'm sure some other GFs will have similar stats...that's a lot of *'s.

I'm looking forward to reading the leaps in logic, the 'I didn't see it, so I can't comment' excuses, and so on. Or, you could do what Collingwood fans back in 1966 did: build a bridge and get over it. Seriously, move on. History from 55 years ago doesn't put an * on that premiership, and it doesn't on 5 years ago either.

Wanting umpiring to improve is a good thing, whether done by training and professional standards, clarifying the rules to eliminate as much 'gray' as possible, or whatever. Indulging in fantasies of conspiracy theories regarding alleged favouritism is a waste of time, but hey, it's your time I suppose (and now mine too, lol). A free kick differential over the course of one coach's tenure is hardly worthy of an investigation beyond what already occurs with every match review.

I will concede that it's fairly obvious that my team is coached to not only reduce the amount of free kicks against, but to maximize the free kicks for. It's a smart strategy. You can argue the 'spirit of the game' but that argument breaks down when you consider every fist out of bounds and the deliberate rule. Back in 1966, it was considered 'holding the man' if you tackled someone while they were bouncing the ball and apparently more than a few free kicks went that way. I wonder if players were trained to bounce the ball if they knew someone was about to tackle them?

Alrighty, that's enough from me for a while. Re-lurking. Carry on.

 

[Alesana]

Say what you like about Bigfooty but it's one of the few places you will get a false consensus and biased opinions from real footy supporters, you won't get that from some of the other media platforms like Ch7 or Fox when they need to negotiate with the AFL to get the rights to AFL games and access to players.

You made a mistake there, don't worry I fixed it for ya

 

[adogsfan5]

I think we comprehensively answered who won that trade.

dons in a canter!

 

[Bulldog Joe]

It's more than just a few people if you go by the number of complaints on this forum about the umpiring in Bulldogs games, there isn't much made of it in the rest of the footy media but they are probably under instructions from the AFL not to be too critical of the umpiring.

There is certainly bias in the commentary and there is consistency from you that your bias is anti-bulldogs.

You continue to harp on that a balanced free kick count is the sign of fair umpiring, when there is no logic that it needs to be.

I realise that engaging in any debate with you is a fruitless exercise, but plenty of reasons have been advanced as to why the Bulldogs receive a positive free kick differential and the trend is clearly associated with Luke Beveridge becoming the coach.

Any theory of intentional corruption or pre-determined bias borders on stupidity.

Unfortunately logic can't compete with stupidity, because stupidity does not require logic.

 

[Bald]

Say what you like about Bigfooty but it's one of the few places you will get honest and unfiltered opinions from real footy supporters, you won't get that from some of the other media platforms like Ch7 or Fox when they need to negotiate with the AFL to get the rights to AFL games and access to players.

You mean like this one:


If you are a good team and are better than your opposition you will generally get more free kicks as you are usually first to the ball and making most of the play.

(pretty sure he has me ignored lellll)

 

[Plugger35]

There is certainly bias in the commentary and there is consistency from you that your bias is anti-bulldogs.

You continue to harp on that a balanced free kick count is the sign of fair umpiring, when there is no logic that it needs to be.

I realise that engaging in any debate with you is a fruitless exercise, but plenty of reasons have been advanced as to why the Bulldogs receive a positive free kick differential and the trend is clearly associated with Luke Beveridge becoming the coach.

Any theory of intentional corruption or pre-determined bias borders on stupidity.

Unfortunately logic can't compete with stupidity, because stupidity does not require logic.

Yes the Bulldogs have generally had positive free kick differentials under Beveridge as he no doubt coaches his players to gain an advantage through playing for free kicks and bending/breaking the rules by throwing instead of handballing but that doesn't mean opposition supporters have to like it and can't complain about it. The Bulldogs are now one of the most disliked teams and most neutral supporters will be barracking for Port in the prelim final.

 

[Sentinel]

There will never be an * on that premiership for Bulldogs supporters but you can't say the same for other teams supporters, many of whom still think there is an * on that premiership due to the biased umpiring. The fact people are still talking about the umpiring in that GF almost 5 years on says it all.

You think that's bad, I'm still talking about the 1966 Grand Final. 39 frees to 26 in a 1 point win! The fix was in.

 

[Alesana]

Yes the Bulldogs have generally had positive free kick differentials under Beveridge as he no doubt coaches his players to gain an advantage through playing for free kicks and bending/breaking the rules by throwing instead of handballing but that doesn't mean opposition supporters have to like it and can't complain about it. The Bulldogs are now one of the most disliked teams and most neutral supporters will be barracking for Port in the prelim final.

Are these facts you're stating? Or just a couple of those 'honest' Bigfooty opinions?

 

[SBYM]

I guess if you say something stupid with enough confidence you don't feel like a complete deadshit on the inside.

The mental gymnastics in here are ****ing stunning...the decisive argument was made above...why??

Why Footscray?? Until you can answer that question please STFU...your sore arses are so pathetic they're making me embarrassed for ya.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Yes the Bulldogs have generally had positive free kick differentials under Beveridge as he no doubt coaches his players to gain an advantage through playing for free kicks and bending/breaking the rules by throwing instead of handballing but that doesn't mean opposition supporters have to like it and can't complain about it. The Bulldogs are now one of the most disliked teams and most neutral supporters will be barracking for Port in the prelim final.

You still don't get it.

It has been repeated ad nauseum and supported by the stats. The Bulldogs concede less frees.

Bulldogs do not for instance fall over like Nic Reiwoldt in 2009 prelim. or like Aaron Francis in this years EF (leading to MRO find against Ryan Gardner). Not even like Tom Jonas with the pretend head into the ground in R23 when tackled by Naughton.

They are coached to infringe less.

The alleged throwing happens with every team and the speed makes it difficult to detect. However, there have been some slow motion replays that from time to time show that some of the alleged throws are actually handballs.

 

[sherb]

The fact people are still talking about it, is quite pathetic to be honest. They are either trolling, trying to persuade other supporters to jump on board with them or trying to ruffle our feathers. Only sad issue is, you’re jumping on board something that can’t be changed, and never will be changed. It’s all a moot point.

What is it that you’re trying to achieve out of it?

Was Wayne Harmes out of bounds in the 1979 grand final? Maybe we can revisit that one too and chuck an * there also.

Nope. Definitely in.

 

[adogsfan5]

Nope. Definitely in.

Haha welcome aboard

 

[sherb]

Haha welcome aboard

I was at the game. Definitely in from where I was sitting.

This happened at half-time. Check out the state of the ground.

RIP Shirl, Darryl & Jon.

 

[jamjam]

2016 still burns inside me. Why? Because I thought we were denied a fair contest on the biggest stage by lop-sided umpiring. Simple as that. No conspiracy theories just that the umpiring was sh*t. Why do bulldog supporters feel the need to convince us otherwise? Just let us vent as much as we want if that’s what it takes for us to heal.

 

[Northernsoul74]

2016 still burns inside me. Why? Because I thought we were denied a fair contest on the biggest stage by lop-sided umpiring. Simple as that. No conspiracy theories just that the umpiring was sh*t. Why do bulldog supporters feel the need to convince us otherwise? Just let us vent as much as we want if that’s what it takes for us to heal.

Because the majority of Swans fans don’t just think the umpiring was crap they believe there was a genuine anti Sydney agenda from the AFL. The whinging has taken on a life of its own so much that the entire Dogs 2016 final series is now questioned. That run was incredible and it’s piss poor that teams achievements are questioned by some bad losers. People should be talking about the actions of Picken, Matt Boyd, Dale Morris, Biggs, Clay Smith types not umpiring 5 years later.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Yet to see any lists of all the frees the Swans should have got and the frees the Dogs shouldn’t have got. Of course, you know that just ONE alteration would completely change all subsequent actions by both sides, don’t you, sending the game on a different trajectory. I refer you to Schrödinger’s cat.

Hey, we could have won by even more.

 

[gordo2016]

2016 still burns inside me. Why? Because I thought we were denied a fair contest on the biggest stage by lop-sided umpiring. Simple as that. No conspiracy theories just that the umpiring was sh*t. Why do bulldog supporters feel the need to convince us otherwise? Just let us vent as much as we want if that’s what it takes for us to heal.

Can't win GF's unless you pretty much get a whole team effort. They lost because they had 3-4 players on the day that played very poorly. Simple as that.

 

[Plugger35]

Because the majority of Swans fans don’t just think the umpiring was crap they believe there was a genuine anti Sydney agenda from the AFL. The whinging has taken on a life of its own so much that the entire Dogs 2016 final series is now questioned. That run was incredible and it’s piss poor that teams achievements are questioned by some bad losers. People should be talking about the actions of Picken, Matt Boyd, Dale Morris, Biggs, Clay Smith types not umpiring 5 years later.

It's not that hard to believe that the AFL wanted the Bulldogs to win a premiership more than the Swans that year when the Bulldogs hadn't won a premiership since the 1950s and the Swans broke their drought back in 2005 and won another one in 2012. Also the AFL weren't happy with Buddy Franklin going to Sydney instead of GWS so they probably didn't want to see Buddy's move to Sydney pay off for them with a flag.

 

[Achy Blakey Heart]

If you are a good team and are better than your opposition you will generally get more free kicks as you are usually first to the ball and making most of the play.

Dogs losses record in 2021....
Rnd 7 Lost to Rich FK -4
Rnd 11 Loss to Melb FK +1
Rnd 14 Loss to Cats FK +7
Rnd 17 Loss to Swans FK+13
Rnd 21 Loss to Ess FK +3
Rnd 22 Loss to Hawks FK -3
Rnd 23 Loss to Port FK -8

Total in losses +9 FK.

 

[Bald]

Dogs losses record in 2021....
Rnd 7 Lost to Rich FK -4
Rnd 11 Loss to Melb FK +1
Rnd 14 Loss to Cats FK +7
Rnd 17 Loss to Swans FK+13
Rnd 21 Loss to Ess FK +3
Rnd 22 Loss to Hawks FK -3
Rnd 23 Loss to Port FK -8

Total in losses +9 FK.

So when we aren’t at our best it’s because we aren’t as disciplined as we have otherwise been.

 

[Achy Blakey Heart]

So when we aren’t at our best it’s because we aren’t as disciplined as we have otherwise been.

We smashed you in every aspect of that round 17 loss.....yet .......+13

 

[Bald]

We smashed you in every aspect of that round 17 loss.....yet .......+13

Yes. The umpires were instructed to try and have the Dogs win that game instead of a team based in an NRL state that the AFL has forever tried to win over I concede you’re right and I’m wrong apologies master foil.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Yes. The umpires were instructed to try and have the Dogs win that game instead of a team based in an NRL state that the AFL has forever tried to win over I concede you’re right and I’m wrong apologies master foil.

You’re not trying to suggest there could be other reasons teams win or lose games, are you? Don’t be ridiculous.

 

[Bushdid911]

We smashed you in every aspect of that round 17 loss.....yet .......+13

Dogs v Swans, Dogs were..

-38 uncontested possessions
+6 contested possessions
-56 marks
+14 tackles
+20 clearances
+5 inside 50s
+8 tackles inside 50

Maybe you can tell us which stats are more conducive to getting frees.