SSwans2011
Hall of Famer
I think the most widely-held view of Swans fans is that the result of the match could have been changed by not playing underdone players/having more contributors, or officiating that was perceived to be more balanced, or both.So is it widely accepted but not often acknowledged? Because I can't say I've ever seen a Western Bulldogs umpires-related thread that doesn't feature a large portion of Sydney fans putting the loss solely on the umpires. I realize it's unfair to pin-point Sydney supporters here as all supporters seem to do it but I genuinely only care about the opinions of two teams' supporters on that particular day.
I'm also not stupid. Clearly, the umpiring wasn't up to standard. I don't personally think there was enough of a break away from the standard to decide the game but it certainly wasn't perfect.
I would agree that stating that the umpiring was the only reason we lost is a narrow view, but I think the view of most Swans fans is that despite poor selection calls, umpiring that they perceived to be more fair would have been enough to tip the balance in our favour, so those selection calls aren't necessarily relevant to threads regarding the umpiring. Not trying to speak for all Swans fans, just how I've read the situation from topics on our own, and on the main board, on the game.
Last edited: