The one Docherty and Plowman were criminal.some of the prior opportunity calls were ridiculous.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
The one Docherty and Plowman were criminal.some of the prior opportunity calls were ridiculous.
The two on Walsh were laughableThe one Docherty and Plowman were criminal.
I don't want to be one of those supporters, but this thread here...
Some ridiculous calls last night, wasn’t the reason we lost but it certainly didn’t help. Just off the top of my head:
-Lynch poking Saad in the lead up to the first goal, should at least be a high free kick
-Ridiculous “holding” call on Lynch in Q1
-Paid the sliding rules against Newnes but not for Fisher
-The Docherty HTB when he was caught high
-Plowman HTB with no prior leading to a Riewoldt goal
-Q2 Richmond goaled from an advantage call where the Carlton players stopped running after the whistle (free wasn’t there either). Advantage rule needs to become like soccer, it’s farcical how the umpire can just restart play once they’ve blown the whistle.
-Q1 there was insufficient evidence to show Doc touching a Richmond goal but the Newnes Q4 goal there apparently was sufficient evidence
-Jack Martin got called for holding Vlastuin in a 50/50 wrestle during an forward 50 entry
-Richmond were fine to drop the ball in every tackle but our guys were consistently caught HTB despite being tackled within half a second of gaining possession.
Some ridiculous calls last night, wasn’t the reason we lost but it certainly didn’t help. Just off the top of my head:
-Lynch poking Saad in the lead up to the first goal, should at least be a high free kick
-Ridiculous “holding” call on Lynch in Q1
-Paid the sliding rules against Newnes but not for Fisher
-The Docherty HTB when he was caught high
-Plowman HTB with no prior leading to a Riewoldt goal
-Q2 Richmond goaled from an advantage call where the Carlton players stopped running after the whistle (free wasn’t there either). Advantage rule needs to become like soccer, it’s farcical how the umpire can just restart play once they’ve blown the whistle.
-Q1 there was insufficient evidence to show Doc touching a Richmond goal but the Newnes Q4 goal there apparently was sufficient evidence
-Jack Martin got called for holding Vlastuin in a 50/50 wrestle during an forward 50 entry
-Richmond were fine to drop the ball in every tackle but our guys were consistently caught HTB despite being tackled within half a second of gaining possession.
Richmond on the end of any bad calls? or only us?
Contrarian for the sake of it or do you actually have a single example to point to. There is a small mountain growing on this side.Richmond on the end of any bad calls? or only us?
We got the rub of the green first encounter they got it last night it happens.Some ridiculous calls last night, wasn’t the reason we lost but it certainly didn’t help. Just off the top of my head:
-Lynch poking Saad in the lead up to the first goal, should at least be a high free kick
-Ridiculous “holding” call on Lynch in Q1
-Paid the sliding rules against Newnes but not for Fisher
-The Docherty HTB when he was caught high
-Plowman HTB with no prior leading to a Riewoldt goal
-Q2 Richmond goaled from an advantage call where the Carlton players stopped running after the whistle (free wasn’t there either). Advantage rule needs to become like soccer, it’s farcical how the umpire can just restart play once they’ve blown the whistle.
-Q1 there was insufficient evidence to show Doc touching a Richmond goal but the Newnes Q4 goal there apparently was sufficient evidence
-Jack Martin got called for holding Vlastuin in a 50/50 wrestle during an forward 50 entry
-Richmond were fine to drop the ball in every tackle but our guys were consistently caught HTB despite being tackled within half a second of gaining possession.
Fair call that. I thought they could have been a little more lenient with marks given the conditions. There were a couple that our fwds had a fair chunk of which I think should have been paid given the conditions.It’s a pretty fast game with numerous big bodies around the football. I can’t imagine how difficult it would be to adjudicate.
Last night with the rain and more bodies flying in would have made it even harder.
The inconsistency with paying one free here and the other not is incredibly frustrating. But the fault does not lie with the umpires.
The AFL keep adding additional ‘technical’ rules that seem too arbitrary and completely up to the umpires interpretation.
HOWEVER, that 50m against Charlie when the camera was showing grimes with his back to Charlie is next level room temp IQ stuff.
That was a call I can say hey that umpire used 0% of his brain and tried to be too technical. Common sense.
All sides get shit calls, just amazing so many supporters in here only remember the ones that effect us.....Contrarian for the sake of it or do you actually have a single example to point to. There is a small mountain growing on this side.
Not one for umpires this,umpires that, it’s a tough gig.All sides get s**t calls, just amazing so many supporters in here only remember the ones that effect us.....
Even worse are the ones who complain about which umpire we have before a game because according to them they have a bias against us......then these supporters apparently just watch that umpire all game and complain about them.
But I guess it's what footy nuffies do, see so many of them at games, they are embarrassing
Sent from my CPH2005 using Tapatalk
I'm not sure if this comparison can be easily done. I seem to recall that a little while ago in an SA game someone complained about an Umpire bias and someone was able to find a stat that 14 of their 16 free kicks were to 1 side. As I recall it, the AFL doesn't provide these stats because of such cases...Not one for umpires this,umpires that, it’s a tough gig.
Mistakes are always going to be made.
Subconsciously most of us watch through a coloured lens of Carlton bias, seeing those that are only missed / incorrect. Whether for or against us.
I’d openly admit to this fault, it can manifest as suspicion, thoughts of bias, even persecution for some of us.
When you take the time to look factually at what we believe are these injustices, they really aren’t there.
It’s our own biases working against us.
Its why someone with more technical capability than myself, someone more statically minded, should if possible, go back over the last 3 to 4 seasons and provide the free kick ledger for and against of umpire 22 Nathan Williamson.
Im sure if this could be done it will clearly demonstrate there isn’t any bias, that the level of professionalism and capability of the individual demonstates a pattern of impartiality.
An impartiality that is clearly distorted by our very own biases, not those of the umpire.
Richmond's gameplan of trailing along behind opponents and giving them a big two handed shove in the back as they tried to pick up the ball worked wonders. Carlton had to take up that tactic after halftime too and it turned into a very ugly game.
That gamestyle actually works in our midfield's favour if had they been able to adapt sooner. Give us the same umpires next week and we could beat Freo with this ugly style of footy
All clear .......
Play. On.
Richmond's gameplan of trailing along behind opponents and giving them a big two handed shove in the back as they tried to pick up the ball worked wonders. Carlton had to take up that tactic after halftime too and it turned into a very ugly game.
That gamestyle actually works in our midfield's favour if had they been able to adapt sooner. Give us the same umpires next week and we could beat Freo with this ugly style of footy