Umpiring needs to be seriously looked at

[Mattdougie]

Are you so naive that you don't know why it was made publicly?

It was a reasonable request and Beverage's attack was classless.

Are you naive enough to think that Bevs response was directed at Pyke and only Pyke?

Coz the coach can play a straight bat but the noise from behind Pyke has been pathetic and disgusting and shall I say "classless"

 

[Mattdougie]

Are you so naive that you don't know why it was made publicly?

It was a reasonable request and Beverage's attack was classless.

Are you naive enough to think that Bevs response was directed at Pyke and only Pyke?

Coz the coach can play a straight bat but the noise from behind Pyke has been pathetic and disgusting and shall I say "classless"

 

[TMoney22]

Pannell has been umpiring for years, its never been an issue before, oh thats right, we weren't contenders then so it doesn't matter.

 

[blue harvest]

If he's not then I retract my comment. Has been stated in the news that he is.

I never heard this. Which news was it on?

 

[docko911]

The umpires should have a target of 10-15 free kicks per team per game. Obviously this isn't just them only paying that many but adjusting the rules so that is the average. I mean you look at more than 50% of freekicks and they probably don't need to be paid.

Ducking, raising the shoulder, diving and dropping the knees for in the back should all be removed from the freekick list.

There should also be a requirement that frees in front of goal are close 100% not these slightly over the shoulder BS Puopolo and a number of others get every 5 seconds.

The game is about contests not about frees.

One last thing is umpires should complete critical reviews on games to see tactics used by teams that should have been freekicks against but weren't paid. Holding off the ball, and Hawthorn throwing instead of handballing to 3 premierships, these kinds of things. Warn them, watch them close next game and blow the whistle of their behaviours don't change. Game will be clean within a couple of months.

 

[crippton09]

I didn't watch this particular match but i have heard people complain about lopsided free kick tallies plenty of times. With usually maybe one or two stupid calls, but always one team breaking the rules a lot more. Then the fans complain look at the free kick tally. but there team was the less disciplined bunch on the day.

 

[blue harvest]

Hawthorn throwing instead of handballing to 3 premierships, these kinds of things

Lol, threw our way to a 3peat, yep, that's what did it, all those throws, now I've heard it all.
Every team throws.

 

[blue harvest]

Are you naive enough to think that Bevs response was directed at Pyke and only Pyke?

Coz the coach can play a straight bat but the noise from behind Pyke has been pathetic and disgusting and shall I say "classless"

Yep, that's what people are missing in all of this. Beveridge wasn't having a go at that fact they asked some questions about some of the decisions, it was to do with questioning the integrity of the umps, ie: people saying they cheated

'Any open message in the open domain and doubt around the integrity of an umpire's performance to me is disgusting'

That was his actual quote. It has been taken out of context by most in the media who conveniently left off the critical part about the integrity of the umpire. Barrett was a key offender with this in his twitter stuff, but that's what you expect from a gutter rat like him.

 

[Mepeyep]

The only doubts are with people who can't accept they lost and have painted this bloke out to be a demon and the reason for that loss.

God help him if he does another team and they get an uneven free kick count.

Adelaide have succeded in its deflection to blame an umpire for their loss and will now no doubt get the rub of the green each week which I believe is their motive

Let's not comment on the bi weekly free kicks count they get handed at Adelaide oval and previously AAMI park every time they play there.

Guess that's ok coz it's not bias against you

That was never it. Under all the rage from our supporters, all Pyke and Fagan did was get clarification on some of the calls.

Every club is free to do that. Sydney chose not to after the game against us.

Agree about the umpire. Some people looking for a scapegoat (he might have had some impact to our loss, I'm nod beginning to judge) when our shortcomings are the major faults.

 

[Plugger35]

Pannell has been umpiring for years, its never been an issue before, oh thats right, we weren't contenders then so it doesn't matter.

It might also have something to do with this.

That probably explains why Beveridge and Bulldogs supporters are so defensive about the umpiring, they wouldn't want to lose the big leg up they've been receiving this season.

 

[JVseven]

No Robbo probably asked but he knows te AFL will say no coz he can get the info himself he is just trumping up a story

My god you could get the info urself if you wanted to troll the net for hours mate. It's not hidden it's released weekly

Just relaying what I heard from his mouth on 360 last night.

Why are all you doggie bandwagoners getting so defensive?

 

[The_Flying_Egg]

It might also have something to do with this.

That probably explains why Beveridge and Bulldogs supporters are so defensive about the umpiring, they wouldn't want to lose the big leg up they've been receiving this season.

How often has a team in the AFL area averaged 105 more disposals per game than their opposition? Like the Dogs currently are?

A team that gets incredibly large amounts more of the ball than their opposition gets lots of frees .... oh the conspiracy!!!

 

[Bulldog1954]

How often has a team in the AFL area averaged 105 more disposals per game than their opposition? Like the Dogs currently are?

105 more disposals per game and have won the contested possessions each week, what a shock we are getting more free kicks.

 

[Mattdougie]

Just relaying what I heard from his mouth on 360 last night.

Why are all you doggie bandwagoners getting so defensive?

Hahahha bandwagoner call from a Melburbe fan !!!

Shouldn't you be skiing ??

 

[TooFar]

Just relaying what I heard from his mouth on 360 last night.

Why are all you doggie bandwagoners getting so defensive?

Refer to previous post for the answer.

 

[dockerfemme]

I hope that the umpiring department do serious statistical analysis of all umpires and decisions. Looking at case by case decisions obviously needs to be done, but there are so many 50-50s that it does not give an overall picture.

For example, if one umpire is giving more (or less) free kicks in the ruck contest than the average over several games then he likely has a slightly different interpretation than others. A case by case analysis would not likely highlight this, as it would just be a number of 50-50s or 60-40s.

The way they present on Whistleblowers is very simplistic and gives the impression that they do not use statistics at all.

 

[HeHateMe]

I hope that the umpiring department do serious statistical analysis of all umpires and decisions. Looking at case by case decisions obviously needs to be done, but there are so many 50-50s that it does not give an overall picture.

For example, if one umpire is giving more (or less) free kicks in the ruck contest than the average over several games then he likely has a slightly different interpretation than others. A case by case analysis would not likely highlight this, as it would just be a number of 50-50s or 60-40s.

The way they present on Whistleblowers is very simplistic and gives the impression that they do not use statistics at all.

As one statistics geek to another, I endors this way of thinking.

No knee jerk reactions, just evidence and clarity. pin pointing the problem in the process.

Also no conspiracies. Well done.

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk

 

[Bazza37]

That graph is damning
Umpires getting fooled by the doggies ducking, diving & acting.

 

[Suma Magic]

Yep, that's what people are missing in all of this. Beveridge wasn't having a go at that fact they asked some questions about some of the decisions, it was to do with questioning the integrity of the umps, ie: people saying they cheated

'Any open message in the open domain and doubt around the integrity of an umpire's performance to me is disgusting'

That was his actual quote. It has been taken out of context by most in the media who conveniently left off the critical part about the integrity of the umpire. Barrett was a key offender with this in his twitter stuff, but that's what you expect from a gutter rat like him.

He was referring to the Crows. He called them disgusting. It was a cheap shot.

 

[Bazza37]

Doggies Wednesday training schedule
10:00am : Goal Kicking
10:30am : Stoppages
11:00am : Drawing free kicks
12:00pm : Lunch

 

[Only Forwards]

I hope that the umpiring department do serious statistical analysis of all umpires and decisions. Looking at case by case decisions obviously needs to be done, but there are so many 50-50s that it does not give an overall picture.

For example, if one umpire is giving more (or less) free kicks in the ruck contest than the average over several games then he likely has a slightly different interpretation than others. A case by case analysis would not likely highlight this, as it would just be a number of 50-50s or 60-40s.

The way they present on Whistleblowers is very simplistic and gives the impression that they do not use statistics at all.

As one statistics geek to another, I endors this way of thinking.

No knee jerk reactions, just evidence and clarity. pin pointing the problem in the process.

Also no conspiracies. Well done.

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk

They will never do this.

Ever.

If they cannot spend resources to address the issues that we have with some umpires and bouncing the ball (Schmidt, Chamberlin, etc...) then they are never going to do the research to provide the data to make the assessments that you are talking about.

The bounce data is significantly easier to extract, it is already standardised due to the camera angle on the bounce, and yet nothing happens with it.

In order to facilitate what you are talking about you would require the AFL to adopt a entirely new way for umpiring to be handled. One that would likely require significantly more people at a substancial cost to the AFL. Where is the incentive to spend that money? To make the game "fair"? Why would the AFL want to do that, if they start looking under the "fair" rug then it leads to much bigger questions, like fixturing which has impacts on revenue. Much easier to say "there is no issue" and move on.

 

[HeHateMe]

They will never do this.

Ever.

If they cannot spend resources to address the issues that we have with some umpires and bouncing the ball (Schmidt, Chamberlin, etc...) then they are never going to do the research to provide the data to make the assessments that you are talking about.

The bounce data is significantly easier to extract, it is already standardised due to the camera angle on the bounce, and yet nothing happens with it.

In order to facilitate what you are talking about you would require the AFL to adopt a entirely new way for umpiring to be handled. One that would likely require significantly more people at a substancial cost to the AFL. Where is the incentive to spend that money? To make the game "fair"? Why would the AFL want to do that, if they start looking under the "fair" rug then it leads to much bigger questions, like fixturing which has impacts on revenue. Much easier to say "there is no issue" and move on.

Ummmmm everything you said is a tad OTT.

Personally I don't see it even nearly as difficult to implement, grab one statistics major give him 2 more people. Done.

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk

 

[Phillyroo]

I have a higher than average IQ.

This is a higher than average floggish post...

 

[Present Not Past]

They will never do this.

Ever.

If they cannot spend resources to address the issues that we have with some umpires and bouncing the ball (Schmidt, Chamberlin, etc...) then they are never going to do the research to provide the data to make the assessments that you are talking about.

The bounce data is significantly easier to extract, it is already standardised due to the camera angle on the bounce, and yet nothing happens with it.

In order to facilitate what you are talking about you would require the AFL to adopt a entirely new way for umpiring to be handled. One that would likely require significantly more people at a substancial cost to the AFL. Where is the incentive to spend that money? To make the game "fair"? Why would the AFL want to do that, if they start looking under the "fair" rug then it leads to much bigger questions, like fixturing which has impacts on revenue. Much easier to say "there is no issue" and move on.

Just the fact that the umpires know they are now under extra scrutiny may be enough for them to pull there heads in and to realise that they can't do what they please on the field and continue to get away with it.

 

[sportsmaniac89]

Well this thread has had it all.

Either way the conclusions that need to be drawn are this:

1) The Western Bulldogs are protected species

2) It's taken people far too long to cotton onto this fact. I've known it for 3 years especially after the 2014 and 2015 Bulldogs vs Freo games.

3) After those 2 games the umpires have rolled it out league wide.

4) Bulldogs fans are morons. Of course they defend the umpires because they're the ones that have benefited and that also goes for fans of the Hawks who have also benefited from legs up from the maggots.

5) Bulldogs, Hawks and Eagles fans can never say a bad word about umpires ever again and if they do, they're stinking hypocrites.

6) We're never going to get a consensus here which is what makes sports discussions so fantastic

Let's move onto Round 8 shall we