Free Kicks for the Kangaroos

[Wes Mantooth]

Port are pretenders. The wheels will come off now

Come play with the big kids when you have something interesting or insightful to add to the conversation instead of taking an unfounded pot shot.

Yeah coz whinging about umpires is interesting and insightful....

My responses on this topic have been debating the issue. I haven't thrown in some cheap one liner like you did.

[Dommie]

Love your reply Wes Mantooth, Umps were poor mos def, but that happens in AFL. Still makes me sad the boys lost though :(

[McRooster]

Roost, if you saw the game, you obviously have less knowledge of the game than I thought. The umpiring decisions were simply baffling. Port should make a complaint, because even though Jeff 'we're doing nothing wrong' G-banger lets any criticism just roll off a duck's back like water, the umpires need to improve and be told when they're doing a bad job. I feel for Richmond last week. That was unacceptable. They lost the game because of that call. A 20 free kick differential is not ill discipline... maybe 10 but not 20. Thats just plain ridiculous and you pull out every thing you want to say it was this or that that impacted the game but umpires get paid extremely well and they shouldn't be influencing games. And they did exactly that yesterday.

Wes, I wholeheartedly concur. I should have made my post read 'don't just blame the umpires'. I did witness the slaughterhouse of poor decisions. I still maintain however that the three players I named were below par (yes PB, two of which are in my DT) and did little to help the resurgence shown by the rest of the team.

I ask you this, would this thread have been created if Port had won? -No.

The passion behind the thread creation is none too dissimilar to that shown by Crows supporters after rnd1 v Essendon and the new interpretation of the 'contact below the knees' or 'sliding' rule, so I enjoy understand your frustration and pain.

[Dudge]

Roost, if you saw the game, you obviously have less knowledge of the game than I thought. The umpiring decisions were simply baffling. Port should make a complaint, because even though Jeff 'we're doing nothing wrong' G-banger lets any criticism just roll off a duck's back like water, the umpires need to improve and be told when they're doing a bad job. I feel for Richmond last week. That was unacceptable. They lost the game because of that call. A 20 free kick differential is not ill discipline... maybe 10 but not 20. Thats just plain ridiculous and you pull out every thing you want to say it was this or that that impacted the game but umpires get paid extremely well and they shouldn't be influencing games. And they did exactly that yesterday.

Wes, I wholeheartedly concur. I should have made my post read 'don't just blame the umpires'. I did witness the slaughterhouse of poor decisions. I still maintain however that the three players I named were below par (yes PB, two of which are in my DT) and did little to help the resurgence shown by the rest of the team.

I ask you this, would this thread have been created if Port had won? -No.

The passion behind the thread creation is none too dissimilar to that shown by Crows supporters after rnd1 v Essendon and the new interpretation of the 'contact below the knees' or 'sliding' rule, so I enjoy understand your frustration and pain.

Roost really, realise you more than likely don't like us, but really?

[PowerBug]

I ask you this, would this thread have been created if Port had won? -No.

The passion behind the thread creation is none too dissimilar to that shown by Crows supporters after rnd1 v Essendon and the new interpretation of the 'contact below the knees' or 'sliding' rule, so I enjoy understand your frustration and pain.

I would imagine the topic of 38 frees to 15 would've been bought up, maybe not in the same way it is now though. Might've been in the North board.

Is it dissimilar to how Crows supporters are reacting this week? Where they are complaining about 1 decision, which got alot of coverage and is being used as the excuse for losing. Where Port had a net total of 23 decisions go against them yet little coverage on that being a possible excuse for losing?

That's what annoys me.

[roo boys!]

I ask you this, would this thread have been created if Port had won? -No.

The passion behind the thread creation is none too dissimilar to that shown by Crows supporters after rnd1 v Essendon and the new interpretation of the 'contact below the knees' or 'sliding' rule, so I enjoy understand your frustration and pain.

I would imagine the topic of 38 frees to 15 would've been bought up, maybe not in the same way it is now though. Might've been in the North board.

Nothing happens in the North board haha

Was watching the game and fell for Port, they got nothing from the umpires. They've had a good last two weeks North Melbourne.
68 Free Kicks For.
30 Free Kicks Against.
:o ::)

Easy to look at this and say "The umpires are favouring North, they must be cheating etc etc", but I'd be interested to see how many of these were debatable frees. Free kick counts can be influenced by high tackles, trips, obvious in the backs and run down holding the balls/incorrect disposals, things that are clearly there. I also know 1 free kick won't change a lot but there was one interchange infringement in our favour last week. Also do out on the fulls count to the free kick count? Chopping the arms going forward can sometimes be clear cut but we have got a few that were 50/50 calls.

A number of contentious decisions have gone in our favour, I'll admit that. But I don't think those 38 extra free kicks would all be contentious ones.

[Wes Mantooth]

I ask you this, would this thread have been created if Port had won? -No.

The passion behind the thread creation is none too dissimilar to that shown by Crows supporters after rnd1 v Essendon and the new interpretation of the 'contact below the knees' or 'sliding' rule, so I enjoy understand your frustration and pain.

I would imagine the topic of 38 frees to 15 would've been bought up, maybe not in the same way it is now though. Might've been in the North board.

Is it dissimilar to how Crows supporters are reacting this week? Where they are complaining about 1 decision, which got alot of coverage and is being used as the excuse for losing. Where Port had a net total of 23 decisions go against them yet little coverage on that being a possible excuse for losing?

That's what annoys me.

Agreed, it still would have been brought up because there is something wrong there. Richmond, even if they won, would have still brought up the goal umpire's position because it is an issue that needs addressing.

[McRooster]

Roost really, realise you more than likely don't like us, but really?

Just to make it clear Dudge - I don't like Port. For a plethora of reasons, including http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,54841.msg716110.html#msg716110
Having said that though, I do recognise that Star Wars is a boring story without 'The Dark Side'  ;)

PB, I didn't see the Crows game in its entirety (wife's birthday dinner) so I can't comment on the Thompson free kick. Embarrassing that it made the paper in a vain attempt to answer the question of the masses, but that's why it did make news I suppose - the Advertiser/Sunday Mail is circulating to a market dominated by Adelaide supporters.

Its not fair or equitable but that's just how it is.

[Dudge]

Wish your better half a happy birthday mate :)

[Rusty00]

As a neutral watching the second half, some of those holding the ball decisions (for both sides) were ridiculous. The whole "not making a genuine attempt" is the most ridiculous rule/interpretation in the game, followed closely by the whole 50m penalty for encroaching within the "protected area".

[Toga]

Ummmmm....

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=592489314102291

[Dudge]

Ummmmm....

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=592489314102291

Wonder if he sang the club with them ???

[Ziplock]

haha, it's a massive overreaction on that. He's congratulated wells for (a goal?) which isn't, imo, overstepping any boundaries.

[Toga]

Idk Zippy, I reckon that's a bit odd... Umps are meant to be completely impartial, not sure why they'd be congratulating players haha? :P

[Ziplock]

'that was an impressive kick, you should be happy with it'

that's still impartial.