Look if they want to pay that as 50 for what Ainsworth did, I have no problem as long as they call every single one like that, they arbitrarily decide when to give warnings and when to pay 50's straight away.
The Bulldogs and Umpires: Time for a Royal Commission?
- Thread starter Lavender Bushranger
- Start date
- Tagged users None
bartlettsbaldpatch
Rookie
- Jul 23, 2022
- 21
- 109
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Can I just ask?, Why did the umpire award the 50, about 1 second after mark was awarded? No warning, no instruction, just 50, here it is? I guess i'll never know!
Werewolf
Meme Thief
Veteran
10k Posts
Western Bulldogs Board Tipping Champion
Western Bulldogs - Josh Prudden Player Sponsor 2016
Western Bulldogs - Zaine Cordy Player Sponsor 2016
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2016
Western Bulldogs - Mitch Honeychurch Player Sponsor 2016
SuperCoach Club Board Championship League Member
Funny how people were chomping at the bit to bump this thread! They were kept waiting.
The Suns made the most of numerous half chances. Good on them, deserved to win
- Apr 5, 2016
- 8,325
- 19,436
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Boston Celtics
Was it a 50 to the letter of the law? Yes. Should a warning have been given? Also yes.
People chomping at the bit to scream conspiracy is absurd though. There’s hundreds of things that happen every game that umpire one would see is a free kick whilst umpire two wouldn’t.
- Thread starter
- #2,855
Almost every single decision could rightly be a Free For, a Free Against or a non-decision.
Almost every single time the umpire could be technically correct. That's why the AFL always ticks off questionable decisions.
- Apr 5, 2016
- 8,325
- 19,436
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Boston Celtics
They don’t always tick them off?
The 50m penalty
That isn't a good review. He doesn't even comment on several of the missed frees that pissed people off and is as consistent as the umpires were on that day. He highlights Naismith being called HTB as correct as one of his first comments ignoring multiple frees in the contests just before and after where players with more time were not called.
- Apr 5, 2016
- 8,325
- 19,436
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Boston Celtics
Provide time stamps, I’m always open to more analysis on this game. It’s the best review we’ve got though.
Christ, I know how this one goes, but anyway:
19:21: Free correctly paid against Naismith: Naismith has taken two steps (being generous) and is in the process of disposing of when tackled. This is fine if that's how it will be paid. but then you have tackles like 14:40 in the first, 19:50 in the second, and with the same time in control and no disposal.
Two of the really egregious things he doesn't comment on:
Q2: 13:45: Rourke Smith is pulling back Grundy's arm with two hands which causes a spilled mark and Bulldogs goal.
Q4: 5:29: In this contest a defender has one hand on Franklin's face and another yanks his arm down before a second hit to Franklin's other arm knocks the ball out. The run-on play leads to Boyd's goal.
Q4:6:31, Rampe being pulled back by the neck of his jumper without possession which leads to Johannison's touched shot.
It's a pretty shit review aimed at being contrarian and going against the common judgement rather than being a worthwhile analysis.
- Jan 5, 2004
- 1,825
- 2,925
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- collingwood vfl
This is what I've been trying to understand for years. It's like they're on a different planet to everybody else.
Possible answers:
1 They know it's true and are just stirring people up
2 They genuinely know nothing about the game
It's as bemusing as why the umpires continue to do it, or why the gutless media remain silent on the issue.
I agree with this. I'm not trying to justify it either, just to show that he technically was over the mark which is where the umpire pulled it from (but fully agree that he should have been called back rather than be called for an immediate 50 as I already stated, far too harsh and inconsistent with what they normally do).
Dogs_R_Us
Space Traveller
Do people genuinely believe (or are they just poking the bear) that Sydney were the better team in 2016?
- Thread starter
- #2,863
Yes. Comfortably. I reckon there were 4 better teams.
Generally believe they were the better team and bulldogs were helped by the umps to complete some fairytale story
3KZ is Football
🏆 🦍 RZSS Curator of Sticks and Stuff.
- Jun 17, 2008
- 27,450
- 38,127
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Fitzroy Football Club
The 50 metre penalty was complete garbage and Weightman should be cited for diving. If that sort of behaviour is what he wants to be known for, then so be it. Two goals in the last quarter of a tight game based on rubbish umpiring…and the umpires still couldn’t get the Bulldogs over the line. 
- Thread starter
- #2,866
I'm not sold on the 'fairytale conspiracy'.
Although the huge windfalls that had taken place for the EPL, and the MLB just previously, was a bit convenient. So the AFL bring the AFL, I wouldn't be surprised if they saw the opportunity and went with it.
- Apr 5, 2016
- 8,325
- 19,436
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Boston Celtics
19:21: If you're expecting umpires to pay exactly the same free kick every single time it happens, you're following the wrong sport. 14:42 left in the first, Shane Biggs handballs it before the tackle is actually laid. 19:50 in the second if the rule is judged as the same as the Naismith free kick then yep - should've been a free, but so should the holding of Shane Biggs without the ball by Tom Mitchell just a second prior (and Kieran Jack who is tackled after taking two steps).
Q2 13:45: Roarke Smith didn't play in the 2016 grand final, that is Clay Smith. Grundy has good body position on Clay, is holding his jumper at the start of contact (I know because I actually sat about 20 meters from that play) and attempts to take the mark with the other hand. The contact is instigated by Grundy but is followed through by Clay. Grundy isn't able to hold on to the mark likely because he can't get his other hand to the ball.
Q4: 6:31: Rampe is initially pulled whilst still having possession but Jack Macrae goes on with it after Rampe drops the ball. Should be a free kick to Rampe.
Q4: 5:29: Dale Morris has his hand on Buddy's shoulder. There is no jolt back or anything suggesting it's simply placed to feel where Buddy is going to move - could this be classed as prohibited contact? Possibly, but there'd be 300 free kicks a game if this were the case and this is an enormous clutch at straws.
You don't genuinely think any of these situations impacted the outcome of the game though, do you?
Dogs_R_Us
Space Traveller
On the ground that day?
Dogs_R_Us
Space Traveller
Better on that day? That's delusional.
General line of thinking is, if they acknowledge they have received a favourable run, they are effectively acknowledging they were handed a flag. For most that would mean the one flag they have seen, and likely will ever see in their lifetime, is about as hard earned as a WWE title.
- Thread starter
- #2,871
See, I don't understand this logic though.
I mean, who cares if your club was the best team? Or the worst?
They won. Isn't that all that matters?
If you win because a sniper in the grandstand takes out the opposition, or the umpires handed it to you, or you were the best team - who cares??!
Why defend the indefensible? I don't understand it.
No, not every time, but at least one HTB against the Dogs all day would have been good, especially when the constant dropping and throwing of the ball out when tackled allowed them to keep the ball moving all day. In any case, this isn't about my expectations, it's about the consistency and accuracy of this review you're leaning on.
No, Grundy wasn't holding his jumper and you know why he can't get his other hand to the ball? Because Smith is holding his other arm with two hands. Regardless of if Grundy instigated contact, you can't pull someone's arm back with two hands. It isn't even subtle. Clear free missed that isn't listed that led to a Dogs goal.
Rampe never actually takes posession of the ball and gets pulled by the neck of his jumper which was high vcontsct under the laws then. Again, insanely obvious free not listed in this review and leads to a Bulldogs shot at goal.
There's one on his face and one arm brings his marking arm down. Again, a pretty clear free kick is not mentioned in the report, the ensuing play leads to a Bulldogs goal.
You asked me to back up my claim that this review of the game left out multiple examples. I have.
On your unrelated question to the original purpose of this post: Do I think the umpiring on the day affected the result? Absolutely. This game was as close as it could be with a quarter to go, of course multiple examples of clear missed frees leading to the shots affected the outcome. Would it have meant the Swans WON? Don't know, but it certainly made it a ****load harder. You think the score would have been the same if the Dogs had been paid one free in the majority of game time and had multiple instances like above?
There was one point in it with, what, seven minutes to go after the Swans had received a single free kick for 2.5 quarters and had multiple umpiring records set or equalled against them on the day.
Last edited:
If only the umpire had been as trigger happy in the last 30 secs of the 2016 PF hey?
Elixuh
See you on the 9th green at 9
Dogs_R_Us
Space Traveller
Sorry, I meant in the grand final game.
Sydney finished with 17 wins, plus 2 wins and 2 losses from 4 finals games.
Bulldogs finished with 15 wins, plus 4 wins from 4 finals games.
Last edited:
