Swans v Umpires

[Ruck'n'Roll]

We were discussing the perceived anti Swans bias from the men in orange/yellow/green recently. And yes I know all football fans think the umpires are biased against their team.

But I did a little research and not only have we received less free kicks than our opponents this season, but we"ve been on the debit side of the season-long free kick ledger since 2004.

Not suggesting conspiracy, just wondering if it is just a statistical anomaly.

For some reason we appear to be unique in that I couldn't find any other team with such a long running bad run. It's very strange.

[DK_]

Probably a reflection of our hard style of football. I can't think of a game this season where I've felt we were too badly done by. Singular bad decision (esky), but they're part and parcel of the game really.

GWS in the last qtr of last weekend had reason to complain however.

[TheAgent]

We were discussing the perceived anti Swans bias from the men in orange/yellow/green recently. And yes I know all football fans think the umpires are biased against their team.

But I did a little research and not only have we received less free kicks than our opponents this season, but we"ve been on the debit side of the season-long free kick ledger since 2004.

Not suggesting conspiracy, just wondering if it is just a statistical anomaly.

For some reason we appear to be unique in that I couldn't find any other team with such a long running bad run. It's very strange.

I believe the umpires do not like our contested style where if we don't win the ball we fight hard to either win it or if we can't we shut down the play, create a stoppage then win that.

They get annoyed with stoppage after stoppage and in the end some look for a free kick to relieve the pressure.

Remember the words the AFL keep pushing (read Kevin Bartlett or Travis Johnstone style of play ie all attack no defence) 'Free flowing, attractive football'.

PS: I HATE 'free flowing attractive football' I prefer hard in and under with quick breakout.

- - - Updated - - -

Probably a reflection of our hard style of football. I can't think of a game this season where I've felt we were too badly done by. Singular bad decision (esky), but they're part and parcel of the game really.

GWS in the last qtr of last weekend had reason to complain however.

Port game, Morton copped a free against him for an in the back, Tippett the same (neither were there) then McVeigh got one against him for I don't know what.

[Bloodthirsty]

I actually think there is bias (corruption, whichever word you want to use) in umpiring in general. It's as though umpire knows what's 'best' in terms of outcomes for the AFL, according to an unspoken 'script'. We were never meant to win the GF, just battle valiantly. Pies can't lose to GWS of course, and in general, they keep the big 4 Victorians in games as much as possible. Hawthorn and Geelong seem to be the most favoured by umpires.

There is clearly umpire bias in Brownlow voting, evidenced by landslide votes to a player the season after the public thought they should have won it but didn't. This exhibits the understanding of an 'ideal script', and actions taken to influence this outcome closer to the script. Why people think that umpire bias can't exist elsewhere is beyond me.

Also, looking at total free kick tallies isn't accurate, because there are the free kicks played when the game is in the balance, and then there are the 'evening-up' free kicks when it doesn't matter or in a neutral part of the ground, to make it look fair when it hasn't been.

[ShockOfHair]

Probably a reflection of our hard style of football. I can't think of a game this season where I've felt we were too badly done by. Singular bad decision (esky), but they're part and parcel of the game really.

GWS in the last qtr of last weekend had reason to complain however.

Yep, I take the stat as illustrating we're the most physical side in the league.

But it's an excellent one that I will definitely use next time I encounter some demented Sydney-Demetriou-COLA-Tippett conspiracy theory.

[hot potato]

I'm also interested how many games Swans players miss by the sanctions of MRP, compared to the competition , as apart from Hall, they seem to follow a pretty disciplined code of conduct.
HP

[DK_]

The things to ask with conspiracies are who would benefit and by how much (the reward), who has the means to pull it off (capability), how difficult it would be to manufacture without being obvious (the difficulty) and how many people would need to be involved (the risk of being revealed).

The reward - In this case, the AFL and favoured clubs could conceivably benefit, but the Melbourne clubs have huge followings regardless if performance (see Richmond), so I don't really see anything worthy of the risk.

Capability - clearly only the AFL has the means, but even less reward.

Difficulty and risk - lots of umpires would need to be involved. If this really happened, surely there'd be at least one disgruntled umpire willing to sell their tell-all scoop to the highest bidder.

I just don't see it as being possible in any real sense. Though there could conceivably be individual umpires with a personal bias. Not sure how you'd guarantee against that. Their existing performance management system would get pretty close though.

[DK_]

Motivation of participants is another consideration - umpires aren't really paid enough to undermine their own integrity like that.

See race fixing as an example of a very small conspiracy that couldn't be kept under wraps. In that case there only needed to be a couple of participants and the rewards were huge and personal.

Match fixing of cricket in India is another example of a failed attempt at conspiracy in a country where corruption is far more culturally acceptable than in Australia.

[Bloodthirsty]

The things to ask with conspiracies are who would benefit and by how much (the reward), who has the means to pull it off (capability), how difficult it would be to manufacture without being obvious (the difficulty) and how many people would need to be involved (the risk of being revealed).

The reward - In this case, the AFL and favoured clubs could conceivably benefit, but the Melbourne clubs have huge followings regardless if performance (see Richmond), so I don't really see anything worthy of the risk.

Capability - clearly only the AFL has the means, but even less reward.

Difficulty and risk - lots of umpires would need to be involved. If this really happened, surely there'd be at least one disgruntled umpire willing to sell their tell-all scoop to the highest bidder.

I just don't see it as being possible in any real sense. Though there could conceivably be individual umpires with a personal bias. Not sure how you'd guarantee against that. Their existing performance management system would get pretty close though.

I don't think it's a Bilderberg-style meeting to determine people's fates, it's more just an awareness of the consequences that their decisions have, and this awareness definitely translates to their actions.

[Nico]

Maybe the answer is we don't get rewarded for our hard tackles, hence the imbalance. Also we tackle quick and often and before a player has prior opportunity to dispose of the ball.

[Swansongster]

I'd like to see the facts broken down to home town advantage. A baying crowd can seriously affect the 50:50 decisions as we often see at Footy Park, Subiaco and the big Melbourne (plus Geelong) venues. Especially against interstate teams with smaller crowd support.

[liz]

I just think it illustrates the way the Swans play the game -the antithesis of 'bruise free football'.

I also think we, on the whole, lack players who duck their heads or use other illegitimate methods to draw high contact frees. We have many who attack the ball head first and win their share that way - Jude, for instance - but no Selwoods or Thomases or the like. Benny McGlynn comes the closest, aided by the fact he's short, but even most of his are where he is genuinely going for the ball and cops unfair high contact from an opponent.

Goodes is probably the worst (or best) we currently have for trying to draw attention to frees he thinks he deserves, but he doesn't go out of his way to create high contact, and most of those he appeals for are just about there.