How do the the hawks get away with crowding the man on the mark, holding and pushing while their kicker plays on around the man on the mark.
It happens all the time and they are never penalised, but if one of our players goes near them - 50m straight away.
Someone in the media mentioned the other day that before every match Hawthorn have pictures of each umpire in the rooms so each player can address them by name when they come into the rooms before the game.
Those who have the greatest power to hurt us are those we love.
I did listen to a podcast during the week where they mentioned that all the Hawks players learn every umpires name. Before the game when the umpires meet the teams the Hawks players go out of their way to use the umpires names when greeting them. I don't know if other teams do this, or if it is true. If it is the case it is a very smart thing they are doing.Originally Posted by stellation
edit: beaten by BC
"Fortunately, this is the internet, so knowing nothing is no obstacle to having an opinion!." Beerman 18-07-2017
The Jack one was a little puzzling- I haven't seen a replay of it, but live it did feel remarkably fast to be blowing the whistle for a 50 for encroaching on the protected zone. The only thing I could think of is that the rule is you're supposed to leave the protected area by the quickest possible route, so Jack perhaps should have been running in a different direction, but ignoring that seems to rarely be paid, it was such a quick whistle I don't think you could reasonably have expected the player to have really twigged what was going on.
The McGlynn one was "technically there", but it was a good example of over policing a rule- he in no way held up the player with the kick, and immediately returned to his mark. Umpires should be able to adjudicate as they see fit for the shades of grey rulings, but there needs to be pretty clear cut guidance given to them that encroaching a mark by a couple of steps under those circumstances and not in any way impeding the player taking the kick is perfectly fine. If Ben hadn't returned to the mark and had just followed the Hawk player who had run past then I doubt it would have been called, which suggests there really was no impact.
I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his time
Yep, only some of the Swans seemed to be trying their best last night, and it seemed to be the kids. Our much vaunted midfield, Kennedy Parker and Hanners, seemed tired and lost last night.
I don't think it is the umpires fault we can't hold a lead with two minutes to go, I'm guessing that is inexperience.
Would we have lost these close games last year with Goodesy and Shaw playing? Does it point to our leaders not taking control when required? I don't know
"Fortunately, this is the internet, so knowing nothing is no obstacle to having an opinion!." Beerman 18-07-2017
Hey jono2727, what rubs me is that the Hawks were only kept in the game through the lop-sided umpiring particularly in the first half, e.g., quick HTB against us, vs Lewis obvious drop of the ball, 50m called on us, but not them etc. If we had gotten closer on the 50/50 calls instead of losing most of them, then it wouldn't have mattered what we did in the final 100 seconds as the game would have been out of reach for the Hawks.
Most people saying it is a conspiracy are just venting, but it does really look like there is biased officiating against us. It might be unintentional bias, but it is still bad for a national game overall.
We really need more umpires from WA, SA, NSW etc., just like international cricket introduced having "neutral" umpires from non-competing countries. Umpires who openly barrack for certain teams etc., should just not officiate games involving those teams. This is not because they are cheats, but why put the umpire into a situation where his integrity might be questioned? Just avoid the potential possibility/appearance of bias altogether.
Can't agree with your first sentence. We lost by 5 points, with similar inside 50s, three quarters of the game played in the Swans' style. Only in the second quarter were the Hawks allowed to dictate play. Hanners did struggle for impact (I wasn't looking closely but I suspect he was being tagged) but I thought Parker and Kennedy were very good and, along with Rohan, the Swans' best contributors.) The team made mistakes, sure, but I didn't come away thinking any of the players weren't trying their hardest.Yep, only some of the Swans seemed to be trying their best last night, and it seemed to be the kids. Our much vaunted midfield, Kennedy Parker and Hanners, seemed tired and lost last night.
I don't think it is the umpires fault we can't hold a lead with two minutes to go, I'm guessing that is inexperience.
Would we have lost these close games last year with Goodesy and Shaw playing? Does it point to our leaders not taking control when required? I don't know
I think what gives the impression that the Swans weren't trying was that Hawthorn were so clean and quick with their disposal. They must practice their in close work a lot, it has become almost instinct for them to know where each player is meant to be and how they could trust each other to hit the right target.
By contrast we were making simple errors, the one that sticks out in my head was a Swans player marking in the half forward area, might have been Sinclair, he handballs to McVeigh about 5 metres away, McVeigh fumbles under no real pressure and we turn it over. What should have been an inside 50 turns into a Hawthorn attack instead.
Hey mate, the only thing pathetic is your post. How can you say that third quarters of running and tackling is only worthy of 3 free kicks in total? Simple probability tells you something is wrong!
My wife and I were sitting near some hawks supporters last night unfortunately and like the umpiring they were a disgrace . Agree with posts here that say that if it is fair and above board I can cop the loss but when the frees paid to one side and not the other are so blatant then it turns our sport into a joke.
You overrate Swans fans then.
No conspiracy. It was a cracking game of footy. Two champions kicked massive goals in the last quarter to give them victory. Sometimes you just have to tip your hat to the opposition.
They missed a few. It happens, it's a tough gig. Every single supporter base thinks the umpires are against them. It's pathetic.
Bloods
"Lockett is the best of all time" - Robert Harvey, Darrel Baldock, Nathan Burke, Kevin Bartlett, Bob Skilton
We had some disgusting Dawks supporters behind us.
The area that I sit in is "members reserve". I know that the seats behind me are seats that belong to members.
By 3/4 time, I'd had enough of these jerks and I asked if they are sitting in the right seats.
They got a bit narky, and the feral chick said asked me if I was asking to see her ticket.
I said yes, she can either show them to me to prove they should be sitting there, or she can show them to the security guard I'm about to call and he can decide if she should be sitting there.
Suffice to say they didn't open their mouth again. Even when they won.
People @@@@ me today.
Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks