SA Footy

I thought the umpiring was terrible. Inconsistent is the best word to describe it.

How bout Cox not getting penalised for deliberate in the last quater in front of the members stand? How bout Weatherly getting pinged for in the back in the last quater? Shocking decision the guy landed on his side. Weatherly could hardly have done a better job. Ryswick should have been penalised for holding the ball in the last quater. Just to name a few.

What did others think?

i didnt see the game, but did you have r williams, officiating

if not who is he gonna screw this week,hopefully not south tomorrow

R Williams wasn't the one making awful decisions IMHO.
For some reason the umps decided to start paying holding the ball tonight for the first time this season except for the time when an unsighted ump let a one handed throw by a Norwood player go and then 1 second later paid a soft as anything push to a Norwood player.
Don't get me wrong, it was bad both ways, Daniel Motlop made one of the most sensational leaps I've ever seen at the Northern End to get paid a mark he only touched slightly which wasn't close to a mark IMHO and resulted in an easy goal in the goalsquare.
I try to look at games in a non biased point of view and I thought give or take a few decisions North got caned in the first half but I thought Norwood got caned in the 2nd half.
One of the deliberates paid agaisnt Norwood in the 2nd half was awful to say the least despite the fact that I and many North supporters called for it, I've seen the same thing happen 100 times without the central umpire blowing his whistle.
Luckily they didn't influence at all and the right and true result ended up happening.

Wedgie wrote:R Williams wasn't the one making awful decisions IMHO.
For some reason the umps decided to start paying holding the ball tonight for the first time this season except for the time when an unsighted ump let a one handed throw by a Norwood player go and then 1 second later paid a soft as anything push to a Norwood player.
Don't get me wrong, it was bad both ways, Daniel Motlop made one of the most sensational leaps I've ever seen at the Northern End to get paid a mark he only touched slightly which wasn't close to a mark IMHO and resulted in an easy goal in the goalsquare.
I try to look at games in a non biased point of view and I thought give or take a few decisions North got caned in the first half but I thought Norwood got caned in the 2nd half.
One of the deliberates paid agaisnt Norwood in the 2nd half was awful to say the least despite the fact that I and many North supporters called for it, I've seen the same thing happen 100 times without the central umpire blowing his whistle.
Luckily they didn't influence at all and the right and true result ended up happening.

Not disagreeing with you re: bad decisions both ways but what angle were you looking at the Motlop mark from? From where i was he took the ball cleanly albeit it was knocked out of his hands. I've seen much less paid but then again maybe it looks different from different angles. Either way it made up for the clear mark Weatherley took in the first term that wasn't paid. Granted the umpire was probably unsighted.

On the whole very inconsistant both ways.

rod_rooster wrote:Not disagreeing with you re: bad decisions both ways but what angle were you looking at the Motlop mark from? From where i was he took the ball cleanly albeit it was knocked out of his hands. I've seen much less paid but then again maybe it looks different from different angles. Either way it made up for the clear mark Weatherley took in the first term that wasn't paid. Granted the umpire was probably unsighted.

On the whole very inconsistant both ways.

I agree fully about Weatherley's mark, I saw the Motlop mark from in amongst the Grog Squad.
I'm going to get this game on DVD so I might save further reservations on it till I see that.

Having said that it was a senationaly leap, it reminded me of a mark Grenville took in 84 against Port at Footy Park when he was on top of a Port player who was on top of another Port player.

Motlop was sensational tonight and I enjoyed it all the more for a couple of North supporters that opened Francou with open arms but questioned Daniel's professinalism. Daniel Motlop was awesome, its amazing the difference it makes when he plays under a coach that doesn't have a game plan that revolves around Tredrea's ego. Some serious soul searching needs to be done down at Alberton.

Wedgie wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:Not disagreeing with you re: bad decisions both ways but what angle were you looking at the Motlop mark from? From where i was he took the ball cleanly albeit it was knocked out of his hands. I've seen much less paid but then again maybe it looks different from different angles. Either way it made up for the clear mark Weatherley took in the first term that wasn't paid. Granted the umpire was probably unsighted.

On the whole very inconsistant both ways.

I agree fully about Weatherley's mark, I saw the Motlop mark from in amongst the Grog Squad.
I'm going to get this game on DVD so I might save further reservations on it till I see that.

Having said that it was a senationaly leap, it reminded me of a mark Grenville took in 84 against Port at Footy Park when he was on top of a Port player who was on top of another Port player.

Motlop was sensational tonight and I enjoyed it all the more for a couple of North supporters that opened Francou with open arms but questioned Daniel's professinalism. Daniel Motlop was awesome, its amazing the difference it makes when he plays under a coach that doesn't have a game plan that revolves around Tredrea's ego. Some serious soul searching needs to be done down at Alberton.

I was about thirty metres around from the scoreboard and from there it looked like he had a fair grip on it before it was knocked out. It was perfectly setup for him though. Soon as it was kicked i called it. Was a great leap. I might be wrong and he might not have had enough of it but worth being paid for the leap alone

He was good Wedgie. His third term was excellent. Just keep it a bit more quiet though. Don't want anyone telling Port he was good after all.

rod_rooster wrote:He was good Wedgie. His third term was excellent. Just keep it a bit more quiet though. Don't want anyone telling Port he was good after all.

No need to keep it quiet, Williams ego wouldn't let him admit that his game plan which revolves around keeping Tredea's ego in tact is wrong.

I was happy as a pig in poo for Daniel to put to rest some knocker of his tonight, not only those who support the teal, but some of the people that support red and white who questioned him. They all look silly now.

Daniel Motlop is a superstar of the game.

Wedgie wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:He was good Wedgie. His third term was excellent. Just keep it a bit more quiet though. Don't want anyone telling Port he was good after all.

No need to keep it quiet, Williams ego wouldn't let him admit that his game plan which revolves around keeping Tredea's ego in tact is wrong.

Hope your right and we get at least 2 more games out of him. Francou as well. Will be nice to have those two in September and hopefully October. I know your thoughts on Francou but if he plays like he did against Glenelg even you would have to admit he would be very handy

Seriously I thought overall the umpiring was good overall all night and had no influence on the end result. Other than last week the best performance I have seen all year and their holding the ball decisions were consistent all night. They missed a few obvious ones for both sides all night but not any that cost direct goals or were match defining.

rod_rooster wrote:I know your thoughts on Francou but if he plays like he did against Glenelg even you would have to admit he would be very handy

Agreed but we won't go into his effort against Central.

drebin wrote:Seriously I thought overall the umpiring was good overall all night and had no influence on the end result. Other than last week the best performance I have seen all year and their holding the ball decisions were consistent all night. They missed a few obvious ones for both sides all night but not any that cost direct goals or were match defining.

Agree that the umpiring had no bearing on the outcome.

Wedgie wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:I know your thoughts on Francou but if he plays like he did against Glenelg even you would have to admit he would be very handy

Agreed but we won't go into his effort against Central.

He only played a quarter and then got injured You're a harsh judge

rod_rooster wrote:He only played a quarter and then got injured You're a harsh judge

Feel free to show me his stats from the quarter he wasn't injured, and lets face it, pulling a heart string isn't really an injury.

Wedgie wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:He only played a quarter and then got injured You're a harsh judge

Feel free to show me his stats from the quarter he wasn't injured, and lets face it, pulling a heart string isn't really an injury.

He didn't do a lot in that quarter but he wasn't on his own. And have you ever done a heart string? I have and it hurts

rod_rooster wrote:He didn't do a lot in that quarter but he wasn't on his own. And have you ever done a heart string? I have and it hurts

Nah, but I did do a hamstring celebrating my only goal in Southern League Footy at Bice Oval and that hurt heaps!
1 goal 13 points looks so much better on my CV than 0 goals 14 points would have!

Wedgie wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:He didn't do a lot in that quarter but he wasn't on his own. And have you ever done a heart string? I have and it hurts

Nah, but I did do a hamstring celebrating my only goal in Southern League Footy at Bice Oval and that hurt heaps!
1 goal 13 points looks so much better on my CV than 0 goals 14 points would have!

- wrote:I thought the umpiring was terrible. Inconsistent is the best word to describe it.

That's the nature of footy umpiring. Because of some of the strange interpretations you are always going to get inconsistencies. Also, it often depends on which angle the umpire views an incident as to whether he pays a mark/free, etc. That which is a free from one angle is not a free from another.

What I cannot understand are those obvious frees that are seen by every spectator at the ground but are missed, by all 3 umpires. No problem with the officiating umpire missing the free because he may have been on the wrong angle, but why one of the other umpires cannot run in and pay the free is beyond my comprehension. Do the other 2 umpires have to be seen to be supporting their comrade even if they know he's made a mistake?

Umpiring bewilders me at times. I realise it's a tough job but at times I think it's not as tough as they are making it appear.

Adelaide Hawk wrote:

- wrote:I thought the umpiring was terrible. Inconsistent is the best word to describe it.

That's the nature of footy umpiring. Because of some of the strange interpretations you are always going to get inconsistencies. Also, it often depends on which angle the umpire views an incident as to whether he pays a mark/free, etc. That which is a free from one angle is not a free from another.

What I cannot understand are those obvious frees that are seen by every spectator at the ground but are missed, by all 3 umpires. No problem with the officiating umpire missing the free because he may have been on the wrong angle, but why one of the other umpires cannot run in and pay the free is beyond my comprehension. Do the other 2 umpires have to be seen to be supporting their comrade even if they know he's made a mistake?

Umpiring bewilders me at times. I realise it's a tough job but at times I think it's not as tough as they are making it appear.

I think they lack common sense sometimes.

I agree the other two umpires should come in a fix a mistake by an unsighted umpire however the weakness to that is that it only takes 1 third of the umpires to think a free is warranted and it gets paid.

I would like to see the tackler rewarded, when the man with the ball has taken him on. Very fustrating seeing a ball up after this scenario.

Wedgie wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:He only played a quarter and then got injured You're a harsh judge

Feel free to show me his stats from the quarter he wasn't injured, and lets face it, pulling a heart string isn't really an injury.

Fair go! He injured his leg in the pre game warm up and carried it into the 1st Q.