Page 1 of 1
Umpire has his say in clash of two great clubs
Posted:
Sun Aug 06, 2006 11:23 pmby -
Today at South Adelaides home ground Torrens kicked 4 goals in the first 5 mins of the last quater to reduce the margin to 24 points. Then Woodville once again went forward and lightly built Rugolo appeared to take a mark. Unfortunately for thunder thighs and his army of fans who cry "Vinny" the umpire didnt see it that way and the Panthers rebounded to kick a goal and increase the lead to 30 points and as history shows never look back.
Of all the football I have seen this year I cant remember a more pivotal umpiring decision and one with such an influence on the rest of the competition (see 2nd last paragraph). I realise number 46 for the warriors had to put the kick thru to make the difference 18 points. I also conceed that at 18 points down there is still a long way to go but bi-jingoes momentum is a wonderful thing in football and the Eagles through no fault of their own were robbed of it. It also be said that everyone has their own view of an event and the umpires might have been different to mine and therefore correct.
Reverse this result and:
Norwood, Port and Glenelg are significantly more likely to contest finals than South. The Peckers are placed in an even if not slightly favourable position to take the minor premiership over North Adelaide instead if u had to have your hand on somthing if u were going to bet on it, it would be corressing the edges of the you know what.
It is part of sport that always has and always will be with us. However as pleasurable as it is to those who are the beneficiaries what goes around comes around and you are one step closer to being subjected to maggotal robbery yourself. You had to spare a thought for the victim 2day.
Posted:
Sun Aug 06, 2006 11:56 pmby spell_check
Bottom line is though, we shouldn't have been that far behind to begin with.
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:02 amby Scoop
And the wonderful shepherd laid on David Clarke by the umpire in the last term to allow an Eagle to gather and run goalwards for an uncontested major?
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:31 amby -
Scoop wrote:And the wonderful shepherd laid on David Clarke by the umpire in the last term to allow an Eagle to gather and run goalwards for an uncontested major?
I must have been looking away but il take ur word 4 it.
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:43 amby eaglehaslanded
- wrote:Scoop wrote:And the wonderful shepherd laid on David Clarke by the umpire in the last term to allow an Eagle to gather and run goalwards for an uncontested major?
I must have been looking away but il take ur word 4 it.
That was just a minor case of umpire moving back into play at wrong time. All accidental and had absolutely no direct on th Eagles kicking a resulting goal a couple of minutes later. Your clutching at straws at best there Scoop.
Re: Umpire has his say in clash of two great clubs
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:49 amby eaglehaslanded
- wrote:Today at South Adelaides home ground Torrens kicked 4 goals in the first 5 mins of the last quater to reduce the margin to 24 points. Then Woodville once again went forward and lightly built Rugolo appeared to take a mark. Unfortunately for thunder thighs and his army of fans who cry "Vinny" the umpire didnt see it that way and the Panthers rebounded to kick a goal and increase the lead to 30 points and as history shows never look back.
Of all the football I have seen this year I cant remember a more pivotal umpiring decision and one with such an influence on the rest of the competition (see 2nd last paragraph). I realise number 46 for the warriors had to put the kick thru to make the difference 18 points. I also conceed that at 18 points down there is still a long way to go but bi-jingoes momentum is a wonderful thing in football and the Eagles through no fault of their own were robbed of it. It also be said that everyone has their own view of an event and the umpires might have been different to mine and therefore correct.
Reverse this result and:
Norwood, Port and Glenelg are significantly more likely to contest finals than South. The Peckers are placed in an even if not slightly favourable position to take the minor premiership over North Adelaide instead if u had to have your hand on somthing if u were going to bet on it, it would be corressing the edges of the you know what.
Totally agree there - Vinnie Rugolo I have no doubt would have kicked that major and the Eags would have been only 18 down and on the rampage. I have no doubt at very least the margin wouldn't have been anywhere near 66 in the end had of that been the case. In fact I have a sneaking suspicion if we kicked that we might of gone on to take the win. Bloody umpires, though that wasn't the only bad decision probably the most crucial. Eagles going into forward 50 on several other occasions didn't have either marks paid or penalties for infringements in the back, on the other hand we had to only breathe down a south players neck and the ump would pull one out in their favour.
It is part of sport that always has and always will be with us. However as pleasurable as it is to those who are the beneficiaries what goes around comes around and you are one step closer to being subjected to maggotal robbery yourself. You had to spare a thought for the victim 2day.
Re: Umpire has his say in clash of two great clubs
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:53 amby eaglehaslanded
- wrote:Today at South Adelaides home ground Torrens kicked 4 goals in the first 5 mins of the last quater to reduce the margin to 24 points. Then Woodville once again went forward and lightly built Rugolo appeared to take a mark. Unfortunately for thunder thighs and his army of fans who cry "Vinny" the umpire didnt see it that way and the Panthers rebounded to kick a goal and increase the lead to 30 points and as history shows never look back.
Of all the football I have seen this year I cant remember a more pivotal umpiring decision and one with such an influence on the rest of the competition (see 2nd last paragraph). I realise number 46 for the warriors had to put the kick thru to make the difference 18 points. I also conceed that at 18 points down there is still a long way to go but bi-jingoes momentum is a wonderful thing in football and the Eagles through no fault of their own were robbed of it. It also be said that everyone has their own view of an event and the umpires might have been different to mine and therefore correct.
Reverse this result and:
Norwood, Port and Glenelg are significantly more likely to contest finals than South. The Peckers are placed in an even if not slightly favourable position to take the minor premiership over North Adelaide instead if u had to have your hand on somthing if u were going to bet on it, it would be corressing the edges of the you know what.
It is part of sport that always has and always will be with us. However as pleasurable as it is to those who are the beneficiaries what goes around comes around and you are one step closer to being subjected to maggotal robbery yourself. You had to spare a thought for the victim 2day.
Totally agree there - Vinnie Rugolo I have no doubt would have kicked that major and the Eags would have been only 18 down and on the rampage. I have no doubt at very least the margin wouldn't have been anywhere near 66 in the end had of that been the case. In fact I have a sneaking suspicion if we kicked that we might of gone on to take the win. Bloody umpires, though that wasn't the only bad decision probably the most crucial. Eagles going into forward 50 on several other occasions didn't have either marks paid or penalties for infringements in the back, on the other hand we had to only breathe down a south players neck and the ump would pull one out in their favour.
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:19 amby westcoastpanther
We've just belted the piss out of ya's by eleven goals, same could be said with McGlones mark at the Bay. I did pose the question but after going down by seven in the end, to blame an umpire would have made an ass of myself. You blokes obviously don't mind looking like asses?
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:43 amby Aerie
Same thing happened earlier in the year at The Bay when a mark was disallowed to Grocke at the end of the 3rd quarter which would have put us in front. South also kicked a goal earlier in the day when the umpire ruled Inkster gave away a free kick when trying to fly for a mark. The South player actually used his body to shepherd Inkster away and was not looking at the ball, but the umpire saw it differently and South got a goal out of it. As for Rugolo, I thought it was a mark. A South player was paid a mark holding it for much less time in the 3rd quarter straight in front of goal.
I think the standard of umpiring has slipped in the past few weeks.
The real reason we lost though is South were much better than us on the day. Often the team who gets to the ball first will get the better of the umpiring and no doubt South deserved every bit of their win by 11 goals. It could and probably should have been that margin at 3 quarter time.
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 11:26 amby MightyEagles
For 2 and a half qtrs (or maybe closer to 3) we played like crap. But at least it wasn't as bad as the 2004 GF.
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:33 pmby cennals05
All teams could sit here and highlight a bad umpiring decision that could have changed the game. You still managed to lose last years Grand Final even after the umpires tried to hand you the game on a platter.
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:37 pmby Scoop
Minor case of an umpire backing into the play at the wrong time? He knocked the player going for the mark to the ground and as a result an Eagles player was able to gather without pressure. Who's clutching at straws EHL?
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:27 pmby sus
Rubbish dasher!!! It wasnt a mark - just like the 20 others similar that the Eagles players half-took or fumbled. Also where was the forward pressure to stop SA running it out uncontested to kick a goal on the rebound? Our forwards were absolutely shocking yesterday in all aspects.
The WWTFC got what they deserved! Umpires were fine.
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:59 pmby Dogwatcher
westcoastpanther wrote:You blokes obviously don't mind looking like asses?
And judging by your avatar, you don't mind looking at asses.
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:03 pmby -
Dogwatcher wrote:westcoastpanther wrote:You blokes obviously don't mind looking like asses?
And judging by your avatar, you don't mind looking at asses.
What about you and dogs? What part of the animal is it you watch?
Posted:
Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:36 pmby Wedgie
I honestly can't believe how soft the 2 umpiring decisions were that resulted in the first 2 Eagles goals.
IMHO they shouldn't have had a goal at 1/4 time except for some help from the men in white.
It was a non issue for the end result but I could have seen South being 10 goals at half time (as opposed to full time) if not for a couple of dodgy decisions.
Posted:
Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:10 amby Dogwatcher
- wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:westcoastpanther wrote:You blokes obviously don't mind looking like asses?
And judging by your avatar, you don't mind looking at asses.
What about you and dogs? What part of the animal is it you watch?
Hey I was being salacious! Not encouraging illegal acts!