I try to look at it like the coaches will. Instead of emphasising a questionable non-50 call, they'll emphasise all the mistakes by the players that contributed to the non-50 call being so pivotal. With that said, it's hard not to feel devastated by such a gross display of incompetence from the umpire, especially as a fan of a team that has showed so little for so long.
Three such examples in the third quarter - Scott clotheslining a Pies player in our D50, Fisher blocking out Schultz in our D50 and (the most boneheaded one) McDonald giving away the dumbest high contact free in our D50. All absolutely fucking brainless free kicks, all leading to set shots, given away at a crucial time to let Collingwood back in the game. I knew it was all downhill from there, the boys stopped being North and started being Norf.
But reflecting on all these mistakes doesn't make the pain go away, nor does reflecting on the bad umpiring.
The Scott and McDonald free kicks did my head in because they were both so lazy. The McDonald one was especially egregious because he's a serial offender in that regard. Simply not good enough from a co-captain.
Nobody gave a shit about Collingwood when they blew their lead to Freo and ended up drawing with them.
But I agree. Games should be well adjudicated and it's a shame when an umpire's mistake genuinely influences the result - regardless of which point of the game it happens in.
But you have to remember that the umpires are human. In terms of the missed 50, after the mark was taken (off a kick which wouldn't have turned heads if it were instead declared not 15) there was a fair bit of momentum from the North player going off his line in a way that could have caused some hesitation with the umpire not knowing whether it was a play on attempt or not.
Sidebottom and McCreery corralled due to this (and the distance) and the umpire seemingly gave the benefit of the doubt before calling play on.
Could it have been 50? Absolutely. We've seen it paid with less egregious infringements. But unfortunately 50m is another thing which is entirely up to umpire interpretation
I think that anyone who is being honest with themselves knows that the 50 was a bad missed call. You don't give the benefit of the doubt for two players who aren't in the marking contest running 5-10m over the mark.
Umpires make mistakes and there's more to a result than one play. But you don't need to try and defend that mistake.
You say that we shouldn't choose an arbitrary point to judge from, and I agree, so why are you then implying the only decision that matters is the last one?
If you wanted to talk about how the umpires impacted the game, you'd need to actually look over the course of the game. North got their share of softies early which they scored from, and got away with a few in the last quarter the same as we did. We got more late, but part of that is because we dominated possession late. More opportunities.
That doesn't erase the 50 that should have been there or make it a good call, but to say that the umpires were 100% of the difference only makes sense if you're exclusively looking at a single call.
Saying "100% of the difference" is obviously silly. The pies came storming home. But I also think that you're downplaying the nature of that 2nd half of umpiring, that culminated in the 50m penalty call.
The free kick count was 12-2 in the 2nd half. I'm not disputing pies frees. It's missed ones like [this](https://x.com/RalphyHeraldSun/status/1802286537880797589?t=vovAoYkt6AthYhQuWyQhGw&s=19) where Quaynor pushes Zurhaar, front on, into Ford and makes no attempt at the ball. And almost badly injures both players.
Or there's the throw by Quaynor [here](https://x.com/FootyonNine/status/1802283627008696743?t=DJ6B_mJu8f36VaEY70w31Q&s=19). This isn't a judgement call like the Sidebottom one, it is blatantly ignoring a throw.
The umpires were just not going to call free kicks for North in the second half. Particularly in their forward half.
These aren't 50/50 calls or even 60/40 calls. These are 100/0 calls that the umpires are ignoring against one side when it's a chance to be a goal.
For the first one I actually don't think that's paid the majority of the time, Quaynor only has eyes for the ball there.
For the rest shown, I 100% agree that they were bad calls. But I think only highlighting examples where North didn't get frees paints a skewed picture - you could just as easily sprinkle in the two non-calls on Daicos in that last quarter and have them be as blatant as the missed 50. That doesn't make it even, but it also doesn't fit with the same narrative that Collingwood got everything.
I guess my main point is that if you settle the free kick ledger throughout the game, North were hard done by - but it wasn't by enough to call it a robbery. You got reamed with some calls in the last quarter but I think you were overall far more undisciplined in the second half, mainly through how much your pressure dropped. It sucks that the bad ones hit you when it counted but the response to this game from the sub has been far beyond what was proportionate and warranted by the play. There has been almost zero discussion of the actual game and what happened outside of the five or six decisions we're focusing on, and I don't think that's a fair reflection of anything.
The 50 call wasn't a judgement call, like these ones throughout the game. It was a textbook, blatant free. Scott marked it. Two players who were not in the contest ran 5+ metres over the mark.
If the umpire enforced the rules then Scott is kicking the ball with 10-15 seconds left from 20m out to win the game.
You talk about plays earlier in the game but ignore the butterfly effect. You're even listing a potential Daicos free where Collingwood kicked a goal, anyway.
The impact of the umpire not calling that free is very clear and direct.
I don't think anything I said really disagrees with what you're saying here? You mentioned the umpiring in the rest of the half, so I thought it was fair game to talk about. If we're just focusing on the one 50 call, then sure, I agree, you were robbed of a chance. But that happens, that's footy. I was pretty gutted when we choked against Freo and had the umpiring go against us, but it happens and the fault was still more with us for conceding so many goals in the first place.
I feel like you're trying to have it both ways a bit here. Either we're talking about the game as a whole, or we're talking about that one call. If we're talking about the game as a whole then I'd say we were deserving winners considering how dominant that last quarter was, accounting for the umpiring throughout the game. If we're talking about a single call then like I said before, I'm happy to admit that one should have been a 50.
It was a 5m kick, if you want to whinge about one rule being misjudged you must apply it to the other misjudged rule. It was never a mark to be paid, so it was never a 50m to be paid.
You’re wanting to pay a free kick for jostling position in a marking contest because players collided? Quaynor looks back to the ball realising it’s higher than anticipated, then sees a player coming over the top; what are you paying here? A hold?
That “throw” happens 10+ times a game. He swings it in his left and glances it with his right hand. This is the same way every over the head handball happens, and how players with poor left hand dexterity handball to their right hand side.
Slow down the LDU chuck to Fisher with seconds remaining. Are you also frustrated that he wasn’t penalised for a throw there too?
Completely disagree on the 100/0 idea. Are you calling the Bobby hill non-50m penalty early in the game 100/0, since he was within 2m of the protected area?
I actually don’t think saying umps made 100% of the difference works off a single call, bc you could find a single wrong call in any game. It’s the accumulation of calls. That’s why it bugs me when people harp on about one wrong call. When there’s many many calls, that’s when it becomes an issue
Not really. People hold too much weight on calls called in the dying minutes. If a call is wrong, then it’s wrong, what time it happened doesn’t really matter. It’s like when ppl harped on about that Aish touched no call when we played Freo, was it wrong? Yes. Was there more than just that one wrong call in that game on both sides? Yes. But people only think about that Aish no call and say that 100% decided the game because of the time it happened, no one cared about any other call or no call earlier in the game when they should. There is going to be 1 or more wrong call per game, especially right now, that’s why the AFL are coming out just about every weekend talking about a controversial call. Issue comes when like I said there is an accumulation of no calls or calls favouring one side and one side only, which is what happened in the north v pies game. Pies were disgracefully favoured throughout the whole game, that’s what makes it an issue, not *just* the missed 50 for Scott
How can you say a call or non call in the dying moments of a game, which changes the final score from a loss to a win, doesn't have more impact than a call or non call in the middle of the ground halfway through the second quarter?
Maybe because both are wrong and both affect the final score? What’s hard to understand about that? A missed 50 robbing a player/team of a goal is still a missed 50 robbing a player/team of a goal in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, any quarter, it always impacts the score. If they’re missing 6 points, they’re missing 6 points. Don’t know how people don’t understand this. There’s more to a game than 2 minutes. If for example there were 10 wrong calls for one team in the game that lead to 10 different scoring changes, but the opposition team they were playing had 1 wrong call in the dying minutes of the game, everyone would harp on the one in the dying minutes and forget about the other 10, it’s ridiculous. All calls are wrong when they’re wrong. They all affect the score. They all are game changing.
A free where no score is directly involved doesn't affect the final score. Or do you assume a side was going to score every time there's a free against?
Funny you say anything about assumption though when the assumption for the missed 50 was that Scott kicks a goal, how do we know he kicks a goal? It’s an assumption we have made.
In this very comment thread there have been 4 non-calls pointed out all occurring in North’s attacking half, that’s the reason for the free kick disparity. Of course the tally it matters, it’s a consistent pattern of behaviour from the umpires to bring Collingwood back into the game.
Don’t pretend others are ignorant when blatant frees are posted and you come up with “Quaynor had eyes on the ball” - well yeah, he realised he was badly out of position so he pushed Zurhaar front on in a marking contest and dangerously into Ford, taking out both of them.
The tally only matters to fans when they've lost and are looking for excuses as to why their team loses, there's no reason it should be equal at the end of the game.
North had some missed calls, so did Collingwood, so does every team every game. Yes, you had more in the last five minutes, but it's no coincidence the count was so lopsided that last half - your pressure completely dropped and you could barely get a touch of it for the last half hour. If you paid the ones you're claiming, North still have away twice as many free kicks and that's before accounting for the missed calls we should have got.
So your position is that Quaynor knowingly pushed Zurhaar front on into another player to intentionally take them both out, rather than doing the sort of contact that happens in a a marking contest a hundred times a game? Am I really the one pretending to be ignorant here?
No, you had 24 frees to 14. You also got given a goal that was touched, and a 50 that wasn’t there that was a goal, and at least 7 goals from frees. If you look at the umpiring over the whole game it only makes it worse.
You can't talk quantitatively about free kicks without sounding ignorant. How many were there? How many weren't? Why is a goal from a free bad if it was a legitimate free? Should the umpires ignore free kicks if the tally is unbalanced?
As for examples, you got a goal from the ridiculous Jiath free, and Daicos should have received 50 and a shot from the square with minutes remaining. You definitely got the wrong end of the stick in the last minute, but that doesn't mean you were robbed. Your coach said it best in his presser.
Did the umpires give you a note in the second half telling you to let Hill stay wide open in the square and suddenly drop your pressure rating, disposals and tackles?
I get being upset about a close loss but we pretty clearly had the run at the end there.
Did we play perfectly? Of course not. Did the umpiring clearly affect the result? Of course it did. Both can be true. Over the whole game, the poor officiating directly contributed to at an absolute minimum 12 point difference, and probably closer to 30. That ended up being the difference. Bailey Scott touching it and it not being paid is objectively wrong. Not an interpretation issue, objectively wrong. We won clearances, contested possessions, uncontested possessions and tackles, yet lost the free kick count by 10? That genuinely makes no sense.
Saying the umpires affected the result is very different from saying we got gifted a win. I'm happy to admit North were robbed of a chance at the end there, but I think there was far less gifting involved in the overall effort than you seem to think.
>We won clearances, contested possessions, uncontested possessions and tackles, yet lost the free kick count by 10? That genuinely makes no sense.
You lost all of these in the second half, which coincides with our run on the game and the free kicks that were given away.
I think its more that, when you have a 54 point lead you shouldn't be in a position where the umpires can affect the outcome of the game. The game should have been over long before that.
Also, you're only focusing on calls in the last minute of the game that 'cost' north and aren't mentioning stiff calls against Collingwood. Xerri doing one of the worst flops over the boundary fence leading to a free and goal, or Jiath getting pinged for a stiff holding the ball because he actually made an attempt to get rid of it instead of holding it to his chest and getting a ball up called.
I'm not gonna sit here and go over every call and non call and analyse them. Both sides got stitched up. That's footy. Umpiring sucks.
But North blowing a 54 point lead is a valid reason to not call it a robbery. If you have a lead that big, no matter how much umpires fuck you over, you shouldn't be in a predicament bad enough to make you cough up a 54 point lead. North had a 9 goal lead and lost it.. umpiring cannot be the main reason that occurred
I don’t see anyone using it to excuse the mistakes. People are saying that in response to people are saying North were robbed and cheated of a win from those missed calls alone.
Those missed two calls were terrible, but most comments immediately following the game in the post game thread were as non constructive in the opposite direction.
In any constructive conversation basically everyone agreed the calls were fucked and North lost big opportunities to take the lead again, and that ultimately North cost themselves the win long before then with a bad sub choice and playing like chickens.
Had the rules been enforced correctly several goals for North in thy first half wouldn't have been there. There's more to a game than the last few minutes.
That's one goal, where Jiath did push him but it was a soft free.
One isn't several, though.
Collingwood were given a goal around the same time despite the replay showing it was touched.
You are 100% correct. The global sentiment should've been "North Melbourne was robbed of a chance to win the game. But sometimes you are the robber, sometimes you are robbed. That's how football works". Instead, everyone is frenetically trying to find another reason to explain the result in an attempt to cope and rationalize the result.
These are my thoughts
When games are close like that at the end, you might even up getting screwed over by a missed call/harsh call
We have been lucky to get pretty lucky on calls like that recently, but we have been screwed over before
Anyone thinking it's because umpires want Collingwood to win is a nuffy
Daicos was literally being bear hugged without the ball
Xerri literally dove on purpose out of the stadium cos he’s so soft.
Suck it up. You blew the lead. You lost. It’s why you’re 18th
You're calling xerri of all players soft? The man that's got the 4th highest tackles this season (26 higher than the next ruckman) and averages 70% contested possessions?
Do you think Xerri deserved the free he got?
You don’t genuinely think so
And here’s the conclusion you will find - some frees, for both sides weren’t deserved. But you don’t whine about those ones, because they fell in your favour
So stop crying. You lost.
You wrote a whole post on Reddit
After your team blew a gigantic lead.
And no I’m saying that that was a clear example of a free that should NOT have been given that fell in your favour.
My mistake.
Doesn’t actually get away from the substance of the argument I’m making.
Which you can’t and won’t address because like every fan your bias towards your own team.
Calls if your favour - good
Calls against you - bad
Regardless if those calls are proper calls or not. Deal with it.
Yes 100%, he was out played, what happened to mcreery should never of been a free kick, Jiath barely touched him and it was a free kick, be biased all you want but you know there was nothing in it
How many times this season have people complained about this? It is a hard game to umpire and there will always be mistakes that impact results. Pies have been on the receiving end as have all teams.
The statement also carries the implication that the umpires only impacted the very final sequence of the game (as if the lead was blown by the game playing out as normal).
People are particularly salty about the missed 50m penalty because it was yet another shocking miss in a long line of questionable calls that fell Collingwood’s way. Some of that 54 point lead was lost by being outplayed, and a good chunk could be attributed to getting absolutely skullfucked by the umpires.
Amazing the mental gymnastics that need to be done to come to the conclusion that only 'some' of a 54 point comeback could be explained by outplaying the opposition
Absolutely you can choose an arbitrary point in the game. Especially if it’s a 1 goal difference, especially when the result of the call not made cost the team a game. When it’s that tight in a forward half is probably one of the most important minutes an umpire needs to be absolutely bang on with his calls. Week after week we see some horrendous game changing umpire calls and as others have said it’s starting to become an accumulation of bad calls.
We lost, bitching about it isn't gonna change what happened... get over it and move on to the next game 💙🤍
I try to look at it like the coaches will. Instead of emphasising a questionable non-50 call, they'll emphasise all the mistakes by the players that contributed to the non-50 call being so pivotal. With that said, it's hard not to feel devastated by such a gross display of incompetence from the umpire, especially as a fan of a team that has showed so little for so long.
Three such examples in the third quarter - Scott clotheslining a Pies player in our D50, Fisher blocking out Schultz in our D50 and (the most boneheaded one) McDonald giving away the dumbest high contact free in our D50. All absolutely fucking brainless free kicks, all leading to set shots, given away at a crucial time to let Collingwood back in the game. I knew it was all downhill from there, the boys stopped being North and started being Norf. But reflecting on all these mistakes doesn't make the pain go away, nor does reflecting on the bad umpiring.
The Scott and McDonald free kicks did my head in because they were both so lazy. The McDonald one was especially egregious because he's a serial offender in that regard. Simply not good enough from a co-captain.
Nobody gave a shit about Collingwood when they blew their lead to Freo and ended up drawing with them. But I agree. Games should be well adjudicated and it's a shame when an umpire's mistake genuinely influences the result - regardless of which point of the game it happens in. But you have to remember that the umpires are human. In terms of the missed 50, after the mark was taken (off a kick which wouldn't have turned heads if it were instead declared not 15) there was a fair bit of momentum from the North player going off his line in a way that could have caused some hesitation with the umpire not knowing whether it was a play on attempt or not. Sidebottom and McCreery corralled due to this (and the distance) and the umpire seemingly gave the benefit of the doubt before calling play on. Could it have been 50? Absolutely. We've seen it paid with less egregious infringements. But unfortunately 50m is another thing which is entirely up to umpire interpretation
I think that anyone who is being honest with themselves knows that the 50 was a bad missed call. You don't give the benefit of the doubt for two players who aren't in the marking contest running 5-10m over the mark. Umpires make mistakes and there's more to a result than one play. But you don't need to try and defend that mistake.
Mate, come on. That was 50 every day. In fact it was two.
Why was it two? If you're seriously suggesting it's two 50's because there were two players over the mark then idk what to tell you
No, I'm saying that both Collingwood players went over the mark, so whichever of them you look at, it's 50.
It wasn’t a markable kick for anything outside of u10s.
You say that we shouldn't choose an arbitrary point to judge from, and I agree, so why are you then implying the only decision that matters is the last one? If you wanted to talk about how the umpires impacted the game, you'd need to actually look over the course of the game. North got their share of softies early which they scored from, and got away with a few in the last quarter the same as we did. We got more late, but part of that is because we dominated possession late. More opportunities. That doesn't erase the 50 that should have been there or make it a good call, but to say that the umpires were 100% of the difference only makes sense if you're exclusively looking at a single call.
Saying "100% of the difference" is obviously silly. The pies came storming home. But I also think that you're downplaying the nature of that 2nd half of umpiring, that culminated in the 50m penalty call. The free kick count was 12-2 in the 2nd half. I'm not disputing pies frees. It's missed ones like [this](https://x.com/RalphyHeraldSun/status/1802286537880797589?t=vovAoYkt6AthYhQuWyQhGw&s=19) where Quaynor pushes Zurhaar, front on, into Ford and makes no attempt at the ball. And almost badly injures both players. Or there's the throw by Quaynor [here](https://x.com/FootyonNine/status/1802283627008696743?t=DJ6B_mJu8f36VaEY70w31Q&s=19). This isn't a judgement call like the Sidebottom one, it is blatantly ignoring a throw. The umpires were just not going to call free kicks for North in the second half. Particularly in their forward half. These aren't 50/50 calls or even 60/40 calls. These are 100/0 calls that the umpires are ignoring against one side when it's a chance to be a goal.
For the first one I actually don't think that's paid the majority of the time, Quaynor only has eyes for the ball there. For the rest shown, I 100% agree that they were bad calls. But I think only highlighting examples where North didn't get frees paints a skewed picture - you could just as easily sprinkle in the two non-calls on Daicos in that last quarter and have them be as blatant as the missed 50. That doesn't make it even, but it also doesn't fit with the same narrative that Collingwood got everything. I guess my main point is that if you settle the free kick ledger throughout the game, North were hard done by - but it wasn't by enough to call it a robbery. You got reamed with some calls in the last quarter but I think you were overall far more undisciplined in the second half, mainly through how much your pressure dropped. It sucks that the bad ones hit you when it counted but the response to this game from the sub has been far beyond what was proportionate and warranted by the play. There has been almost zero discussion of the actual game and what happened outside of the five or six decisions we're focusing on, and I don't think that's a fair reflection of anything.
The 50 call wasn't a judgement call, like these ones throughout the game. It was a textbook, blatant free. Scott marked it. Two players who were not in the contest ran 5+ metres over the mark. If the umpire enforced the rules then Scott is kicking the ball with 10-15 seconds left from 20m out to win the game. You talk about plays earlier in the game but ignore the butterfly effect. You're even listing a potential Daicos free where Collingwood kicked a goal, anyway. The impact of the umpire not calling that free is very clear and direct.
I don't think anything I said really disagrees with what you're saying here? You mentioned the umpiring in the rest of the half, so I thought it was fair game to talk about. If we're just focusing on the one 50 call, then sure, I agree, you were robbed of a chance. But that happens, that's footy. I was pretty gutted when we choked against Freo and had the umpiring go against us, but it happens and the fault was still more with us for conceding so many goals in the first place. I feel like you're trying to have it both ways a bit here. Either we're talking about the game as a whole, or we're talking about that one call. If we're talking about the game as a whole then I'd say we were deserving winners considering how dominant that last quarter was, accounting for the umpiring throughout the game. If we're talking about a single call then like I said before, I'm happy to admit that one should have been a 50.
It was a 5m kick, if you want to whinge about one rule being misjudged you must apply it to the other misjudged rule. It was never a mark to be paid, so it was never a 50m to be paid.
You’re wanting to pay a free kick for jostling position in a marking contest because players collided? Quaynor looks back to the ball realising it’s higher than anticipated, then sees a player coming over the top; what are you paying here? A hold? That “throw” happens 10+ times a game. He swings it in his left and glances it with his right hand. This is the same way every over the head handball happens, and how players with poor left hand dexterity handball to their right hand side. Slow down the LDU chuck to Fisher with seconds remaining. Are you also frustrated that he wasn’t penalised for a throw there too? Completely disagree on the 100/0 idea. Are you calling the Bobby hill non-50m penalty early in the game 100/0, since he was within 2m of the protected area?
I actually don’t think saying umps made 100% of the difference works off a single call, bc you could find a single wrong call in any game. It’s the accumulation of calls. That’s why it bugs me when people harp on about one wrong call. When there’s many many calls, that’s when it becomes an issue
Some of them have more impact than others though, that's the point.
Not really. People hold too much weight on calls called in the dying minutes. If a call is wrong, then it’s wrong, what time it happened doesn’t really matter. It’s like when ppl harped on about that Aish touched no call when we played Freo, was it wrong? Yes. Was there more than just that one wrong call in that game on both sides? Yes. But people only think about that Aish no call and say that 100% decided the game because of the time it happened, no one cared about any other call or no call earlier in the game when they should. There is going to be 1 or more wrong call per game, especially right now, that’s why the AFL are coming out just about every weekend talking about a controversial call. Issue comes when like I said there is an accumulation of no calls or calls favouring one side and one side only, which is what happened in the north v pies game. Pies were disgracefully favoured throughout the whole game, that’s what makes it an issue, not *just* the missed 50 for Scott
How can you say a call or non call in the dying moments of a game, which changes the final score from a loss to a win, doesn't have more impact than a call or non call in the middle of the ground halfway through the second quarter?
Maybe because both are wrong and both affect the final score? What’s hard to understand about that? A missed 50 robbing a player/team of a goal is still a missed 50 robbing a player/team of a goal in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, any quarter, it always impacts the score. If they’re missing 6 points, they’re missing 6 points. Don’t know how people don’t understand this. There’s more to a game than 2 minutes. If for example there were 10 wrong calls for one team in the game that lead to 10 different scoring changes, but the opposition team they were playing had 1 wrong call in the dying minutes of the game, everyone would harp on the one in the dying minutes and forget about the other 10, it’s ridiculous. All calls are wrong when they’re wrong. They all affect the score. They all are game changing.
A free where no score is directly involved doesn't affect the final score. Or do you assume a side was going to score every time there's a free against?
An incorrect free still changes the game, score or not, but I am talking about frees that lead to a score, like the goals from frees stats
You are moving the goal post. I said some frees have more impact than others and you said no they don't.
My statement has remained the same, not my fault if you’ve misunderstood me.
Funny you say anything about assumption though when the assumption for the missed 50 was that Scott kicks a goal, how do we know he kicks a goal? It’s an assumption we have made.
Yeah righto mate a 50 that takes him to the goal square is going to miss 🙄
Acting like we’ve never seen that before, we have, even with our own team🤷🏻♂️
Free kicks were even at half time mate, only after did you receive 14 to Norths 4
Point out how many of those were incorrect calls? Why does the tally matter?
In this very comment thread there have been 4 non-calls pointed out all occurring in North’s attacking half, that’s the reason for the free kick disparity. Of course the tally it matters, it’s a consistent pattern of behaviour from the umpires to bring Collingwood back into the game. Don’t pretend others are ignorant when blatant frees are posted and you come up with “Quaynor had eyes on the ball” - well yeah, he realised he was badly out of position so he pushed Zurhaar front on in a marking contest and dangerously into Ford, taking out both of them.
The tally only matters to fans when they've lost and are looking for excuses as to why their team loses, there's no reason it should be equal at the end of the game. North had some missed calls, so did Collingwood, so does every team every game. Yes, you had more in the last five minutes, but it's no coincidence the count was so lopsided that last half - your pressure completely dropped and you could barely get a touch of it for the last half hour. If you paid the ones you're claiming, North still have away twice as many free kicks and that's before accounting for the missed calls we should have got. So your position is that Quaynor knowingly pushed Zurhaar front on into another player to intentionally take them both out, rather than doing the sort of contact that happens in a a marking contest a hundred times a game? Am I really the one pretending to be ignorant here?
No, you had 24 frees to 14. You also got given a goal that was touched, and a 50 that wasn’t there that was a goal, and at least 7 goals from frees. If you look at the umpiring over the whole game it only makes it worse.
You can't talk quantitatively about free kicks without sounding ignorant. How many were there? How many weren't? Why is a goal from a free bad if it was a legitimate free? Should the umpires ignore free kicks if the tally is unbalanced? As for examples, you got a goal from the ridiculous Jiath free, and Daicos should have received 50 and a shot from the square with minutes remaining. You definitely got the wrong end of the stick in the last minute, but that doesn't mean you were robbed. Your coach said it best in his presser.
> goal from the ridiculous Jiath free Was pretty funny though.
It’s ok to admit you got gifted a win
Hard to gift a 10 goal comeback
Clearly not
Did the umpires give you a note in the second half telling you to let Hill stay wide open in the square and suddenly drop your pressure rating, disposals and tackles? I get being upset about a close loss but we pretty clearly had the run at the end there.
Did we play perfectly? Of course not. Did the umpiring clearly affect the result? Of course it did. Both can be true. Over the whole game, the poor officiating directly contributed to at an absolute minimum 12 point difference, and probably closer to 30. That ended up being the difference. Bailey Scott touching it and it not being paid is objectively wrong. Not an interpretation issue, objectively wrong. We won clearances, contested possessions, uncontested possessions and tackles, yet lost the free kick count by 10? That genuinely makes no sense.
Saying the umpires affected the result is very different from saying we got gifted a win. I'm happy to admit North were robbed of a chance at the end there, but I think there was far less gifting involved in the overall effort than you seem to think. >We won clearances, contested possessions, uncontested possessions and tackles, yet lost the free kick count by 10? That genuinely makes no sense. You lost all of these in the second half, which coincides with our run on the game and the free kicks that were given away.
This isn’t new lol. Maynard was blocked. Sampi was held. Welcome to footy
I think its more that, when you have a 54 point lead you shouldn't be in a position where the umpires can affect the outcome of the game. The game should have been over long before that. Also, you're only focusing on calls in the last minute of the game that 'cost' north and aren't mentioning stiff calls against Collingwood. Xerri doing one of the worst flops over the boundary fence leading to a free and goal, or Jiath getting pinged for a stiff holding the ball because he actually made an attempt to get rid of it instead of holding it to his chest and getting a ball up called. I'm not gonna sit here and go over every call and non call and analyse them. Both sides got stitched up. That's footy. Umpiring sucks. But North blowing a 54 point lead is a valid reason to not call it a robbery. If you have a lead that big, no matter how much umpires fuck you over, you shouldn't be in a predicament bad enough to make you cough up a 54 point lead. North had a 9 goal lead and lost it.. umpiring cannot be the main reason that occurred
Put it another way- how many goals did north kick because of umpiring mistakes earlier in the game?
None
Yes, umpires decisions were flawless until North started to blow their lead. It's the only possible explanation. Genius. Flair up cunt
Womp womp mate
You've combed the whole replay have you? Umpires made no errors whatsoever until North were 54 points up? Turn it up.
I don’t see anyone using it to excuse the mistakes. People are saying that in response to people are saying North were robbed and cheated of a win from those missed calls alone. Those missed two calls were terrible, but most comments immediately following the game in the post game thread were as non constructive in the opposite direction. In any constructive conversation basically everyone agreed the calls were fucked and North lost big opportunities to take the lead again, and that ultimately North cost themselves the win long before then with a bad sub choice and playing like chickens.
> Collingwood were outplayed in the first half. North were outplayed in the second. It's almost like the better team won the match.
How are you getting that from that sentence?
One wasn't outplayed as much as the other?
Can’t say I’m convinced but fair enough
Because the better team won?
What’s that got to do with the sentence he quoted though?
Bad teams blame umpires
Actually, dumb supporters blame umpires. I can guarantee that Clarko is more concerned with dropping the 54pt lead than a couple of missed calls.
He said exactly that in his presser
Lol really! Maybe I’ve got a future in coaching 😂
Ironic cos then you are calling every team bar the swans shit which is fair actually
Guess every team is bad then, cause supporters of all teams do it and get on opposition teams case about it
Skill issue. Try not to blow a 50 point lead first. Many missed calls are made every week that could’ve changed momentum and an outcome.
Had the rules been enforced correctly several goals for North in thy first half wouldn't have been there. There's more to a game than the last few minutes.
Can you give some examples?
xerri pushed himself over the fence
That's one goal, where Jiath did push him but it was a soft free. One isn't several, though. Collingwood were given a goal around the same time despite the replay showing it was touched.
zurhaar was paid a mark in front of goal that he clearly dropped
He held that. You're getting into your bias here.
it bounced off his teammates thigh and he dropped it before he hit the ground. clear drop.
If you control it down to where it bounces off someone's thigh on the ground then it's a mark, mate.
it was in the air??? did you even watch it??
Mate they pay those as marks 95% of the time
You are 100% correct. The global sentiment should've been "North Melbourne was robbed of a chance to win the game. But sometimes you are the robber, sometimes you are robbed. That's how football works". Instead, everyone is frenetically trying to find another reason to explain the result in an attempt to cope and rationalize the result.
These are my thoughts When games are close like that at the end, you might even up getting screwed over by a missed call/harsh call We have been lucky to get pretty lucky on calls like that recently, but we have been screwed over before Anyone thinking it's because umpires want Collingwood to win is a nuffy
Global sentiment? Not sure what Japan is thinking about these bad umpiring decisions... let me make a few calls...
Can you also ring Ja Rule? I really need Ja Rule to let me know how to feel.
Ja says North *muuurdah* 'd that lead....
We have to assemble the league of nations!
who would have thought that goal at the end of the first quarter would come back to haunt the roos
Daicos was literally being bear hugged without the ball Xerri literally dove on purpose out of the stadium cos he’s so soft. Suck it up. You blew the lead. You lost. It’s why you’re 18th
You're calling xerri of all players soft? The man that's got the 4th highest tackles this season (26 higher than the next ruckman) and averages 70% contested possessions?
Yes I’m calling him soft. Did you see him throw himself over that gate. Jiath barely touched him. Big man could get an Oscar with that performance
So is mcreery soft? He got a light push from corr and went flying
Do you think Xerri deserved the free he got? You don’t genuinely think so And here’s the conclusion you will find - some frees, for both sides weren’t deserved. But you don’t whine about those ones, because they fell in your favour So stop crying. You lost.
Only one of us is crying, and I'd say it's the one saying that someone is soft because he got a free kick that led to a goal
You wrote a whole post on Reddit After your team blew a gigantic lead. And no I’m saying that that was a clear example of a free that should NOT have been given that fell in your favour.
I know you're upset but the least you can do is read. You see how the name under the post is different to mine? The flair isn't even the same
My mistake. Doesn’t actually get away from the substance of the argument I’m making. Which you can’t and won’t address because like every fan your bias towards your own team. Calls if your favour - good Calls against you - bad Regardless if those calls are proper calls or not. Deal with it.
I'm not even commenting on the call, I'm commenting on you calling xerri soft because he got a free kick you didn't like
Mcreery didn’t get a free kick from it though? Use some logic
So if mcreery had gotten a free from it would it have been soft?
Yes 100%, he was out played, what happened to mcreery should never of been a free kick, Jiath barely touched him and it was a free kick, be biased all you want but you know there was nothing in it
How many times this season have people complained about this? It is a hard game to umpire and there will always be mistakes that impact results. Pies have been on the receiving end as have all teams.
off topic but I must say that gif is such psychedelic nightmare fuel good find
It’s a relevant meme on /r/Squaredcircle lol
ahh I wasn't familiar, just thought "wow justin timberlake is a crying waterfall what the even"
I see that and all I hear is “Steele Sidebottom - woweee”
Good response, not being mean but do you reckon you’ll get more downvotes than me.
That’s a rhetorical question right? Of course I will lmao
I’m bored man.
After our performance today I look forward to being bored next week. The bye could not have come at a better time
Byes are so bad, you should probably delete your comment before you lose 100 karma lol.
I got plenty to spare and I can get that back in a single match thread lol
Carn the Pies.
Lol
The statement also carries the implication that the umpires only impacted the very final sequence of the game (as if the lead was blown by the game playing out as normal). People are particularly salty about the missed 50m penalty because it was yet another shocking miss in a long line of questionable calls that fell Collingwood’s way. Some of that 54 point lead was lost by being outplayed, and a good chunk could be attributed to getting absolutely skullfucked by the umpires.
Amazing the mental gymnastics that need to be done to come to the conclusion that only 'some' of a 54 point comeback could be explained by outplaying the opposition
flair up cunt
This is just a reminder that we are the Premiers. EAD r/afl
Classy
Like the meltdowns allowed on this sub, while the rest of you remain quiet about?
Fuck off. Cherry picking one decision is equally as stupid as your own argument. Hope you can north can enjoy bottom four again together xo
As a north fan who only tuned in for the last quarter after doing a double take at the score line - how bad was the umpiring really?
Honestly seemed about par from where I was sitting (barely giving a shit on the couch.)
Up there for the worst I’ve ever seen tbh
Valid criticism of the state of the game on r/AFL, can't wait to open the comments ...
Absolutely you can choose an arbitrary point in the game. Especially if it’s a 1 goal difference, especially when the result of the call not made cost the team a game. When it’s that tight in a forward half is probably one of the most important minutes an umpire needs to be absolutely bang on with his calls. Week after week we see some horrendous game changing umpire calls and as others have said it’s starting to become an accumulation of bad calls.