SA Footy

i tonight went to norwood oval to watch norwood v sturt as a neutral supporter & i never had a bet on the match either, norwood were superb, sturt were very ordinary, however the 'performance' by umpire richard harvey was the worst umpiring i have ever seen, he gave away so many very very soft frees where players had hardly touched each other & also many 25 metre penalties that were ordinary infact in the forward pocket right in front of me cubillo gave away a soft free kick where he hardly touched rowe, cubillo shook his head but said nothing & it was a 25 metre penalty straight to the goal line & goal, during the 3rd quarter he seemed to be the only field umpire out there, & with these 25 metre penalties he used the wrong signal


i think with the lack of depth in umpiring at the moment we should revert back to a 2 umpire system as this bloke & a few others a clearly out of their depth & it ruins the spectacle of the game & these league footballers deserve better to show their talent as do the paying public that supports our great competition

Bayman, the reason Cubillo received a 25 metre penalty was because after the initial free kick, he decided it would be a good idea to elbow Rowe as well. I was sitting on the fence right where it occured. It was yet another undisciplined act by a surprisingly undisciplined Sturt team tonight. The initial free, as you said, may have been soft, but there was no doubt whatsoever about the 25 metre penalty.

i was sitting there as well, i didn't see the elbow but even so, don't you think this umpire was atrocious ?

I don't think that vilifying an individual umpire like this is very helpful.

I agree with Leigh Matthews "One of the great problems in our game and any sport is respect for officials....".

So far, we know that the 25 metre penalty that outraged you so much was for something you did not even know about. I suspect most of the other decisions are going to be proven correct when they view the replay, but I won't hold my breath waiting for you to acknowledge your mistakes.

jim5112 wrote:I don't think that vilifying an individual umpire like this is very helpful.

I agree with Leigh Matthews "One of the great problems in our game and any sport is respect for officials....".

So far, we know that the 25 metre penalty that outraged you so much was for something you did not even know about. I suspect most of the other decisions are going to be proven correct when they view the replay, but I won't hold my breath waiting for you to acknowledge your mistakes.

Why should the umpires be above criticism? They get paid decent money to perform. If they don't perform,they don't deserve any praise, and should be open to criticism-the players certainly are. Disrespect and criticism are not the SAME THING

bayman wrote:i was sitting there as well, i didn't see the elbow but even so, don't you think this umpire was atrocious ?

I tend to agree overall about the softness in awarding 25 metre penalties, it has been a bit of an issue with me for awhile now. Surely a player should be given a little bit of slack in the heat of battle, but the moment a player says anything at all it's 25 metres.

I can't agree about this umpire in particular, mainly because I don't look at individual umpires and wouldn't know him from the the others. I don't even know the names of the umpires on most occasions. I'm more worried about how Norwood plays than how three men in white umpire the game.

I think it's grossly unfair of Bayman to single out an umpire like that. They were all shite.

zipzap wrote:I think it's grossly unfair of Bayman to single out an umpire like that. They were all shite.

Unfortunately I'm with bayman - this guy was a hell of a lot worse than the other 2.

I think he thought it was all about him with some of his baffling decisions.

Thank god it didn't have an effect on the result.

bloods08 wrote:

zipzap wrote:I think it's grossly unfair of Bayman to single out an umpire like that. They were all shite.

Unfortunately I'm with bayman - this guy was a hell of a lot worse than the other 2.

I think he thought it was all about him with some of his baffling decisions.

Thank god it didn't have an effect on the result.

Agreed, it did not have an effect on the result, Norwood were quicker, stronger and first to the ball. But I fear he did have a rather large effect on the final margin. This of course affects percentage, which may be crucial later in the season.

I hope this bloke doesn't ever officiate in league again, at least until he goes through rehab. Umpires are not above criticism...this bloke was an absolute w@nker tonight.

purch wrote:

bloods08 wrote:

zipzap wrote:I think it's grossly unfair of Bayman to single out an umpire like that. They were all shite.

Unfortunately I'm with bayman - this guy was a hell of a lot worse than the other 2.

I think he thought it was all about him with some of his baffling decisions.

Thank god it didn't have an effect on the result.

Agreed, it did not have an effect on the result, Norwood were quicker, stronger and first to the ball. But I fear he did have a rather large effect on the final margin. This of course affects percentage, which may be crucial later in the season.

I hope this bloke doesn't ever officiate in league again, at least until he goes through rehab. Umpires are not above criticism...this bloke was an absolute w@nker tonight.

Norwood themselves also made the margin closer by wasting opportunities. Should have won by 100 tonight.

Just accept your team got right royally pantsed tonight. Umpires held no bearing on the result and the margin.

Umpier an absolute w@nker? How about the 21 blokes wearing double blue (and white)?

HeartBeatsTrue wrote:

purch wrote:

bloods08 wrote:

zipzap wrote:I think it's grossly unfair of Bayman to single out an umpire like that. They were all shite.

Unfortunately I'm with bayman - this guy was a hell of a lot worse than the other 2.

I think he thought it was all about him with some of his baffling decisions.

Thank god it didn't have an effect on the result.

Agreed, it did not have an effect on the result, Norwood were quicker, stronger and first to the ball. But I fear he did have a rather large effect on the final margin. This of course affects percentage, which may be crucial later in the season.

I hope this bloke doesn't ever officiate in league again, at least until he goes through rehab. Umpires are not above criticism...this bloke was an absolute w@nker tonight.

Norwood themselves also made the margin closer by wasting opportunities. Should have won by 100 tonight.

Just accept your team got right royally pantsed tonight. Umpires held no bearing on the result and the margin.

Umpier an absolute w@nker? How about the 21 blokes wearing double blue (and white)?

Look, you being a Norwood supporter, I really don't care to much for your (predictable) opinion on this topic. You should just enjoy a well deserved win and the rest of your weekend. I'm actually more interested in the opinions of neutral supporters that were at the game...in particular, what they thought about the umpiring in the first 15 mins of the 3rd quarter. For mine, it was the worst I've ever seen...and I've seen quite a bit of football.

Adelaide Hawk wrote: I'm more worried about how Norwood plays than how three men in white umpire the game.

A perspective that more footy supporters - across the spectrum - would do well to adopt.

purch wrote:

bloods08 wrote:

zipzap wrote:I think it's grossly unfair of Bayman to single out an umpire like that. They were all shite.

Unfortunately I'm with bayman - this guy was a hell of a lot worse than the other 2.

I think he thought it was all about him with some of his baffling decisions.

Thank god it didn't have an effect on the result.

Agreed, it did not have an effect on the result, Norwood were quicker, stronger and first to the ball. But I fear he did have a rather large effect on the final margin. This of course affects percentage, which may be crucial later in the season.

I hope this bloke doesn't ever officiate in league again, at least until he goes through rehab. Umpires are not above criticism...this bloke was an absolute w@nker tonight.

Terrible umpiring overall, Norwood had about 7 x 25m paid against them in the first half non really seemed there. We got a better run in the second half to make up for it and it probably did effect the margin. However the poor umpiring really cost us the South game so we have to take the good with the bad.

I think an area where bayman makes a good point is in directing the post to Shane Harris & The SANFL.
I think the standard of umpiring is terrible but I think the worst aspect is the way they're directed to umpire.
Without getting into the low level directions they receive its almost like the high level direction would be "go out and ruin the game as a spectacle, don't let it flow freely and for Christ sake make sure the spectators notice you, if you start to feel left out of the game make some ticky touchwood decisions and stupid 25 metre penalties, also make sure those 25 metre penalties range in distance between 10 metres and 40 metres to really frustrate players and fans. Remember most importantly troops, the spectators pay good money to see you, not the players".

Wedgie wrote:I think an area where bayman makes a good point is in directing the post to Shane Harris & The SANFL.
I think the standard of umpiring is terrible but I think the worst aspect is the way they're directed to umpire.
Without getting into the low level directions they receive its almost like the high level direction would be "go out and ruin the game as a spectacle, don't let it flow freely and for Christ sake make sure the spectators notice you, if you start to feel left out of the game make some ticky touchwood decisions and stupid 25 metre penalties, also make sure those 25 metre penalties range in distance between 10 metres and 40 metres to really frustrate players and fans. Remember most importantly troops, the spectators pay good money to see you, not the players".

I totally agree.

purch wrote:Look, you being a Norwood supporter, I really don't care to much for your (predictable) opinion on this topic. You should just enjoy a well deserved win and the rest of your weekend. I'm actually more interested in the opinions of neutral supporters that were at the game...in particular, what they thought about the umpiring in the first 15 mins of the 3rd quarter. For mine, it was the worst I've ever seen...and I've seen quite a bit of football.

I think we have a winner for the sour grapes award. Amazing you feel because he's a Norwood supporter, and not a neutral one, that his opinion doesn't matter, and yet you deem fit to express an opinion of your own. So, Norwood supporters can't comment but Sturt supporters can? Stop sooking and suck it up.

I'll offer an opinion ... the umpires perfromed better than Sturt did, perhaps focus a little more on that rather than blaming umpires for a 79 point loss.

bloods08 wrote:

zipzap wrote:I think it's grossly unfair of Bayman to single out an umpire like that. They were all shite.

Unfortunately I'm with bayman - this guy was a hell of a lot worse than the other 2.

I think he thought it was all about him with some of his baffling decisions.

Thank god it didn't have an effect on the result.

Sorry, there should have been a there

Hopefully umpire Deboy takes Richard Harvey under his wing and teaches him a thing or two.

This same umpire had a shocker a few weeks ago for the Central v Glenelg game.

As a country umpire, how do you people see the gap between country, ammos, sanfl and afl umpiring, and which style of umpiring do you prefer...?
Before you criticise, get out there and try it for yourself, that might be a bigger laugh than you think...