by The Sleeping Giant » Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:51 pm
by blueandwhite » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:02 pm
Go Legs wrote:Blue and White your are kidding right.
The umpiring was pathetic and Eagleton's 2 reports will be dropped before Monday. I suspect that the umpires board will make a
formal apology to the Norwood Football Club on Monday
The joke of an umpire who reported him twice should be reported and dismissed from any further games period.
I wouldn't trust that peanut with a juniors game.
Eagleton's second report was based on him standing still and the South player diving into his legs !!!! and deemed as a head
high contact, I kid you not.
He was a joke in the first quarter and even more so in the second, then the 2 reports, he had to be escorted off the ground at
half time and then ran the gauntlet of Bass seeking clarification of what he was on!!!
Good on Bass for not tolerating such acts of bastardry.
Suffice to say the other two umpires instructed him to stay at the other end of play and not use his whistle, funny watching him
run away from the play for fear of getting caught up in play.
We would have won this game by 20 goals had it not bean for free kicks given to South for even breathing on them in the first half.
by CENTURION » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:16 pm
by Adelaide Hawk » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:26 pm
blueandwhite wrote:I didnt see it
by Adelaide Hawk » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:29 pm
CENTURION wrote:Adelaide Hawk wrote:prowling panther wrote:If I was a Norwood supporter, I wouldn't be to bothered by the umpires, your first 3 goals came from free kicks, one of them was a definite, the other two were a bit on the dubious side.
Nowhere in my post did I say anything about who was favoured. My post said that the umpiring was bloody pathetic, and I meant it. You can read into it what you like.
Hey, AH, did pp say anyone was favoured? He just stated that your first 3 goals came from free kicks, chill out.
by dedja » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:33 pm
by Adelaide Hawk » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:34 pm
CENTURION wrote:This IS my thread, it's a public forum about The SANFL, of which I am passionate about. My opinion is just as valid and regarded as yours. Now I am going to have a bowl of Golden North Vanilla Ice Cream.............but I will be back.
by topsywaldron » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:54 pm
blueandwhite wrote:Ah you have to love Norwood supporters- they smash us by 12 goals and then have to whinge like poms about the umpiring. have a look at the stats and you'll find that Norwood kicked their first 3 goals from very dubious free kicks,sure you smashed by 12 goals and so you have to whinge- give us a break!!!!
As for Eagletons report, it will be even more laughable than the inept umpiring display we all witnessed today, if he gets off the first charge- a forearm to the head of a player who was looking the other way 40m off the ball....? ??? great to see him sent off anyway- I didnt see it but someone said he tripped over his fat wallet on the way to the bench.
by HOORAY PUNT » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:54 pm
CENTURION wrote:SDK wrote:When the two reports on Eagleton are thrown out how are we compensated for his being sent off ?
That piece of crap who reported him the second time should never be allowed to umpire again. To send off a player of that quality over many years is a disgrace and Nathan was obviously upset by his treatment.
We need to go back to two umpires because we can not find 27 field umpires of League quality each week and never ever will.
ALL umpires should have played the game for a minimum of 5 years before they are permitted to umpire at SANFL level. They have no idea of the spirit of the game and you can never have that unless you have played the game.
If we are short of umpires then just use one !!!!!!!!
I am sick to death of having my afternoon/night at the football ruined by gutless whimps.
COMPENSATED? Does ANYONE get compensated when a player is reported? That is a dumb question!! Who gives a frigging tinker's cuss about the "quality" of your player! What makes a player of 1 game any better than a player of 500 games, when it comes to being reprimanded? HE SHOULD KNOW BETTER!! 27 Umpires each week? 3 per game, 4 games, hmmmmm.......
by southee » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:58 pm
by blueandwhite » Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:21 am
topsywaldron wrote:blueandwhite wrote:Ah you have to love Norwood supporters- they smash us by 12 goals and then have to whinge like poms about the umpiring. have a look at the stats and you'll find that Norwood kicked their first 3 goals from very dubious free kicks,sure you smashed by 12 goals and so you have to whinge- give us a break!!!!
As for Eagletons report, it will be even more laughable than the inept umpiring display we all witnessed today, if he gets off the first charge- a forearm to the head of a player who was looking the other way 40m off the ball....? ??? great to see him sent off anyway- I didnt see it but someone said he tripped over his fat wallet on the way to the bench.
I don't go to the Footy to watch goals kicked from from free kicks, I saw way too many today. The umpiring was prissy, overly technical and blatantly wrong way too many times today. They ruined a perfectly average game of football. You on the other hand appear to be blaming them for the loss.
And if you, as a south supporter, are having a go at someone for being a mercenary then I'd suggest you let me introduce you to Mr Pot and Mr Kettle. You'd only try and recruit them though.
by am Bays » Sun Jun 19, 2011 9:13 am
by clanger » Sun Jun 19, 2011 9:24 am
by Go Legs » Sun Jun 19, 2011 9:28 am
blueandwhite wrote:Go Legs wrote:Blue and White As for Eagletons report, it will be even more laughable than the inept umpiring display we all witnessed today, if he gets off the first charge- a forearm to the head of a player who was looking the other way 40m off the ball....? ??? great to see him sent off anyway- I didnt see it but someone said he tripped over his fat wallet on the way to the bench.
by CENTURION » Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:14 am
Adelaide Hawk wrote:CENTURION wrote:Adelaide Hawk wrote:prowling panther wrote:If I was a Norwood supporter, I wouldn't be to bothered by the umpires, your first 3 goals came from free kicks, one of them was a definite, the other two were a bit on the dubious side.
Nowhere in my post did I say anything about who was favoured. My post said that the umpiring was bloody pathetic, and I meant it. You can read into it what you like.
Hey, AH, did pp say anyone was favoured? He just stated that your first 3 goals came from free kicks, chill out.
Why don't you STFU? Your comments are worthless. If I want to comment on poor umpiring I will. Don't tell me what I can post and what I can't.
by redandblack » Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:27 am
Adelaide Hawk wrote:CENTURION wrote:Adelaide Hawk wrote:prowling panther wrote:If I was a Norwood supporter, I wouldn't be to bothered by the umpires, your first 3 goals came from free kicks, one of them was a definite, the other two were a bit on the dubious side.
Nowhere in my post did I say anything about who was favoured. My post said that the umpiring was bloody pathetic, and I meant it. You can read into it what you like.
Hey, AH, did pp say anyone was favoured? He just stated that your first 3 goals came from free kicks, chill out.
Why don't you STFU? Your comments are worthless. If I want to comment on poor umpiring I will. Don't tell me what I can post and what I can't.
by JK » Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:35 am
by CENTURION » Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:48 am
by redandblack » Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:51 am
by CENTURION » Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:54 am
redandblack wrote:Pleased to hear it, mate. In that case, don't constantly talk about Centrals in other match threads, please.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |