Déjà vu all over again for the Fremantle Dockers

You don't seem to realise that you're arguing a point, and apparently taking me to task, for something I never said. You'd be great in politics, just ignore what everyone else is saying and have your rant. Dockers are a better contested possession and clearance team, they won more of both of those stats on the weekend - I'm not sure how you could argue that since the it's there in black and white. This whole behind at 3 qtr time business makes me think, that you think Sydney won the stats in 3 qtr.'s and freo won them in the last, which is not correct either. Sydney won the first qtr, Freo won the last 3.

It simply goes to show how little impact differential had on the day. That's what I took you to task on and I certainly am not apologising for it. The mere fact they were so far behind in that stat and ended up finishing 3 and 2 in front respectively, and were further behind on the scoreboard than at half time, shows even more the insignificance of your stat.

Yeah you still missed the point, I was saying that everyone was assuming Sydney were the better contested and clearance team - they lost those statistics to the Dockers, who are actually the best in those categories. That was my point and that point was played out on the weekend. After half time, the Dockers smashed Sydney in those stats and obviously came out on top in the end. So the Dockers were better. I hope you understand how that works - the team who registers more is better, yeah? So your apology is accepted. I understand, you wanted to take someone to task, you were wrong and now you feel the fool. I understand.

No actually I am not trying to prove my superiority. What you actually said was that contested possession and clearance differential was in brackets (the real indicator on where a team sits). I took you to task on it because regardless of where they sit, the Swans led them on it until the 3rd term at which point, Freo were well beaten and finally turned it on in the last quarter. I took you to task on it because even though they led it at the end of the game, it had very little impact on the result. I did offer some analysis in the lead up. I held myself accountable for the fact that I doubted Freo's back line would hold up. It's there in black and white if you want to go back and read it. I also said that although they may contain one or the other of the big forwards, someone else from the forward line would jump up and kick a score. It happened.mi also said defence wins premierships, and given Walters and Ballantyne were held to one goal, and Freo could only manage 69 points, I wasn't far wrong. I also said it the midfields would be even but Sandilands would dominant the hit outs. Pav's goal was good, albeit a little closer into to goal.

There has been a few studies on this (I am currently completing a research report on umpire bias) and it is something that away teams have to deal with, unless they're Victorian. In my opinion from reading a lot of the research, it seems that the best way to combat the bias, is to A) have full time professional umpires - hopefully the increased training and analysis will help increase the accuracy thereby decreasing bias and B) get more umpires from outside Victoria, 80% of umpires are Victorian. Good luck convincing the Victorian based on AFL HQ of either of these points though as they're not surprisingly all fans of Victorian based sides.

You have got to be kidding me. Are you honestly trying to prove your superiority as a footy critic by comparing a persons pre-game opinions to your post game opinions? Ever heard apples with apples? Geez, you think you're a great judge how about you try to analysis before the game. And how about I take you to task, my point on contested possessions was not that this would win the game alone, if you had read it correctly it was that the contested possession and clearance statistcis people were using weren't an accurate reflection of either sides ability in these areas - AND I WAS CORRECT WITH FREMANTLE WINNING BOTH THESE AREAS! Was I not? Geez, talk about taking the easy route. And for the record, Pav snapped a goal under pressure from a tight angle on the run on his NON-PREFERRED FOOT, rather than Buddy who kicked on his preferred foot under no pressure, from his favoured pocket. Apples with oranges champ.

I tried hard to find some excuses for loss but could only come up with,We were beaten fair and square. Ive been a bit sad and even sledging my team saying"the old Freo used to get us excited by playing great during a game and lift our hopes only to find a way to lose at the end.The new Freo got bored of this and starts playing well all season to give us hopes of a flag and then.....". Its hard being purple But after all these years Ive learned purple positivity and here we go. Last year the dockers choked on the big stage and that was it,season over. I bet they would have loved the chance to play again the next week. Also even though history suggests otherwise i wonder about the week off,2 weeks without playing and all of a sudden your in a huge final.I know watching Fyfe after 2 weeks off yes he may have been fresher but his skills were not as good as usual. Yeh thats it thats all ive got. Cmon Freo!

Well, maybe you should put aside your righteous outrage and read what I actually said... Game won and lost in the midfield in the first half. True - I think it's blindingly obvious I am saying the Swans midfield won the battle in the first half. Swans broke the game open in the third and the 4th. True. Swans received about 10 free kicks in a row in the 3rd. True - they even put it up on the big screen at the game! Our forward line did not fire. True. But no, you did not deserve each and every one of the free kicks your team got and yes that was frustrating. God Swans fans on this site are hard work!

Don't feed him Balt . . .

This is the most outrageous rubbish I have ever read!!!! Your anywhere anytime team that doesn't make excuses just lost to my Swannies at ANZ in Sydney and you have the nerve to say it was because of the umpires?!?!? Go and have a can of concrete. Maybe go and figure out why your hero forward line that you bang on about all the time only kicked 5 goals and then come back to us with something real! McGlynn, Buddy, Goodes, Tippett. 8 goals. Umpires helped the swans.....puke. Undisciplined play cost Freo each and every one of those free kicks!! GO SWANNIES!!!'

Having played and coached enough footy in my lifetime Balt, I have that ability to watch both teams. Generally I watch the good games half a dozen times, I like to just focus on particular players from both sides, the most recent viewing, I focused on Pearce, Crowley and Fyfe because I was intrigued as to how a player of Pearces ability could just go missing and be subbed out; how Hannebery could get 27 with Crowley playing on him; and how Fyfe could get 29 but seemingly have had very little impact on the game. So I went back to watch it and found a few things which I can go into detail with you if you want. In doing so, watching the game from the other teams perspective means you see all the missed free kicks, of which there were some as I have already highlighted a billion times. But there were just as many the other way. In analysing the 12 free kicks for Freo, they were all there. In analysing Sydney's 20, they were all there, none of them dubious. I don't want you to agree with me. But don't make excuses, particularly don't blame the umpire. He pays what he sees, we have TV to help us.

Oh dear. He wasn't playing on him when it mattered. I thought you watched the game 4 times? Blame Duffield if you like for the 2 goals in the fourth. Silva didn't follow him up into the midfield, he never does. That's why Buddy was sent there. The one goal scored directly against Silva was from a dubious free kick.

yeah holding the ball on Fyfe. No chance to dispose of it. And of course I review the ones that were paid because as several people on this site, including non-Freo fans, have pointed out soft frees were paid but only in one direction. Watching the game 4 times with one eye closed won't change things. I was at the game - even the Swans fan I'd never met before who was sitting next to me agreed that the Swans had the best of the umpiring especially in the third. I've watched it once since. I still don't agree with you.

I'm in a fantastic mood actually. As I said above, Silvangi did an ok job on Buddy. Actually that tackle near the boundary line in the last quarter was sensational. But he couldn't hold him when it mattered. No one is sledging anyone, just pointing out that some blokes went missing when they were needed by their team mates. Ballantyne, Tabener, Pearce notably. I've got a good sense of humour Balt, I just defend myself and my team when I feel I need to.

Having had this discussion to its death with Moose for everyone of those intricate free kicks that you have picked up, I can give you hole heap as well. I've watched the win 4 times now, and there were plenty of free kicks that the beauty of TV showed us. Both ways. When you also start reviewing all the ones that were paid, that's when you start getting really desparate. Holding the ball on Fyfe? Really?

Peter I sad it therefore I thought it? When I retracted it saying specifically at the time that I was joking? Man, you are humourless at times. You should be in a good mood, your team won. Why not celebrate rather than sledge Freo players? And yep Buddy was well-held by Silvagni for most of the game. Pretty clearly why they had to move him out of the forward line.

Peter, as everyone knows it is not always the ones that are paid but the ones that are missed. If the umpires pay the 50/50 ones - and personally no I don't think Buddy's arms were chopped, in finals matches that is considered a good spoil - then it's fair they go both ways. On Saturday that didn't happen. The first HTB against Fyfe was ridiculous given that his arms were pinned. There were about 3 HTBs that were not paid against Buddy. Neale nearly has his head ripped off by a high tackle in the middle? Nothing for him. Pav was getting molested by Richards , yep nothing, and there were a number of occasions where there was clear illegal shepherding by Swans players in our front half and in the middle that didn't get paid. Hill was held at just about every bounce. I am not expecting you to agree and don't really care but it was home town umpiring, especially in the third, that helped the Swans. Your team may well have won anyway but it sure helped.

Not confused by the free kick count peter, that was 20-12. Like you, I watched the game and saw what was and wasn't paid, and to who. Just confused by the inconsistent flow of your reasoning.

Wow. You just went down the free kick path. Amazing. Buddy, Silvagni chopped the arm, over the shoulder, free kick was there. Parker, Sandilands held him without it (after Pyke beat him in a contest mind you), free kick was there. McGlynn, high, ump paid it as he saw it. Jack, legged (free could have gone to Goodes for over the shoulder), free kick was there. Hannebery, legged by Silvagni, free kick was there. He missed. Out of bounds on the full by Silvagni, Goodes missed. Freo's first goal came from Rohan running to far, free kick was there. Freo's next goal comes from a Rohan clanger that gifts Freo the ball and Pav's first. Ballantyne is awarded a free inside 50m for high, in the back, but missed. Unlucky I guess, could have been a goal. Kennedy gifts Freo their next goal after kicking it straight into Ballantyne, Mzungu mops up, goal. Sandilands, held by Pyke, free kick was there. he missed. Turn it up. Balthazar.

Whether or not you retracted it, you still said it, which means you thought it. Where were Sandilands and Clarke when he was dashing towards goal? I'm only making these points because you guys so freely talk up all your players like they are gods but when it came to the crunch, they didn't do all the things you guys said they would. Call it gloating, because we do have to put up with a fair amount of it and last weeks lead in was a prime example. You've just done it again. Pav better than Buddy across the whole game? Buddy 18 disposals, 7 marks, 3 tackles, 3.3 to. Pavlich 19, 3, 0, 4.0. I'd say that's either pretty even or slightly in Buddy's favour considering the set up Jetta's goal that he created from a mark on the half back flank, and his two goals put the Swans well up. So yeah nah.