The worst display of umpiring i have ever witnessed. Constantly bad.......over four quarters!

Very very irritating...the boys did not deserve treatment like that

I was so appalled, I stopped watching in frustration, and went out to mow the lawn. While mowing the lawn, I formed a theory! It goes like this:

The AFL assign the most experienced umpires to the "premium" games between the "important" clubs.

It would hardly do for the free to air televised games, premium Friday night games and blockbusters that go to a large audience, having the spectacle ruined by disgraceful umpiring. So for games with lower coverage, less interest, or where the outcome is of less importance, the AFL assigns umpire with "learner plates" on, or, lower quality umpires.

So if you are Melbourne, a "low value" non "premium" club, you get the crap umpires. Can I prove it?

Well sort of. I went through all of the 2008 games, listed the umpires up to round 17, and the total number of games they have officiated in.

I then averaged out the number of umpiring games experience for each club over the season (Total number of games for all three umpires).

Dividing this value by the total number of games of umpiring experience for the whole league gives an "index" value.

What a surprise! Look who consistently gets the most experienced umpires. Look who gets, on average, the least experienced umpires.

Team Average Index

COLL 1.25

SYD 1.20

HAW 1.10

NMFC 1.07

WB 1.07

GEEL 1.06

STK 1.04

FRE 1.01

ADEL 1.00

PORT 0.97

ESS 0.96

WCE 0.96

RICH 0.90

CARL 0.87

BL 0.80

MELB 0.74

League 1.00

Just goes to prove that the umpires are not assigned at random, but are selected to suit the game and coverage. If free to air got a display like the one we had today, I am sure heads would roll.

This leads to some important questions:

Why aren't umpires assigned at random to ensure fairness for all involved?

What impact does this have on betting?

Why do "developing" clubs deserve lower quality or "developing" umpires?

Why do we have to put up with umpiring that cost us todays match!

This thread is so common every week. I hate the state of our rules. If it wasn't for the MFC I wouldn't follow this dog of a game.

I was so appalled, I stopped watching in frustration, and went out to mow the lawn. While mowing the lawn, I formed a theory! It goes like this:

The AFL assign the most experienced umpires to the "premium" games between the "important" clubs.

It would hardly do for the free to air televised games, premium Friday night games and blockbusters that go to a large audience, having the spectacle ruined by disgraceful umpiring. So for games with lower coverage, less interest, or where the outcome is of less importance, the AFL assigns umpire with "learner plates" on, or, lower quality umpires.

So if you are Melbourne, a "low value" non "premium" club, you get the crap umpires. Can I prove it?

Well sort of. I went through all of the 2008 games, listed the umpires up to round 17, and the total number of games they have officiated in.

I then averaged out the number of umpiring games experience for each club over the season (Total number of games for all three umpires).

Dividing this value by the total number of games of umpiring experience for the whole league gives an "index" value.

What a surprise! Look who consistently gets the most experienced umpires. Look who gets, on average, the least experienced umpires.

Team Average Index

COLL 1.25

SYD 1.20

HAW 1.10

NMFC 1.07

WB 1.07

GEEL 1.06

STK 1.04

FRE 1.01

ADEL 1.00

PORT 0.97

ESS 0.96

WCE 0.96

RICH 0.90

CARL 0.87

BL 0.80

MELB 0.74

League 1.00

Just goes to prove that the umpires are not assigned at random, but are selected to suit the game and coverage. If free to air got a display like the one we had today, I am sure heads would roll.

This leads to some important questions:

Why aren't umpires assigned at random to ensure fairness for all involved?

What impact does this have on betting?

Why do "developing" clubs deserve lower quality or "developing" umpires?

Why do we have to put up with umpiring that cost us todays match!

Craig is it still raining in perth, lots of free time :-)?

I don't think experience is going to help those three; they miss the obvious and that you cannot learn.

Although Melbourne did't adjust their game (or learn) to suit the way it was officiated, they kept on holding in the centre and giving away the frees.

I am glad at least one journo had the balls to point out the obvious.

Thank you Mark Hayes.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl...1-19742,00.html

"Demon fans were bemused by a stretch of hideous umpiring that played its part in stopping their team's second-term surge.

Morton was unbelievably pinged for incorrect disposal after clearly handballing deep in his attacking 50m, allowing Essendon to repel one threat.

But worse soon followed when Cameron Bruce marked 45m out with his Essendon opponent stumbling and hanging on to prevent him breaking away.

Not only did the umpire rule Bruce had played on because of his apparent desire to do so, he overlooked the hands around Bruce's ankles when he was forced to move the ball on. "

I was so appalled, I stopped watching in frustration, and went out to mow the lawn. While mowing the lawn, I formed a theory! It goes like this:

The AFL assign the most experienced umpires to the "premium" games between the "important" clubs.

It would hardly do for the free to air televised games, premium Friday night games and blockbusters that go to a large audience, having the spectacle ruined by disgraceful umpiring. So for games with lower coverage, less interest, or where the outcome is of less importance, the AFL assigns umpire with "learner plates" on, or, lower quality umpires.

So if you are Melbourne, a "low value" non "premium" club, you get the crap umpires. Can I prove it?

Well sort of. I went through all of the 2008 games, listed the umpires up to round 17, and the total number of games they have officiated in.

I then averaged out the number of umpiring games experience for each club over the season (Total number of games for all three umpires).

Dividing this value by the total number of games of umpiring experience for the whole league gives an "index" value.

What a surprise! Look who consistently gets the most experienced umpires. Look who gets, on average, the least experienced umpires.

Team Average Index

COLL 1.25

SYD 1.20

HAW 1.10

NMFC 1.07

WB 1.07

GEEL 1.06

STK 1.04

FRE 1.01

ADEL 1.00

PORT 0.97

ESS 0.96

WCE 0.96

RICH 0.90

CARL 0.87

BL 0.80

MELB 0.74

League 1.00

Just goes to prove that the umpires are not assigned at random, but are selected to suit the game and coverage. If free to air got a display like the one we had today, I am sure heads would roll.

This leads to some important questions:

Why aren't umpires assigned at random to ensure fairness for all involved?

What impact does this have on betting?

Why do "developing" clubs deserve lower quality or "developing" umpires?

Why do we have to put up with umpiring that cost us todays match!

Good work there, the things you discover while mowing the lawn B)

Craig is it still raining in perth, lots of free time :-)?

I don't think experience is going to help those three; they miss the obvious and that you cannot learn.

Although Melbourne did't adjust their game (or learn) to suit the way it was officiated, they kept on holding in the centre and giving away the frees.

Ash,

Not raining today, exams over so I have some "CPU" available to think about important stuff like football and lawns.

The umpires were Kennedy (426 games), Sully (34 games) and Fila (14 games).

With the exception of Kennedy, the other two lack experience, like any rookie the make errors in reading the game (Morton's choice of targets?).

I can handle decisions going against Melbourne in general play, but things like Bruce being tackled by the foot, Lloyd with Warnock in a head lock, Lloyd pushing players under the ball and Morton getting pinged for a throw when he clearly handballed make my blood boil.

The dipsarity in decisons between the two forward lines was clear yesterday, I waited for it to even out, but no such luck.

My personal opinion is that umpires improve with time. But getting two "rookie" umpires was clearly a blight on yesterdays game.

We waz robbed!

They stood too far away from the play. And were caught not looking at the play way too often

Exactly. There were 46,000 at the game today. 40,000 of which would have been Scum supporters. Our fans and even supporters are woeful. A weak, pathetic effort from the so called faithful of the MFC.

Stuff the umpires and their extremely poor form, the insipid performance today was from our supporters.

I have a 10 Home game season ticket and have decided to not go to any away games and have used my money i would have spent donating to the club $200 raffle rather support us that way than give to another club

I was so appalled, I stopped watching in frustration, and went out to mow the lawn. While mowing the lawn, I formed a theory! It goes like this:

The AFL assign the most experienced umpires to the "premium" games between the "important" clubs.

It would hardly do for the free to air televised games, premium Friday night games and blockbusters that go to a large audience, having the spectacle ruined by disgraceful umpiring. So for games with lower coverage, less interest, or where the outcome is of less importance, the AFL assigns umpire with "learner plates" on, or, lower quality umpires.

So if you are Melbourne, a "low value" non "premium" club, you get the crap umpires. Can I prove it?

Well sort of. I went through all of the 2008 games, listed the umpires up to round 17, and the total number of games they have officiated in.

I then averaged out the number of umpiring games experience for each club over the season (Total number of games for all three umpires).

Dividing this value by the total number of games of umpiring experience for the whole league gives an "index" value.

What a surprise! Look who consistently gets the most experienced umpires. Look who gets, on average, the least experienced umpires.

Team Average Index

COLL 1.25

SYD 1.20

HAW 1.10

NMFC 1.07

WB 1.07

GEEL 1.06

STK 1.04

FRE 1.01

ADEL 1.00

PORT 0.97

ESS 0.96

WCE 0.96

RICH 0.90

CARL 0.87

BL 0.80

MELB 0.74

League 1.00

Just goes to prove that the umpires are not assigned at random, but are selected to suit the game and coverage. If free to air got a display like the one we had today, I am sure heads would roll.

This leads to some important questions:

Why aren't umpires assigned at random to ensure fairness for all involved?

What impact does this have on betting?

Why do "developing" clubs deserve lower quality or "developing" umpires?

Why do we have to put up with umpiring that cost us todays match!

Interesting. Well done.

Can be added to other conspiracy theories.

Try this one on, Melbourne's only friday night game of the year is against the unbeatable team on the night of the Olympics Opening ceremony which is live on TV. How many will go to that game. Another financial nail for the Dees.

I am glad at least one journo had the balls to point out the obvious.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl...1-19742,00.html

Sometimes it's nice to know we aren't just one-eyed and overlooking the truth. The truth is yesterday we were murdered by the umpires, i won't speak to whether it affected the result, but certainly affected the game and my enjoyment of it.

And i'll reiterate what gOLLy said, if it wasn't for the Dees i probably wouldn't follow footy anymore.

But worse soon followed when Cameron Bruce marked 45m out with his Essendon opponent stumbling and hanging on to prevent him breaking away.

Not only did the umpire rule Bruce had played on because of his apparent desire to do so, he overlooked the hands around Bruce's ankles when he was forced to move the ball on. "

What is it with Cameron Bruce, umpires and Essendon?

I'm certain he was legged in the dying moments of last year's game at the Telstra Dome and the call was "play on" leading to a Scott Lucas goal in a game where we lost by a couple of points.

Or do the umpires support us and are really helping us get the first draft pick?

Weak decisions made by inexperienced umpires.

It's easier to make the decision, when a huge section of the crowd applauds you for doing so, or boos you when you don't. It would be intimidating, but a more experienced umpire wouldn't be sucked in.

Just goes to show the importance of crowd support. Not just to lift the moral of the players, but in getting our share of the decisions.

The tally:

30 : 18

Bombers have a habit of encroaching over the mark, they did it a lot on Saturday and got pinged twice. I saw it early on and it was annoying heck out of me. All these tiggy free kicks against us and they were getting away with this.

Maybe it's easier to see from the stands (I was right near the loudmouth Demons supporter who kept calling them silvertails and hated Daniel Bell, I'm sure others here heard him).

They are sneaky about it, they move sideways in an arc, cribbing half a metre or more. Bastards.

Sometimes it's nice to know we aren't just one-eyed and overlooking the truth. The truth is yesterday we were murdered by the umpires, i won't speak to whether it affected the result, but certainly affected the game and my enjoyment of it.

We aren't just one-eyed. The Bombers supporter sitting next to me (decent chap) commented on how unfair they were (to us) from early on, starting with one unpaid to not sure the (Demons) player as he was scragged off the ball running into our goal.

His overall comment was, the timing & positions of the frees unfairly favoured his team. Pretty decent observation of his. Likely helped by the fact they were usually ahead, but decent nevertheless.

With the Morton decision, I remember the fox commentary team said that the umpire was blindsighted and almost tried to defend him on this. If the umpire is blindsighted, how can he make a decision at all? I am much more accepting of an umpire missing a decision because they were blindsighted, but making a decision when they couldn't see exactly what was going on? That's just bull!

And the legging of Bruce at the end of last years game! No matter how you look at it, that cost us the game. And had we won, it wouldn't have hurt our draft picks. That was an absolute shocker.

The worst display of umpiring i have ever witnessed. Constantly bad.......over four quarters!

Very very irritating...the boys did not deserve treatment like that

With 10 mins to go, the frees were something like Ess 26 Melb 13. Before the Umpires MADE it look a bit more respectable at something like 28-18 in favour of the Bumbers (scum).

Fair enough free kicks have to be earned, and if they're there they must pay them if blatant. Bruce was shafted big time having not been payed the mark.

I think the AFL should look at rewarding umpires on performance, and have the umpires take pay-cuts for blatant mistakes. Because as the Ox says, its invariably those mistakes that costs games .

With 10 mins to go, the frees were something like Ess 26 Melb 13. Before the Umpires MADE it look a bit more respectable at something like 28-18 in favour of the Bumbers (scum).

Fair enough free kicks have to be earned, and if they're there they must pay them if blatant. Bruce was shafted big time having not been payed the mark.

I think the AFL should look at rewarding umpires on performance, and have the umpires take pay-cuts for blatant mistakes. Because as the Ox says, its invariably those mistakes that costs games .

Usually bad umpiring doesn't cost the game, just makes it less pleasurable going to the footy. When bad (unfair) umpiring does cost the game, little wonder you hear spectators saying "why bother going". I know how they feel.

Umpires have a bad enough job (except it's much easier if they simply keep out of the way, let technicalities go, stay in the background and just blow the whistle when it's obvious).

The occasional bad decision, mistake, whatever, is understandable. We are all human. Frustrating at the time, we get over it. When it starts in qtr 1 and is still going, consistently and favouring the same team for all 4 qtrs, then call it what it is. Unfair. Cheating.

Until umpires are accountable to more than the closed umpiring department, this will continue. They are above and beyond any genuine criticism. Maybe a system of performance pay would work like you say, but it should be open and accountable. If Scott McLaren got performance pay for the North Melb game, I would be ropeable. But he probably would because of his stature unless it was open to public scrutiny & critical appraisal.

I have seen performance pay develop into nepotism when there's no accountability.

Usually bad umpiring doesn't cost the game, just makes it less pleasurable going to the footy. When bad (unfair) umpiring does cost the game, little wonder you hear spectators saying "why bother going". I know how they feel.

Umpires have a bad enough job (except it's much easier if they simply keep out of the way, let technicalities go, stay in the background and just blow the whistle when it's obvious).

You can say that again. They should keep out of the way, and keep the talk back to players to an absolute minimum. When their miked up, there is nothing worse than the player on the mark and the umpire exchanging words. Whilst it gives the commentators and viewers perhaps an explanation. It infuriates me.

[quote name='twist'

"I sat in the 3rd level of the Southern Stand near the 50 metre mark. I swear it was 95% Essendon."

This is one of the many problems of the Melbourne Football Club. Having such a low following, our supporters are drowned out , even on our home ground(even when it's our home game!). Not only do our players have less inspiration from the spectators,but the umpires are influenced by the one-sided crowd. Hence it's harder to win games. Hence it's harder to attract a following. The downward spiral is self-perpetuating.

The MCG was nearly as inhospitable to us as AAMI stadium on Saturday.

But it's truly iniquitous that the umpires should play a part in this as they did on Saturday. Those ignorant morons should be sent to Bandywallop north next week.

I think the Bruce situation was laughable. It was either a 50m penalty or a free kick for legging. I would love to hear the umpires reasoning as to why he didn't pay a free kick.

In regards to the theory that the AFL assigns umpires based on the status of the clubs playing, I would assume that to be the truth, but Hayden Kennedy was umpiring in our game vs Essendon, and McLaren vs North Melbourne. Experienced umpries aren't necessarily the best umpires.

I think the Bruce situation was laughable. It was either a 50m penalty or a free kick for legging. I would love to hear the umpires reasoning as to why he didn't pay a free kick.

In regards to the theory that the AFL assigns umpires based on the status of the clubs playing, I would assume that to be the truth, but Hayden Kennedy was umpiring in our game vs Essendon, and McLaren vs North Melbourne. Experienced umpries aren't necessarily the best umpires.

Loved the reaction on the 9 footy show - utter disbelief by all and pondered the concerned umpires future in the game.

I have asked myself this question all season, "Why arn't the umpires held accountable for their decisions?"

footys changed a lot over the years but unfortunately one constant remains , sub standard umpiring.

if any of you want to kill them im more than happy to give you and alibi

It's obvious that the players weren't tanking well enough and a helping hand from the white rabbits was needed

It was a bloody disgraceful effort on the part of all of the umpires

Did any one else see Colin Garland being held near the ten metre as Mcphee snapped a very important goal,and how about Bate being tackled and flung to the ground on the forty when in proximity of the ball, or Wonna being held for the whole of the first quarter

It's not the ones the Bombers got but more the ones they missed for us

Also it's clear that Peverells cheque must have cleared at three quarter time

NEXT YEAR WILL BE GREAT

just you wait