Oh umpire!

[... 11]

Having sat through the rubbish that was served up today by the maggots, I have come up with three ideas to set things right.

1> Umpires get to tell us which players are the best at Brownlow night, so why shouldn't the players get a chance to return fire? Imagine the match by match report:

"Round twelve ended with a fantastic clash between league majors, Collingwood, and minnows Melbourne, absolutely destroyed by umpires Larry, Moe and Curly, who have yet to come to terms with consistency and the dropping the ball rule." etc. Ratings would be high.

2> My other idea, and I would pay one or two large for this chance, is a raffle run by the Dees, where the winner gets five minutes after the game to give the umpires a MASSIVE SPRAY. The umpires aren't allowed to leave or answer back, and they're not allowed to dob on you to the AFL... they just have to take it.

3> Bring back "What's your decision" on the TV - probably needs to be the Footy Show. I would love to see these [censored] try to justify some of their decisions from today's game. Problem is, we'd run out of umpires too soon.

They were rubbish today. Apart from two incidents that come to mind, every ticky-touchwood free kick went against us. The maggots seem utterly at sea when it comes to the holding the ball rule, the push in the back, the prior opportunity, and... oh stuff it, I can't be bothered any more.

Get the raffle going.

[Guest Cougar Magic]

you are absolutely right. the umps cost us, at one stage during the last qrt the count was 15 - 7 in favour of them. Go figure

[big tuna 0]

Barry I thought you were going to give 3 serious suggestions and then not one of them was to burn them at the stake or a public stoning... shame

[... 11]

Barry I thought you were going to give 3 serious suggestions and then not one of them was to burn them at the stake or a public stoning... shame

Two more reds and I promise that result!

[Trisul 674]

Not to say the decision was wrong, but can someone explain the free to the pies in the first quarter, about 15-20 minutes in?, on our forward 50? Did the ump pay intentional?

[Gorgoroth 13,189]

I actually had to agree with Robert Walls today.

He said the holding the ball rule has to go.

And it's not the umpires but that is the way they are told to adjudicate the rule.

If they don't pay those they get told they are wrong.

The main problem with the rule is the punish the play maker! As soon as a tackler lies on the guy and holds it in it should be a ball up, but if a team mate jumps on to hold it in, then it should be holding the ball.

[Roost It 1,434]

Davey in the centre square?

Fraser drops it?

Cloke drops it?

O'Brien in the back on Miller?

Jamar when attempting to ruck and Jolly just stands there?

Staggering, just staggering!

[Guest mazza]

There is no such rule as "dropping the ball".

If a player is tackled with out prior opportunity and the ball spills/is dropped it is play on.

If a player is tackled with prior opportuinty and the ball spills it is holding the ball.

[Deestroy All 14,266]

I have 2 completely serious suggestions.

1 - Raise each club membership by 10 dollars. So 10 bucks from each membership goes into a kitty. Let's say that comes to about 5 and a half mil. The captains and coaches from each club vote on the best and worst umpires after each game. At the end of the season, the best performing umpire gets 4 MILLION DOLLARS. 2nd best gets 1 mil, 3rd best gets 500k.

Part 2 - Bring back public executions. I prefer the guillotine. The worst performing umpire gets beheaded the week after the grand final at the G. I know there aren't enough seats, but it's the best we can do. Maybe set up huge 3D screens outside the G and at bubble dome. Maybe catapult the head from the G into the bubble dome then into Rod Laver and so on...

I cannot see a flaw in this system. Umpires will strive for excellence, which means better games.

Even if the worst umpire is quite good, we'll still finally get to see one of them die.

Frankly I'm surprised this isn't already common practice.

[big tuna 0]

There is no such rule as "dropping the ball".

If a player is tackled with out prior opportunity and the ball spills/is dropped it is play on.

If a player is tackled with prior opportuinty and the ball spills it is holding the ball.

what about incorrect disposal? is that a rule or just a term that is used.

[Guest mazza]

what about incorrect disposal? is that a rule or just a term that is used.

It depends if the umpire thinks the ball was spilt as a result of the tackle, or the player was intending to dispose of it. Most of the time its as a result of the tackle, so its play on.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

bewildering

[monoccular 17,700]

I actually had to agree with Robert Walls today.

He said the holding the ball rule has to go.

And it's not the umpires but that is the way they are told to adjudicate the rule.

If they don't pay those they get told they are wrong.

The main problem with the rule is the punish the play maker! As soon as a tackler lies on the guy and holds it in it should be a ball up, but if a team mate jumps on to hold it in, then it should be holding the ball.

My beef with the interpretation is that it doesn't seem to matter if the tackle is correct or not, they just love to pay holding the ball.

Part of it is I think the frustrated Thespian in the maggots who love the "theatre" of the HTB arm actions.

Prior opportunity varies from week to week, day to day, minute to minute, and player to player NB Judd and Ablett are allowed to do a 360 whereas others grab the ball and are pinged instantly.

So, IF prior opportunity IS recognised, AND correct tackle is enforced than keep the rule - but current interpretation fails to protect and reward the player who does what the umpires do not have the courage to do, that is get in and under and get the ball. ANY incorrect tackle though must take priority over HTB, every time.

[heartbeatstrue 57]

I actually had to agree with Robert Walls today.

He said the holding the ball rule has to go.

And it's not the umpires but that is the way they are told to adjudicate the rule.

If they don't pay those they get told they are wrong.

The main problem with the rule is the punish the play maker! As soon as a tackler lies on the guy and holds it in it should be a ball up, but if a team mate jumps on to hold it in, then it should be holding the ball.

Today it wasn't the rule that was the problem, but the inconsistent way it was applied. And today, most of the inconsistencies cost us.

[Eth 4]

Nobody has a clear interpretation of the rule anymore.

[heartbeatstrue 57]

My beef with the interpretation is that it doesn't seem to matter if the tackle is correct or not, they just love to pay holding the ball.

Part of it is I think the frustrated Thespian in the maggots who love the "theatre" of the HTB arm actions.

I think you're right. So let's change all that.

From now on, any umpire awarding a HTB decision must do a jig on one leg, waving his arms while holding a fluttering handkerchief in Morris Dancer style. That should fix the Thespian instincts in them

[davey_magik 1]

I don't think umpiring cost us at all, but the consistency was awful.

Scully runs down Reid and play on, Melbourne player then is pinned under a pack and HOTB is paid.

Bizarre.

[george_on_the_outer 7,855]

The Umpiring fraternity are causing the problem because they are not implementing the RULES of the game...not interpreting incorrectly...incorrect application of the rules!!

15.2.2 Remaining in Possession and Bouncing the Football

(a) A Player may remain in possession of the football for

any length of time:

(i) unless the Player is Correctly Tackled by an

opponent; or

(ii) unless directed to dispose of the football by a

field Umpire; or

(iii) provided the Player complies with Law

15.2.2(B).

(B) Where a Player is moving whilst in possession of the

football, he or she must bounce or touch the football on

the ground at least once every 15 metres, irrespective

of whether such Player is running in a straight line or

otherwise. For the purposes of this Law, a Player shall

be deemed to be in possession of the football during the

period when the Player handballs the football to himself

or herself and regains possession without the football

touching the ground.

© A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a

Player if he or she is of the opinion that a Player

has contravened Law 15.2.2(B).

15.2.3 Holding the Football — Prior Opportunity/No

Prior Opportunity

Where the field Umpire is satisfied that a Player in possession

of the football:

(a) has had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the

field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player

if the Player does not Kick or Handball the football

immediately when he or she is Correctly Tackled; or

(B) has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the

field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if,

upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not Correctly

Dispose or attempt to Correctly Dispose of the football after

being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.

© Except in the instance of a poor bounce or throw, a Player

who takes possession of the football while contesting a

bounce or throw by a field Umpire or a boundary throw in,

shall be regarded as having had prior opportunity.

15.2.4 Application — Specific Instances where Play

shall Continue

For the avoidance of doubt, the field Umpire shall allow play to

continue when:

(a) a Player is bumped and the football falls from the

Player’s hands;

(B) a Player’s arm is knocked which causes the Player to

lose possession of the football;

© a Player’s arms are pinned to his or her side by an opponent

which causes the Player to drop the football, unless the

Player has had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of

the football, in which case Law 15.2.3 (a) shall apply;

(d) a Player, whilst in the act of Kicking or Handballing, is

swung off-balance and does not make contact with the

football by either foot or hand, unless the Player has had

a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of the football,

in which case Law 15.2.3 (a) shall apply; or

(e) a Player is pulled or swung by one arm which causes

the football to fall from the Player’s hands, unless the

Player has had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose

of the football, in which case Law 15.2.3 (a) shall apply

Simply with Prior opportunity ( and that argument can go on forever..) a player must dispose of the ball correctly when TACKLED according to 15.2.2.i.

The Umpires are incorrectly applying 15.2.4 (a) by allowing players who have HAD prior opportunity and have been TACKLED ( not bumped )to dispose of the ball incorrectly.

According to the RULES, if you have been tackled you must kick or handball the ball. If it spills free it is NOT correct disposal and a free kick should result. It is not happening today.

[sue 9,239]

My beef with the interpretation is that it doesn't seem to matter if the tackle is correct or not, they just love to pay holding the ball.

It is the AFL that is missing the plot. They have forgotten why diving on the ball and holding it in was 'banned'. They wanted to avoid ball-ups. Fair enough. But much of the time the holdup is caused by 5 guys jumping on both the tackler and the tackled player. They do this not to get the ball, but to confuse the umpire. This also creates ever increasing packs till finally a dubious free kick is the only way to get the game going.

Dunno if this would work, but:

Why not also penalize players who tackle the tackler, or dive on top of the general pile of players? After all the tackler rarely also possesses the ball so it should be holding the man (and if 2 people really do have the ball, then it should be a ball-up). If the 'stacks on the mill' approach was penalized then I bet the ball would be able to come out more, or it would be more obvious if the player with the ball has made a genuine attempt to get the ball out. Admittedly there would be disputed decisions about who jumped on whom, but at least the player getting the ball wouldn't be the only mug on the ground.

Also the current definition of 'genuine attempt' seems to require Academy Award acting skills in impossible situations. I'm amazed players don't use the opportunity to 'accidentally' punch an opponent rather than the ball since there is often no way the ball is going to move.

[NC MFC 0]

It destroys me the most when they give holding the ball when they think a player has pulled it in, even though they are about 40 meters away and were in now way able to correctly give that call. It's not under 12s, get right up in there

[Demon Disciple 12,494]

It destroys me the most when they give holding the ball when they think a player has pulled it in, even though they are about 40 meters away and were in now way able to correctly give that call. It's not under 12s, get right up in there

Too right!!! Countless times today and many a time in all other games, umpires are making a call 30 metres away (and more often than not) on the wrong side of the pack. What is really starting to frustrate me, is the amount of time an umpire is willing to wait before he calls a ball up. It ain't coming out, but they still wave their arms like morons. The problem with all umpires these days, is that they want to be part of the game. They are not there to put on a show, just to adjudicate it. A good umpire is one that isn't recognised during the game.

[DeeSpencer 26,510]

Two decisions today that completely baffle me and both should have led to Melbourne scoring

1. Non holding the ball against Reid. Did the ball brush his foot or something because seriously he had a tonne of prior opportunity

2. Front on contact (to either Watts or Miller not sure) not payed against Harry O. Has been paid 100 times this year but not on this occasion. These 2 left me completely bewildered.

Sadly every other decision was within the umpires normal range of error I believe.

Also grow some balls the ump that didn't pay deliberate against Shaw when Dunn chased him. He kicked it straight to the boundary and 40m from a team mate. They paid one against Heath Scotland last week that was exactly the same.

[Harrisonrules 273]

Lets assume there are roughly 200 infringements per game. If you want to argue 100, go for it. It's a complex game and I've got better things to do in life than count free kicks. To cope they simplify the rules, eg hand in the back but let you push with the forearm in the back. Hence many are incidental to what is happening. They end up picking 30 to 40 for the game because their might be this number of simple infringements. They let the rest go because it ventures into the far to complex to pick 50/50 frees or even 30/70 frees. The crowd helps turn the complex into supposedly simple rules. The crowd simply wants this one so they give it ( and they do have to get out of the ground.)(alive). Consistency is impossible with three umpires and a philosophy of 'keep it simple stupid'

My best example was the dismissed goal of Brad Greens against the doggies. Goal umpire gets ready to signal goal. Central umpire thinks doggie hand touches ball. Conference takes place. Central umpire simplifies decision. I saw it touch his hand,"touched one point" The real happening was actually complex. The ball touches the doggie hand then onto the boot of Brad Green which is behind the doggie hand. The goal umpire saw this as the foot was behind the hand and clearly visible to him. He makes his point but in the complex situation is overrules by the central umpire who can't revert to a complex situation and insists on a point.

A second example. Before the bounce of the Carlton game. Blues come out to intimidate young demons ( as Carlton player says after game on the radio) The demons probably considering it. Push and shove punch and pinch fights start around the game. A very complex situation develops. One umpire pulls the trigger before the other two have lost their nerve and the blues get thesimple free.

We all go home dumbfounded.

Giesh and his self righteous boys review the footage and happily nod their heads then go home smiling at how well they are doing. All is forgotten as the week passes and we repeat the fiasco next weekend. Thank goodness we've got a bye this weekend. Relief from those simpletons.

[Trisul 674]

The Umpiring fraternity are causing the problem because they are not implementing the RULES of the game...not interpreting incorrectly...incorrect application of the rules!!

...

Simply with Prior opportunity ( and that argument can go on forever..) a player must dispose of the ball correctly when TACKLED according to 15.2.2.i.

The Umpires are incorrectly applying 15.2.4 (a) by allowing players who have HAD prior opportunity and have been TACKLED ( not bumped )to dispose of the ball incorrectly.

According to the RULES, if you have been tackled you must kick or handball the ball. If it spills free it is NOT correct disposal and a free kick should result. It is not happening today.

Well put g_o_t_o.

[45HG 1,559]

Blame the AFL not the umpires...incosistent as they may be and apologies for all those sitting near the MCC race.