Regarding the free kick given against Clisby for hand balling through for a Swans point after failing to kick out after play on called, I say the umpire got it wrong.

Rule 13 (2) b says a player who fails to kick the ball in after a point has been scored will lead to a ball up on the centre of the kick in line as a result of incorrect disposal.

Rule 15 (1) says a defender will be given the benefit of the doubt if rushing a point when under pressure.

Facts in this case.

The umpire called play on, the Swans player ran in and grabbed Clisby, who then handballed a point.

The field umpire asked the goal umpire did Clisby handball or kick the point. The goal umpire said he handballed it. The field umpire then showed he should have kicked it through by imitating a kick.

The field umpire then paid a free kick to the Swans for deliberate rushing of a point.

Clearly he accepted that Clisby was under pressure as he was being held and that if he kicked the point that would have been the end of it. However the mistake is that because he handballed it the umpire incorrectly ruled not incorrect disposal which is a ball up but deliberate rushed point.

Clearly wrong under the rules.

This wouldn't have changed the result but it just demonstrates that the umpires don't know the rules.

Given the way they umpired today they also have no idea of the holding the ball rule either.

Lets see if the AFL admit the mistake here.

"I can assure you we have reviewed the decision thoroughly and consulted widely. The umpire made the correct call... also the sky is green." - AFL spokesperson of the week

I think you are right 'Redleg', if the ball had not been brought back into play in the correct manner (by a kick) which it wasn't then it can't be deemed as a deliberate rushed behind, it wasn't in play. It had to be a ball up for incorrect disposal from a kick out.

...as for the holding the ball etc. I think it was Finey this morning who brought up the new interpretations of dragging the ball back in under the player on the ground. This is still happening and getting paid the wrong way continually, if a player pulls the ball back in under the player and trying to get a holding the ball decision it is actually against him.

I'm not sure there is a rule that specifically covers what happened with Clisby in the goal square.

However, I will question why such an inexperienced player was doing a kick in at that point in the game. The result clearly shows that we should have experienced players with good decision making and foot skills in that job.

So many mistakes today that cost us goals .

I am annoyed young Jack kicked 4 goals.

Sides should be making his life hell, why give these young kids a free ride.

Maybe the umps have been told to get tougher on deliberate rushed points? Those of you who watched last week's Sydney v Carlton game will recall the Blues kicked their only goal for the first half from a similarly dubious free paid against Sydney. Funny that - makes me wonder if the Swans heirarchy were leaning on the umps during the week.

I am annoyed young Jack kicked 4 goals.

Sides should be making his life hell, why give these young kids a free ride.

Including Brandon and Kieren there were a total of six Jacks out there today. A little oddity there for you...

I think you are right 'Redleg', if the ball had not been brought back into play in the correct manner (by a kick) which it wasn't then it can't be deemed as a deliberate rushed behind, it wasn't in play. It had to be a ball up for incorrect disposal from a kick out.

...as for the holding the ball etc. I think it was Finey this morning who brought up the new interpretations of dragging the ball back in under the player on the ground. This is still happening and getting paid the wrong way continually, if a player pulls the ball back in under the player and trying to get a holding the ball decision it is actually against him.

Funny you mention Finey, he is a mate and sat with us for the game. While a strong Saints man, his daughter is a Swannie.

Funny you mention Finey, he is a mate and sat with us for the game. While a strong Saints man, his daughter is a Swannie.

Never ring in but often send texts, he has a good understanding of the game and is always entertaining.

Maybe the umps have been told to get tougher on deliberate rushed points? Those of you who watched last week's Sydney v Carlton game will recall the Blues kicked their only goal for the first half from a similarly dubious free paid against Sydney. Funny that - makes me wonder if the Swans heirarchy were leaning on the umps during the week.

I have no problem with that, but it was a ball up for incorrect disposal first and that takes precedence. What comes next doesn't matter.

Never ring in but often send texts, he has a good understanding of the game and is always entertaining.

I ran a radio show on sport years ago and WJ was on the panel. Finey was a guest one night and he wouldn't stop swearing and I kept hitting the dump button which stops it going to air.

I said to him today that I was glad that he had learned not to swear on air and it got him laughing. He has a great general knowledge of sport.

I ran a radio show on sport years ago and WJ was on the panel. Finey was a guest one night and he wouldn't stop swearing and I kept hitting the dump button which stops it going to air.

I said to him today that I was glad that he had learned not to swear on air and it got him laughing. He has a great general knowledge of sport.

He's still pretty close to the edge at times but it makes for good listening. Thanks for the story 'Redleg', much appreciated.

As bad as today's umpiring was, I was there so I saw it first hand. The worst decision of the weekend has to be the deliberate out if bounds paid to hawthorn after a Geelong player(his name eludes me) kicked it 40+ metres whilst being bumped. The ball went past the MCC then bounced then rolled over the line. Bafoonery at its greatest.

So many mistakes today that cost us goals .

Yes but also some bad decisions, comments coming from Swan supporters ' we look and play like a footy side should' . We learn tomorrow from the review and move on. Was really impressed how we though out way through coming out of the back half.

As bad as today's umpiring was, I was there so I saw it first hand. The worst decision of the weekend has to be the deliberate out if bounds paid to hawthorn after a Geelong player(his name eludes me) kicked it 40+ metres whilst being bumped. The ball went past the MCC then bounced then rolled over the line. Bafoonery at its greatest.

I heard on the radio today that the interchange free kick against the Cats in the last quarter also shouldn't have been paid. There's been a few doozies in the last two weeks of footy, none more baffling than the two awarded to Sydney for rushed behinds today & last week.

As bad as today's umpiring was, I was there so I saw it first hand. The worst decision of the weekend has to be the deliberate out if bounds paid to hawthorn after a Geelong player(his name eludes me) kicked it 40+ metres whilst being bumped. The ball went past the MCC then bounced then rolled over the line. Bafoonery at its greatest.

Kelly.

Agree. Atrocious decision.

Some of the pay it once but not a second time amazed me today. Tackles that were virtually identical were treated differently, as were push in the back toe decisions.

Watts was pinged for holding the ball for boxing it while being tackled but he didn't. He bounced it and then was grabbed and should have been allowed to dispose of it subsequently.

Looks like the same conversation in worst umpiring ever thread

Part of the issue for the umps is that the "official" interpretations are often directly opposed to the rules as written. How can they then adjudicate the game properly when they know what the rules say to do but their boss says to do something different?

_{I hope this issue is raised in the media today, because I would like to hear the official AFL answer.}

Fitzpatrick's chase down and tackle that was paid against him for 'legging' in the first quarter set me right off. I respect they have the toughest job in football but they were shocking all day. Their dubious application of the sliding rule as well as hands in the back were mind bogglingly stupid!

The MFC should immediately demand the umpire involved is not appointed to umpire another of its game.

The umpires are paid enough to understand the correct rules and its not acceptable for the to show this level of supidity.

The AFL must supply umpires at AFL standards as football is now a business and not just a game.

Funny you mention Finey, he is a mate and sat with us for the game. While a strong Saints man, his daughter is a Swannie.

I find Finey insightful and absolute hilarious. Especially when he gives a caller/messager an absolute bath for being a general bellend.

What was his thoughts on the dee's game yesterday Legger?

Edited July 7, 201312 yr by The Song Formerly Known As

I find Finey insightful and absolute hilarious. Especially when he gives a caller/messager an absolute bath for being a general bellend.

What was his thoughts on the dee's game yesterday Legger?

Very similar to my own.

Our effort has improved markedly. Hopefully the absolute thrashings are a thing of the past. We are now competitive. We have found a few players, Terlich, Kent, Fitzy, Clisby etc, who were low key pick ups. Our forward line when all available and back line are ok. We are still very weak in the midfield. Players are clearly playing with more freedom. We are not as bad as we looked earlier in the season.