I'm spewin all over again - 3/5 key reviewed decisions all wrong

I'm spewin all over again - 3/5 key reviewed decisions all wrong

What make me spew is they pay these ridiculous not making an attempt to dispose of the ball decisions when you are besieged by 10 - 100 kg opponents and couldn't get the ball out with TNT - yet they don't reward obvious good tackles. to say Murphy didnt have prior opportunity - pleaseeee

( I do note that they didnt pay the not making an attempt to get the ball out at our game but did pay some howlers at other games. I think the umpires should go to our club training - have the ball put under them and have Pederson, Jamar, TommyMac and Dawes lie on top of them and see how successful they are at getting the ball out)

They need to take the rules back to the basics and find consistency again.

I think they should let the game be played and only pay free kicks where really necessary - that way players might stop staging free kicks and you get a free flowing game.

Leave goal reviews for the finals.

Interestingly I thought I would see where we rank in free kicks awarded and we are 6th - more surprisingly Collingwood have had the least free kicks

http://www.afl.com.au/stats

Edited July 2, 201411 yr by Young Dee

What make me spew is they pay these ridiculous not making an attempt to dispose of the ball decisions when you are besieged by 10 - 100 kg opponents and couldn't get the ball out with TNT - yet they don't reward obvious good tackles. to say Murphy didnt have prior opportunity - pleaseeee

( I do note that they didnt pay the not making an attempt to get the ball out at our game but did pay some howlers at other games. I think the umpires should go to our club training - have the ball put under them and have Pederson, Jamar, TommyMac and Dawes lie on top of them and see how successful they are at getting the ball out)

I can't stand when they do that - they need to drop that rule and start paying the frees where they actually have prior opportunity.

I think they also overdo the 'pulling the ball in' rule I understand paying those in the late stages of a close game but really they are just discouraging the players from going in and getting the footy.

Last time we played Dogs we also copped a few shockers in the last few minutes which turned the game. Dogs always seem to get dodgy goals against us, it has happened often.

I say we should live with it. For every mistake made by the umpires, our own players committed half a dozen. If we can reduce or eliminate our mistakes we'll soon start winning - and winning well against similar quality opposition.

I'm spewin all over again - 3/5 key reviewed decisions all wrong

and for most of the dullards on here, it is the difference between 'this is a resurgence" and "we won't win another game for the year, hopeless list etc"

I say we should live with it. For every mistake made by the umpires, our own players committed half a dozen. If we can reduce or eliminate our mistakes we'll soon start winning - and winning well against similar quality opposition.

I agree to an extent.

I have said that watching footy for over 40 years I don't think I can remember a game where an umpire cost us a game. What I can say is I am seeing way too many games where umpires are costing me the enjoyment of the game.

What I don't understand is why haven't the AFL done anything about these decisions. It has been going on for a few seasons and every supporter I know hates that holding the ball rule where everyone jumps on them. They need to listen to the supporters who actually keep this sport alive.

What I don't understand is why haven't the AFL done anything about these decisions. It has been going on for a few seasons and every supporter I know hates that holding the ball rule where everyone jumps on them. They need to listen to the supporters who actually keep this sport alive.

One of these days the poor bugger under the pack, we all know, the one who has shown the guts to go in and get the ball, is found to be unconscious once the pile of vultures on him is cleared. Will the bloody maggot he embarrassed then??

Applying the rule in the manner it is now only encourages packs, scrimmages and mauls - the very thing it is (supposedly) designed to prevent.

Edited July 2, 201411 yr by monoccular

I'm spewin all over again - 3/5 key reviewed decisions all wrong

good pick up DC....the mongrels !!!

I say we should live with it. For every mistake made by the umpires, our own players committed half a dozen. If we can reduce or eliminate our mistakes we'll soon start winning - and winning well against similar quality opposition.

yes and no. These decisions were at crucial moments of the game. Quite easily have gone the other way for us

You simply have to move on but you have to wonder.

Red, was that dodgy or doggy goals ?

Should go back to the basic of protecting the player

particularly

the players back and head

players on the ground where an opponent sits/falls is pushed onto hi sback the player on the grpound gets the kick

the player who is tackled around the head front on side on doesnt matter gets a free kick.

How many times have we seen players getting up with blood on their head or had to have strapping around their head where there has been no free kick. How does that happen??

Also players rarely fall flat on their faces for no reason the player behind them usually has pushed them. Perhaps a jumper with heat pad recognition could record the in the back which has caused a potential injury.

These players are so skilled that even at the speed they play they usually are in control and know when there is an infringement especially one that may cause an injury.

We've historically been slaughtered against the Bulldogs. We must have walked under their black cat, because the breaks and the umpiring is invariably in their favour. We've been o the wrong end of many howlers.

It's a difficult game to umpire, so let's not be too tough on the individuals concerned.

However, the makers of the rules need a good hard look at themselves. They've made it too tough for the umpires leaving too many decisions to be "subject to interpretation" rather than clear cut. In addition, it appears that the umpires appear to have been given some sort of responsibility to make the game more attractive. That's not their job (nor is it the job of the coaches or the players).

In my view, the solution starts with a wholesale review of the rules of the game to eliminate inconsistencies and, wherever possible, eliminate subjective assessments. Other rules need to be clearer. For example, why have a rule about "incorrect disposal" which includes, in effect, an exception if the ball is knocked free in a tackle? Just make it a free kick if the player has had a prior opportunity and is tackled and the ball is not disposed of properly...irrespective of whether the ball is knocked out of the player's arms or not.

I watched a 1992 Fitz vs Coll game on a long haul flight recently. What struck me (apart from how much Bruce McAveney sounded like a 11 yr old girl and Roos' mullet looked ace) was how few howlers the umps made and how quickly they did ball ups once the player was tackled and it was deemed 'no prior'. Rolling mauls were not happening. These days the ump waits for 3-5 seconds while the pack increases in size before pulling a decision out of their rrrse. The game was still quick, skills not so good, but very entertaining and definitely more open. While I understand this is often dictated by coaches and team plays, but I also strongly think that the umps can make it easier on themselves by not lingering upon a decision until the point where they cannot see WTF is happening in a pack of 5-8 players.

And clearly the umps are not taking advantage of their OPSM sponsorship.

.... For example, why have a rule about "incorrect disposal" which includes, in effect, an exception if the ball is knocked free in a tackle? Just make it a free kick if the player has had a prior opportunity and is tackled and the ball is not disposed of properly...irrespective of whether the ball is knocked out of the player's arms or not.

but that is the rule now where prior opportunity exists

it was even stated on the video

of course prior opportunity is still somewhat ill-defined especially when they introduce the conditioner "reasonable"

It's a pattern though - going back years against the 'Dogs. They do well against us.

One time the Umpires even disguised themselves as Demons by wearing a pink tops for the breast cancer game (at night!) and it turned in the last six minutes after Clint Bartram turned it over by handballing to an umpire.

Go back further and an umpire retired after gifting them the game with a clearly wrong free against Jim Stynes which resulted in the match winning goal to these canines.

Go back further and an umpire retired after gifting them the game with a clearly wrong free against Jim Stynes which resulted in the match winning goal to these canines.

1997. I still rate that night as the worst umpiring performance (and decision) I've ever seen. Pretty sure the maggot in question was never seen at AFL level again.

It's a pattern though - going back years against the 'Dogs. They do well against us.

One time the Umpires even disguised themselves as Demons by wearing a pink tops for the breast cancer game (at night!) and it turned in the last six minutes after Clint Bartram turned it over by handballing to an umpire.

Go back further and an umpire retired after gifting them the game with a clearly wrong free against Jim Stynes which resulted in the match winning goal to these canines.

1997. I still rate that night as the worst umpiring performance (and decision) I've ever seen. Pretty sure the maggot in question was never seen at AFL level again.

Let it go, people.

yes and no. These decisions were at crucial moments of the game. Quite easily have gone the other way for us

You simply have to move on but you have to wonder.

Red, was that dodgy or doggy goals ?

Both, dodgy doggy goals.

And clearly the umps are not taking advantage of their OPSM sponsorship.

Even the world's best optometrist can only help with eyesight: "vision" obviously involves far more than eyesight. It is a higher cerebral function, an entity missing, or maybe removed from AFL umpires during their induction.

1997. I still rate that night as the worst umpiring performance (and decision) I've ever seen. Pretty sure the maggot in question was never seen at AFL level again.

Metamorphosed into a big annoying blowfly perhaps?

1997. I still rate that night as the worst umpiring performance (and decision) I've ever seen. Pretty sure the maggot in question was never seen at AFL level again.

Yes...that free went to Darcy, who kicked the winning goal.

It turned out that the ump who gave the decision had been in a car accident the year before, was unconscious for weeks in ICU, and had to be taught to walk and talk again when he came to!

He was adjudged fit to umpire the next year!( not abad effort)!

Unfortunately, I think you're right that it was his last game.

I think we got some revenge on the Bullies in about 2004, in the last round, when Jeff White got a dubious free on the 50m line and duly kicked the winner(round 22, and significant in our final eight position)

I'll never forget a game v. the Scrays at Princes Park in the 90's, when the frees were something like 18 to 1 against us during the second quarter. I was near the fence and tried to inform the ump of the unbelievable imbalance.........but he wasn't interested! (Though I'm sure he heard me!) the situation didn't improve!

I'm of the opinion that the shocking 1st half where we barely raised a whimper lost us the game; not the umps. still hate'm though