I no longer understand these concepts. I thought I had a pretty good grasp on them, but clearly I'm wrong.

Can someone explain it to me like I'm a 4 year old?

You'd be better off asking an Umpire, better still ask a number of Umpires. Nothing like a bit of variety!

 

Ask a magician.

What the get tackled, drop the ball, ball hits ground, throw a boot at and connect is play on rule?

11 minutes ago, Choke said:

I no longer understand these concepts. I thought I had a pretty good grasp on them, but clearly I'm wrong.

Can someone explain it to me like I'm a 4 year old?

Think the 4 year old probably has a better idea than the umpiring dept.

Edited May 15, 20169 yr by GM11

No comprendo

Holding the man is another I would like to understand.

11 minutes ago, Choke said:

I no longer understand these concepts. I thought I had a pretty good grasp on them, but clearly I'm wrong.

Can someone explain it to me like I'm a 4 year old?

The umpires are good men.

The king told the umpires to read the rule book and do good umpiring.

But an evil wizard put a spell on them.

Now the umpires are trying to be good still. But because of the spell, they can't do good umpiring all the time. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.

It will be this way until a good prince comes and breaks the spell. But then there will be no more football ever again.

PLEASE EXPLAIN GILL

or are you to busy lunching and playing Polo?

oh and don't forget Watson's Brownlow....

Another umpiring thread?  Come on guys.

The official rules of the game here. Read and scratch your head in puzzlement.

I have come to the conclusion the umpires decide year on year which rules to enforce.  at the moment, incorrect disposal and throwing (unless blatently obvious) are not being paid as this lets the game move

really frustrating the changes to the game are being driven by umpires

1 hour ago, AzzKikA said:

Another umpiring thread?  Come on guys.

Normally I'd agree and wince. This time I started one because I'm genuinely confused by what happened yesterday, to the point where I think my understanding of the rules is incorrect.

If a player has had prior opportunity the player must dispose of the ball correctly when tackled correctly.

If a player has not had prior opportunity the player must attempt to dispose of the ball correctly when tackled correctly.

15 minutes ago, Choke said:

Normally I'd agree and wince. This time I started one because I'm genuinely confused by what happened yesterday, to the point where I think my understanding of the rules is incorrect.

No mate. There are no rules. Friday nights game was exactly the same. 

I didn't see yesterdays game as it wasn't pumped into Asia, but i followed you guys on the game day thread and it was obvious incorrect disposal NO LONGER EXISTS

This is driven by TV. Mark my words. They want a fast game with minimal stoppages regardless of ball movement. 

Edited May 16, 20169 yr by Sir Why You Little

2 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

If a player has had prior opportunity the player must dispose of the ball correctly when tackled correctly. (Immediately)

If a player has not had prior opportunity the player must attempt to dispose of the ball correctly when tackled correctly. (Within reasonable time)

Slight edit where fans sometimes get it wrong.

3 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Slight edit where fans sometimes get it wrong.

It's this "reasonable time" that gets me as well Skuit. It seems to be adjudicated differently, even within games.

1 minute ago, Choke said:

It's this "reasonable time" that gets me as well Skuit. It seems to be adjudicated differently, even within games.

I didn't see the game yesterday so can't use specific examples. But I think the umps mentally distinguish the prior opportunities further and it leads to inconsistencies. Get caught unawares of take evasive action more than once in a pack and you are pretty much given NO time to dispose correctly. Attempt to force your way in a straight line through a pack and no prior is determined and it doesn't seem to matter how long it takes to spill out, if or how it does, or how much effort is genuinely made. This last interpretation encourages the head-down burrowing.

As much as the umpires annoy me, this is one rule where the fans and commentators (Brian Taylor admitted he had never heard of the "attempt" to dispose part before, astounding) are often more often than not wrong. 

39 minutes ago, DubDee said:

I have come to the conclusion the umpires decide year on year which rules to enforce.  at the moment, incorrect disposal and throwing (unless blatently obvious) are not being paid as this lets the game move

really frustrating the changes to the game are being driven by umpires

Don't forget results too....

36 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

If a player has had prior opportunity the player must dispose of the ball correctly when tackled correctly.

If a player has not had prior opportunity the player must attempt to dispose of the ball correctly when tackled correctly.

Should be more emphasis on correctly.

2 minutes ago, GM11 said:

Should be more emphasis on correctly.

Correct.

I still love it when the umpires say the ball was disposed/knocked out in the tackle and call play on. I see that is incorrect disposal when being tackled.

55 minutes ago, DubDee said:

I have come to the conclusion the umpires decide year on year which rules to enforce.  at the moment, incorrect disposal and throwing (unless blatently obvious) are not being paid as this lets the game move

really frustrating the changes to the game are being driven by umpires

I would say week on week they decide which free kicks to pay.  This week....virtually no deliberate out of bounds and also, seemed to change how holding the ball is interpreted. 

12 minutes ago, Devil is in the Detail said:

I still love it when the umpires say the ball was disposed/knocked out in the tackle and call play on. I see that is incorrect disposal when being tackled.

I don't, but I concede it is a massive grey area.

Again, it all depends on if a player has had prior opportunity or not.

Edited May 16, 20169 yr by Clint Bizkit