Umps got it wrong - need a please explain

[BDA 22,267]

Who would want to be an umpire? The rules keep changing and way too much scope for interpretation.

What was wrong with the old deliberate rule.

Why has HTB all of a sudden become such a confusing mess. Our game against Carlton last week was a farce.

The AFL created this mess and need to sort it out.

And i reckon there's a role for technology to help umpires

Edited May 23, 2021 by Better days ahead

[Grr-owl 1,169]

8 hours ago, Webber said:

That is crazy. Nobody will ever want to umpire. The point you make about umpires not being full-time is the biggest issue. They should be, and they and the game would be better for it. 

I reckon pay them a boatload. Make it attractive for all those fitness buffs out there. Then we would have the right to hold them accountable. 

[Deesprate 1,323]

1 hour ago, Mazer Rackham said:

18.10 OUT OF BOUNDS
18.10.1 Spirit and Intention
Players shall be encouraged to keep the football in play.
18.10.2 Free Kicks - Out of Bounds
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player who:
(a) Kicks the football Out of Bounds On the Full;
(b) Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Boundary Line and does not demonstrate sufficient intent to keep the football in play; or
(c) fails to immediately hand the football to the boundary Umpire or drop the football directly to the ground once the football is Out of Bounds.

 

Nothing about the ball being touched or deflected. Either it was deflected and is still deliberate OOB, or it was deflected which can't be deliberate because Spargo had no intent. Except that's not in the rules. "Interpretation", I suppose.

I love (c) if they paid that free kicks would double. Reckon that rule came in in the era of chivalry. What the point of a rule that not observed.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

3 minutes ago, Fanatique Demon said:

Maybe the insufficient attempt (OOB) rule should be judged by boundary umpires? They are always on the boundary side of play so may have a better view. As well as less to think about.

In a wasteland of ridiculous and self-serving suggestions over many years by the ex-Collingwood president, one very sensible one, of course pooh-poohed by the AFL and the empty-headed AFL media, was that boundary and goal umpires be permitted to call general frees. I think the idea was that boundary umps would be of the same status as field umps and have the same powers to call frees. Of course the AFL saw no merit whatsoever in it and the idea was stillborn; whereas, even if the idea was not perfect, it still merited discussion.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

1 minute ago, Deesprate said:

I love (c) if they paid that free kicks would double. Reckon that rule came in in the era of chivalry. What the point of a rule that not observed.

Another rule that the umpires department have allowed to evolve in to a degenerate state. Like 50m when a player is prevented from getting up and taking his mark or free kick.

[Wizard of Koz 1,051]

I am not sure why anyone is arguing. Both decisions were spineless and pathetic and purely because of the possible reaction from the crowd. 

Absolutely pathetic and 100 percent unjust.

Anyone arguing otherwise is just picking fights for the sake of it.

[binman 41,945]

3 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

But we can't have professional umpires. We have to have amateurs who can't practice things like deliberate OOB, kicks less than 10m, communication between umpires re overriding decisions, and so on. You see, a couple of the current umps are highly paid lawyers who umpire as a side gig, and they would be LOST TO THE GAME if forced to be professional (thereby suffering an income hit).

Would anyone notice?

Is the standard of umpiring from these special few so clearly a notch above the others that the game as a whole would suffer?

Spoiler: no, it ****ing isn't.

The future direction of the game is being held to ransom by these special few who demand to have two paying jobs. Of course the AFL are helpless in this situation. What can they do???? They can't just go and make a decision!! (Can they?)

Is it just possible that if umpiring were a professional gig, some decent umpires might be FOUND TO THE GAME by people who had new motivation to make it a vocation, a career, where currently it is not?

The vision of the AFL around umpiring is amateur every which way you look at it.

This times a million.

If say umpires were paid 120k a year, with performance bonuses you don't think young men and women who want to be involved in elite sport might make it a career? 

Create a bloody pathway to the professional level and it will help all levels, both in terms of numbers but also talent.

I'm not sure if this is urban myth but I have been a number of times that key metric used for selecting afl umpires is fitness.

 

[binman 41,945]

2 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

In a wasteland of ridiculous and self-serving suggestions over many years by the ex-Collingwood president, one very sensible one, of course pooh-poohed by the AFL and the empty-headed AFL media, was that boundary and goal umpires be permitted to call general frees. I think the idea was that boundary umps would be of the same status as field umps and have the same powers to call frees. Of course the AFL saw no merit whatsoever in it and the idea was stillborn; whereas, even if the idea was not perfect, it still merited discussion.

Of course it does. If only for blatant throws that happen all game because the umpires operate in the corridor and can't see what happens boundary side  And the players take full advantage.

[binman 41,945]

As I say the afl love all the hysteria the rubbish umpiring creates. Any news is good news

[Mel Bourne 4,389]

8 minutes ago, Wizard of Koz said:

I am not sure why anyone is arguing. Both decisions were spineless and pathetic and purely because of the possible reaction from the crowd. 

Absolutely pathetic and 100 percent unjust.

Anyone arguing otherwise is just picking fights for the sake of it.

Or just desperately trying to find sense in the utterly senseless. 

[praha 11,115]

IMO we accept the result and move on.

Part of what makes our game beautiful is that its rules are so open to interpretation. The AFL has tried to make it seem more clear and objective but reality is that many rules are applied subjectively ie. you often see free kicks awarded that are soft when obvious ones are missed moments earlier: you can sense the umpire is trying to make it up.

A lot of the rule changes over the past 10 years have been introduced under the guise of "easing congestion" and otherwise but really it's about making the game easier to interpret. And arguably the outcome has been terrible rule changes that have made the game worse.

The umpire made a mistake but that's that. We were up by 20 with 5 minutes remaining and lost. All game, Adelaide streamed it out of congestion with an easy kick and they did just that once again straight to Tex who kicked the winner.

We lost. Move on.

[Left Foot Snap 2,319]

9 minutes ago, binman said:

This times a million.

If say umpires were paid 120k a year, with performance bonuses you don't think young men and women who want to be involved in elite sport might make it a career? 

Create a bloody pathway to the professional level and it will help all levels, both in terms of numbers but also talent.

I'm not sure if this is urban myth but I have been a number of times that key metric used for selecting afl umpires is fitness.

 

Umpires are already paid pretty well. A HS article from a few years ago said field ups were on a base salary of 65k with match payments on top. Said the top umpires who do the grand final were making about 150k pa. That is enough money to be held accountable,  oh  - and also to learn how to bounce the damn ball properly.

[Cassiew 1,886]

I thought it was a holding the ball decision just before they got their last mark 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

16 minutes ago, binman said:

As I say the afl love all the hysteria the rubbish umpiring creates. Any news is good news

The AFL don't believe they administer a sporting competition. They think it's a reality show with hazards, surprises,  and impromptu challenges, all for eyeballs and clicks.

[binman 41,945]

13 minutes ago, Left Foot Snap said:

Umpires are already paid pretty well. A HS article from a few years ago said field ups were on a base salary of 65k with match payments on top. Said the top umpires who do the grand final were making about 150k pa. That is enough money to be held accountable,  oh  - and also to learn how to bounce the damn ball properly.

For me it is not about accountability.

It is about being a full time professional. Training all week. Doing mutiple matches. Coaching young umpires at lowe level. Practising decision making under pressure. Going to the clubs and umpiring at training sessions.

Full bloody time.

[Mel Bourne 4,389]

Genuine question: With regards to official club complaints about umpiring decisions, what’s the desired result?

Is it to seek a reprimand for the umpire in question? Or is it’s main aim to apply pressure to the AFL to edge closer to the kind of reform @Mazer Rackhamis talking about? 
 

 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

10 minutes ago, Left Foot Snap said:

and also to learn how to bounce the damn ball properly.

The poor dears! Apparently it might cause them shoulder injuries. Meanwhile we weekly see boundary umps winding up like clockwork springs and hurling the ball in like a catapult. It's surprising they don't dislocate their shoulders. Not a whisper about the extreme health hazard this represents.

Watch old replays and the umps bounce it without any hesitation, all over the ground, dry or wet, grass or mud, over and over and over throughout a match. The umps in today's Pies/Power match had to bounce it an incredible 20 times! No wonder they're stressed.

We're told this is an obstacle to getting more umpires into the game. Is it just possible that professional umps might have the time, the resources, the coaching, at all levels, to learn this one skill effectively?

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

1 minute ago, Mel Bourne said:

Genuine question: With regards to official club complaints about umpiring decisions, what’s the desired result?

Is it to seek a reprimand for the umpire in question? Or is it’s main aim to apply pressure to the AFL to edge closer to the kind of reform @Mazer Rackhamis talking about? 

Let's not get hung on reprisals and work towards effective, consistent umpiring, to the rule book. Which means professionals.

[Mel Bourne 4,389]

1 minute ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Let's not get hung on reprisals and work towards effective, consistent umpiring, to the rule book. Which means professionals.

But is it to seek reprisal? Genuinely unsure. 

[Gawndy the Great 9,009]

25 minutes ago, praha said:

IMO we accept the result and move on.

Part of what makes our game beautiful is that its rules are so open to interpretation. The AFL has tried to make it seem more clear and objective but reality is that many rules are applied subjectively ie. you often see free kicks awarded that are soft when obvious ones are missed moments earlier: you can sense the umpire is trying to make it up.

A lot of the rule changes over the past 10 years have been introduced under the guise of "easing congestion" and otherwise but really it's about making the game easier to interpret. And arguably the outcome has been terrible rule changes that have made the game worse.

The umpire made a mistake but that's that. We were up by 20 with 5 minutes remaining and lost. All game, Adelaide streamed it out of congestion with an easy kick and they did just that once again straight to Tex who kicked the winner.

We lost. Move on.

I stopped reading after the above... I would say it’s actually a blight on the game. 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

1 minute ago, Mel Bourne said:

But is it to seek reprisal? Genuinely unsure. 

Not to me. I just want decent umpiring. Can't answer for others.

[Gawndy the Great 9,009]

Have we got our apology yet? Haven’t seen/heard anything. There’s a lot going on that the deliberate viewed from another angle came off spargo’s hands (which is utter BS) but curious to hear the result.

[Pates 9,625]

9 hours ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

It was very ironic given that the Crows got awarded a free for deliberate out of bounds which they got a goal out of, which far less of a free kick in my eyes.  In that instance out player (I think it was Lever) did a soft hand loopy handball out of a pack situation and the Adelaide player shephered the ball over the line, while appealing for the free kick.  When the rule was first bought in, the free would have actually been paid against that Adelaide player, because he had pleanty of oppertunity to pickup the ball before it went out, but chose not to.

The non paid free kick for holding the ball/incorrect disposal, which bobbled out to Tex was also a complete shocker.

There should be bigger consequences for umpires that F it up this much and make howlers that change the result of games.  The expectations on players in the professional era are huge and they should be on umpires too.  Not enough for the league just to say, sorry we F that up.   The responsible umpires should get substantial fines.

I think it’s time for a rule adjustment on this, it can’t be deliberate if the opposition player is making no attempt to keep it him themselves. They cancel each other out because neither team has made an attempt to keep the ball in play. 

As for a please explain, I don’t see what it would achieve. I don’t like complaining, particularly when you’re up the top end of the ladder. Makes you seem entitled. 

They got it wrong, the entire competition knows it was incorrect. It’s not going to change the result or make us feel any better. 

[david_neitz_is_my_dad 4,083]

5 minutes ago, CYB said:

Have we got our apology yet? Haven’t seen/heard anything. There’s a lot going on that the deliberate viewed from another angle came off spargo’s hands (which is utter BS) but curious to hear the result.

Tom Brown just said on the news “AFL will have a statement tomorrow, likely apology”

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

26 minutes ago, praha said:

Part of what makes our game beautiful is that its rules are so open to interpretation. The AFL has tried to make it seem more clear and objective but reality is that many rules are applied subjectively ie. you often see free kicks awarded that are soft when obvious ones are missed moments earlier: you can sense the umpire is trying to make it up.

Sorry, can't agree. "Interpretation" is an abomination which only encourages the "rule of the week" scenario, which only serves to further infuriate we hapless spectators.

Name ONE other sport in the world whose rules require interpretation. Take your pick. Ball sport, bat sport, racing, missiles ... name ONE that requires its rules to be "interpreted".

Show me a sport whose rules require interpretation and I'll show you a sport who rules are poorly framed and invite inconsistency, spectator frustration, and illegitimate outcomes in games.