5 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Isn't part of the angst the fact that many umpires have no feel for the game probably coz many have not ever played themselves. This could be a reason why the second guess element of decision making leads to errors.Similarly the hands up display that has lead to fifties being paid, is frivolous, unwarranted and displays limited empathy for the players for exactly the same reason

I thought Pettys spoil almost perfect and could, but wasn't to have been, play on.

Yes. 

22 hours ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

I also feel as premiers, the MFC are being made examples of.

It is easy - just don't do it.

I think it is a great rule. It speeds up the game and almost eliminates "show-boating" leaving the game's famous posers with no-where to go except 50m down field away from their goals or looking at the apposition goal while they take the subsequent free kick.

It also takes pressure off the Umpires which can only be a good thing given the immense difficulty of their task and the abuse they have had to put up with over so many years. No wonder the AFL has so much difficulty in filling their ranks at all levels. That can now be expected to improve which can only be a good thing.

I posted this in the Casey thread but is probably more suited to this one. Sorry if some of the context is lost. And I also agree that the abuse rule needs to remain, but refined and more consistency.

Totally agree. There is virtually no transparency on umpire reviews of performance and by that I also mean a lack of media scrutiny. I know why they stopped bagging umpires on TV, but it has gone too far in that there now seems to be no accountability. Constructive discussion with an umpires rep explaining decisions should be a weekly occurrence with a view to improving umpiring. When the same umpires keeping getting shown up (like some of Stevic's strange involvements) then a better feedback loop can begin. Need to talk more openly publicly to help ease supporter frustration as poor decisions seem to generally go ignored after the event. We should also be discussing and recognising good performances.

26 minutes ago, Dees2014 said:

It is easy - just don't do it.

I think it is a great rule. It speeds up the game and almost eliminates "show-boating" leaving the game's famous posers with no-where to go except 50m down field away from their goals or looking at the apposition goal while they take the subsequent free kick.

It also takes pressure off the Umpires which can only be a good thing given the immense difficulty of their task and the abuse they have had to put up with over so many years. No wonder the AFL has so much difficulty in filling their ranks at all levels. That can now be expected to improve which can only be a good thing.

Don't do what? That's the problem.

Players will learn. 

And then, much, much, much later, supporters finally will too.

There is a culture of umpire abuse in AFL football at all levels. It's not only accepted but often encouraged as 'passion'. Umpires are scapegoats because there will always be bad decisions in 2 hours of chaos. It needs to stop.

At lower levels of football many teams are having to sacrifice a player to umpire the game .... and those players nearly always say how much more difficult it is than they thought it would be. I suspect they also come out of it far more respectful of umpires.

Edited April 17, 20223 yr by Axis of Bob

I think, as others have mentioned, it should just be a stringent return to the ‘abuse’ ruling. Players putting their hands out in confusion feels like an overreaction - but any player uttering anything to the umpire is an instant 50.

It often feels like things go too far before they settle at a place that the AFL community learns to live with. I think we are in that stage, but it’ll calm down.

2 hours ago, Webber said:

De-rail slightly…… what do we think about Harry Petty’s spoil on Jesse Hogan that gifted his only goal on Saturday night? Was a perfect spoil in an impossible situation for me…running back, punched the ball and didn’t touch the player. Umpire knee-jerked to the fact he was running face onto Hogan to spoil, assumed it was ‘front-on contact’ because he didn’t mark it. I was a teeny bit ropable. 

I was at the ground and haven't seen the TV replay, but at the time I thought the spoil was perfect. Watching the replay on the scoreboard I thought Petty's arm might have given Hogan an ear massage, although it was not possible to be sure. If a review system similar to cricket was in place, I think it would have been "umpire's call".

Demon player:  "Hey umpire, can I say that was a shizenhousen decision?"

Umpire:  "No, it'll be a 50 metre penalty if you say that".

Demon player:  "Am I allowed to think it was a shizenhousen decision?"

Umpire:  "You can think whatever you like".

Demon player:  "I think that was a shizenhousen decision".

2 hours ago, Dees2014 said:

It is easy - just don't do it.

I think it is a great rule. It speeds up the game and almost eliminates "show-boating" leaving the game's famous posers with no-where to go except 50m down field away from their goals or looking at the apposition goal while they take the subsequent free kick.

It also takes pressure off the Umpires which can only be a good thing given the immense difficulty of their task and the abuse they have had to put up with over so many years. No wonder the AFL has so much difficulty in filling their ranks at all levels. That can now be expected to improve which can only be a good thing.

If a 50 costs us a Grand Final on an umpires interpretation of body language would it still be a good thing?

5 minutes ago, picket fence said:

If a 50 costs us a Grand Final on an umpires interpretation of body language would it still be a good thing?

This old chestnut gets dragged out about every single rule change.

Has a Grand Final ever been decided by a 50 meter penalty?

I just cannot see how raising your arms or looking upwards to the sky to indicate your disagreement with a decision is abusive or  is necessarily even disrespectful.  Or why any umpire with an ounce of self-confidence would feel hard-done by a player exhibiting disagreement.   Disagreement doesn't mean the other person thinks you are an [censored], just mistaken. 

For  example, the free paid against Petty for that excellent spoil. I could see that the umpire may have been mislead into thinking Petty hit the GWS player's head (as did many posters here) when in fact it was the footy that hit his head.  If I (or had Petty) indicated disagreement it does not mean we think the umpire was an [censored]. Just wrong.  Which is easy to be given the speed or the game, the vague rules and the fact that umpires are not equipped with 360 degree slo-mo vision. 

If the current umpires are such precious petals that disagreement is too much for them, I expect properly paid full-time employment may help them get over it.   (Abuse is another matter.) I think umpiring issues at junior levels can be addressed by other means than requiring AFL players to behave like robots.

2 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

Players will learn. 

And then, much, much, much later, supporters finally will too.

There is a culture of umpire abuse in AFL football at all levels. It's not only accepted but often encouraged as 'passion'. Umpires are scapegoats because there will always be bad decisions in 2 hours of chaos. It needs to stop.

At lower levels of football many teams are having to sacrifice a player to umpire the game .... and those players nearly always say how much more difficult it is than they thought it would be. I suspect they also come out of it far more respectful of umpires.

Agree with the thrust of your post, but disagree with the way they have brought this in.

Any abuse to an umpire should be penalized and I am sure we all agree on that.

I just don't think that every bit of frustration, or even guarding the mark with hands out is abuse.

They have even given a 50 for a player shaking his head. That could be at himself.

I don't agree that putting the arms out is a 50, otherwise you can't even STAND and guard the mark. It is an overreaction.

This is being badly adjudicated and is another reason to criticize umpires. The umpires don't need this and it is unhelpful to the cause.

Just make it any DEMONSTRATIVE gesture or verbal abuse aimed to the umpire.

This is a perception rule and made so the crowds see no abuse of umpires.

At the moment it is a farcical rule, bringing the umpires under more attention. They don't need it and neither does the game.

PS: Imagine losing a GF, because a player is waving his arms at the player having a free kick or mark, to try and put him off his kick and a 50 is paid for abuse, giving his team the winning goal. That would not be helpful to umpires.

 

Edited April 18, 20223 yr by Redleg

3 hours ago, Dees2014 said:

It is easy - just don't do it.

I think it is a great rule. It speeds up the game and almost eliminates "show-boating" leaving the game's famous posers with no-where to go except 50m down field away from their goals or looking at the apposition goal while they take the subsequent free kick.

It also takes pressure off the Umpires which can only be a good thing given the immense difficulty of their task and the abuse they have had to put up with over so many years. No wonder the AFL has so much difficulty in filling their ranks at all levels. That can now be expected to improve which can only be a good thing.

"It also takes pressure off the Umpires which can only be a good thing.." 

Wrong - it only makes things worse.   Open abuse, yes: penalising arms out in exasperation only reinforces the authoritarian mindset of AFL HQ and does nothing to harbour goodwill between players and umpires.

Do umpires regularly visit all clubs at training and get to know the players and explain how they interpret the rules? NO. That IMO would be the first step in "addressing disrespect" rather than acting like infallible dictators.

14 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

This old chestnut gets dragged out about every single rule change.

Has a Grand Final ever been decided by a 50 meter penalty?

Not yet, but would you like us to be on the wrong end of the stick when it inevitably does?

Edited April 18, 20223 yr by monoccular

34 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Demon player:  "Hey umpire, can I say that was a shizenhousen decision?"

Umpire:  "No, it'll be a 50 metre penalty if you say that".

Demon player:  "Am I allowed to think it was a shizenhousen decision?"

Umpire:  "You can think whatever you like".

Demon player:  "I think that was a shizenhousen decision".

Umpire: Thats a 100 metre penalty

Demon Player: Why?

Umpire: The fact you thought it a shizenhoisen decsion and then articulated it is clear dissent thats 50 and the other is clearly disrespecting my authority by asking the question. Thats another 50. Anything else?

Demon player: Hnmm my ex partner had similar views to these, I cant win can I?

Umpire: Nope.

Edited April 18, 20223 yr by picket fence

1 minute ago, monoccular said:

Not yet, but would you like us to be on the wrong end of the stick when it inevitably does?

So it's never happened before but is now 'inevitable'....

Saw a Blues player raise his arms in protest against a decision in the dying minutes against Port. 

Nothing to see here according to that umpire, right in front of him.

3 minutes ago, Hellaintabadplacetobe said:

Saw a Blues player raise his arms in protest against a decision in the dying minutes against Port. 

Nothing to see here according to that umpire, right in front of him.

Hence the confusion and angst.

13 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

So it's never happened before but is now 'inevitable'....

yes

46 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Demon player:  "Hey umpire, can I say that was a shizenhousen decision?"

Umpire:  "No, it'll be a 50 metre penalty if you say that".

Demon player:  "Am I allowed to think it was a shizenhousen decision?"

Umpire:  "You can think whatever you like".

Demon player:  "I think that was a shizenhousen decision".

Best post of Easter….close the thread. (still laughing) 

The problem with this rule isn’t that we don’t agree that umpires need to be respected, it’s that it is impossible to adjudicate CONSISTENTLY because what one umpire constitutes as “abuse” another umpire won’t. Already we’ve seen countless examples of this across the first 5 rounds. 
It is too much of a grey area and therefore needs to be changed to: verbal abuse or physical intimidation = 50m. Everything else is fair game. 

2 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

Players will learn. 

And then, much, much, much later, supporters finally will too.

There is a culture of umpire abuse in AFL football at all levels. It's not only accepted but often encouraged as 'passion'. Umpires are scapegoats because there will always be bad decisions in 2 hours of chaos. It needs to stop.

At lower levels of football many teams are having to sacrifice a player to umpire the game .... and those players nearly always say how much more difficult it is than they thought it would be. I suspect they also come out of it far more respectful of umpires.

The main topic here is the arms out in frustration not umpire abuse. You should allowed to express frustration non verbally in the 1-2 seconds after a decision. 

the verbal abuse rule, I think everyone would agree is good. Umps should not have cop this

Protecting umpires from demonstrative and evident abuse or remonstrations is OK.

However acts of frustration, disappointment, dismay, annoyance and similar sentiments by a player are not abuse and should not be penalised. Maxie's standard eye roll for unknown infractions are surely acceptable as is extending arms to stand on the mark.

The status of umpires at this level should not be affected by occasional expressions of regret by players and the AFL should rapidly clarify what should be acceptable conduct. Otherwise the football world will slowly lose respect for umpires.

These comments are directed only at the most senior levels of footy. At all other levels below AFL and perhaps VFL there should be zero tolerance for any response accompanied by a 25 m penalty and broader club penalties for repeat offenders. The place to eliminate poor behavior against umpires is at the level where the game is played.

18 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

The problem with this rule isn’t that we don’t agree that umpires need to be respected, it’s that it is impossible to adjudicate CONSISTENTLY because what one umpire constitutes as “abuse” another umpire won’t. Already we’ve seen countless examples of this across the first 5 rounds. 
It is too much of a grey area and therefore needs to be changed to: verbal abuse or physical intimidation = 50m. Everything else is fair game. 

Just goes to show they didn't think it through and maybe hoped one scorched earth community series game would be enough to send the message to the entire comp.

But hey presto, players react in different ways to giving away a free. The umps department clearly hadn't gone over past footage to determine what's acceptable and what's not. They're undermining themselves.

If they're trying to set an example for lower grades of footy, surely some degree of frustration or disappointment is allowed. As other have said, the player might be disappointed in himself, or worried about what his coach might say. He isn't necessarily disagreeing with the ump or disrespecting the ump.

Right concept, terrible execution. The AFL umps department in action.

3 minutes ago, tiers said:

The status of umpires at this level should not be affected by occasional expressions of regret by players and the AFL should rapidly clarify what should be acceptable conduct.

They manifestly don't know what is!

Saw a Blues player raise his arms in protest against a decision in the dying minutes against Port. 

Nothing to see here according to that umpire, right in front of him.