Jump to content

Featured Replies

 

If 3 umpires cannot get it right then adding another one will cause even more confusion,  now it means players will have to be more vigilant not to run into an umpire by accident.

4 umpires 5 on the bench...

If they keep going soon there won't be any room for fans at the games.

 

Surely if the three maggots can’t get it right, and occasionally contradict one another, enlarging the cesspit won’t produce better maggots, only more of lower quality.  
Rather like endlessly expanding the number of teams,  can only dilute the quality, the same applies for umpires. 
Eventually everyone can play and get a participation award for trying. 

another umpire 😲

at this rate there will be more umpires than players by 2040

that's now 4 central, 4 boundary and 2 goal umpires = 10

some empire building going on


Will add to confusion, the closest umpire being overruled incorrectly and thin the talent pool of umpires further

OR

Keep it 3, make them professional, create a career path, increase quality of umpiring

Does anyone know how this is going to work when they disagree. Who's decision is followed. 

It's not a big a change as it sounds. There are already 4 field umpires at each match. It's just that the one who was designated as the emergency umpire now joins the fray. If an umpire gets injured during the game and can't continue, the remaining three will continue to do the job.

To me it makes sense. Firstly, because the emergency umpire has been an under-utilised resort. Secondly, it allows the ground to be divided into four quadrants which is a much better design than thirds, whichever way you cut it. As a result, there should be fewer instances of umpires being blind-sided and missing things like throws and high tackles.    

 
3 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Will add to confusion, the closest umpire being overruled incorrectly and thin the talent pool of umpires further

OR

Keep it 3, make them professional, create a career path, increase quality of umpiring

A Talking Heads song comes to mind in response to this post. 

Edited by Its Time for Another

26 minutes ago, monoccular said:

Surely if the three maggots can’t get it right, and occasionally contradict one another, enlarging the cesspit won’t produce better maggots, only more of lower quality. 

Really think it's time we moved on from this kind of language about umps.


And all 4 will STILL be standing too far from the action to get it right. 

So the answer to reducing inconsistencies in game adjudication, is to bring in another umpire? Yeah that'll work 🤦‍♂️

25% more errors?

Fix the rules and that would fix the umpires. With the present interpretative rules, more umpires means more inconsistency.


3 hours ago, DubDee said:

Will add to confusion, the closest umpire being overruled incorrectly and thin the talent pool of umpires further

OR

Keep it 3, make them professional, create a career path, increase quality of umpiring

Well if there are 4 the AFL will have an even greater argument that they cannot afford to have them as full time professionals - unless they sacrifice some of their bonuses of course, so it will never happen.

On the other hand one could make a case for reducing it to two full time professionals, but this will never ape either.

Seems illogical given the massive shortage of quality umpires. Are you going to make umpires cover more games per week, or are we just going to add more rookie umpires to be crucified out there? 

the afl want more frees paid and more controversial ones

it feeds the media and the afl gets more publicity which means more money


Max is being blocked, punched and elbowed 70 metres off the ball and 10 metres away from the third field field umpire and no free being paid. How does four make any difference? Let's give the goal umpire the power to adjudge off the ball cheating and play Max at full forward all year I say.

 
3 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

for the Dogs it’ll be 25% more frees

25% less freed from desire

..and who votes.This friends is ad hoc.

One would think the AFL has just had the bejesus frightened out of them.


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

      • Haha
      • Like
    • 629 replies
  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

    • 4 replies