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 November 23, 20223 yr 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. 

They can play bridge. Same as umpiring. Educated guesses.

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.

Stand! 

Stand! 

Stand! 

Stand!

55 minutes ago, loges said:

25% more errors?

33%?

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.

2 hours ago, loges said:

25% more errors?

for the Dogs it’ll be 25% more frees

I'm sure this will ready get the game flowing...like effluent 

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.