AFL football: The only code where rules ain’t rules

 

That umpire isn't fit enough for Auskick.

Gearing free kick they didn't pay at a close stage of the game.

Incompetence or cowardice.

 

11 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

That umpire isn't fit enough for Auskick.

Gearing free kick they didn't pay at a close stage of the game.

Incompetence or cowardice.

 

both

I’d love to be a fly on the wall for the umpires game review after a game like that. What’s the consequence for getting calls like the one a live wrong?! Do they just laugh it off and say they decided to let it go as it was the closing stages of a tight game? 
Do they look at every questionable(wrong) decision during a game and are happy if they keep it under a certain number? 
Does the amount of media attention they get in the aftermath of a game have a bearing on how in depth they review each game?

You wouldn’t think they can be happy with the the amount of costly errors they make during games but there doesn’t seem to be any improvement or real plan for improvement. 
I’m still off the opinion that the AFL has no intention of improving the standard of umpiring as bad decision create more media attention than good ones and they feel they currently have the balance right to suit their needs. 

42 minutes ago, pitmaster said:

AFL football: The only code where rules ain’t rules

 

I was gob smacked watching that ...thinking.....he just got 'tunnelled'....and then....crickets...    commenatry rather quiet about it too...   not surpising that those cowardly lackies wouldnt have the bottle to ruffle feathers......( nor accreditation )....only one voice even heard to mention 'tripping'....(Pearce)

I can understand putting the whisatle away in some respects vis a vis  generl play perhaps but that was such an obvious free...if not something for the MRP !!     but no........what a joke

Edited August 16, 20232 yr by beelzebub

I pointed this one out on the 3 word thread...

Ray had a few howlers at the end of the game.

...putting the whistle away.

Now there's putting the whistle away on 50/50's in a tight game.

...but there's no putting it away on such an obvious free kick.

1 minute ago, beelzebub said:

I was gob smacked watching that ...thinking.....he just got 'tunnelled'....and then....crickets...    commentatry rather quiet about it too...   not surpising that those cowardly lackies wouldnt have the bottle to ruffle feathers......( nor accreditation )....only one voice even heard to mention 'tripping'....(Pearce)

I can understand putting the whisatle away in some respects vis a vis  generl play perhaps but thatwas such an obvious free...if not something for the MRC !!     but no........what a joke

 

Just now, rjay said:

I pointed this one out on the 3 word thread...

Ray had a few howlers at the end of the game.

...putting the whistle away.

Now there's putting the whistle away on 50/50's in a tight game.

...but there's no putting it away on such an obvious free kick.

 

32 minutes ago, Colm said:

I’d love to be a fly on the wall for the umpires game review after a game like that. What’s the consequence for getting calls like the one a live wrong?! Do they just laugh it off and say they decided to let it go as it was the closing stages of a tight game? 
Do they look at every questionable(wrong) decision during a game and are happy if they keep it under a certain number? 
Does the amount of media attention they get in the aftermath of a game have a bearing on how in depth they review each game?

You wouldn’t think they can be happy with the the amount of costly errors they make during games but there doesn’t seem to be any improvement or real plan for improvement. 
I’m still off the opinion that the AFL has no intention of improving the standard of umpiring as bad decision create more media attention than good ones and they feel they currently have the balance right to suit their needs. 

Do they actually review umpire's performance?

And comeon, you can see the Carlton player only has eyes for the footy 😁

Edited August 16, 20232 yr by Brownie

I had a feeling Razor was getting overruled and didn't have that much impact in the last QTR.

What we don’t know is whether JvR would have goaled from that distance or whether the Blues would have cleared the kick. Let’s just move on from that game and win our next five in a row.

Call in SEN next Wednesday when Ray is on and ask. He is always able to admit to his mistakes 

28 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

What we don’t know is whether JvR would have goaled from that distance or whether the Blues would have cleared the kick. Let’s just move on from that game and win our next five in a row.

And we dont know whether it was a Stiton or strong cheddar in the Shiraz hamper..

Its irrelevant..  it would have been our possession.  That's actually important in the scheme of things.

Slide tackles like that mean an early shower. Maybe JvR should’ve rolled around 16 times on the turf.
Wow wee, how do you miss something so obvious?

Edited August 16, 20232 yr by Dee Zephyr

2 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

What we don’t know is whether JvR would have goaled from that distance or whether the Blues would have cleared the kick. Let’s just move on from that game and win our next five in a row.

It was definitely mind boggling, and i was disgusted like many on here, but we are carrying on like he would have converted. Whether he could have found a target 20m closer (would have been called on no doubt) remains to be seen.

To me the bigger howler was the non-goal call. Its gets my heart rate up every time i hear it on the radio or see the replay on TV - i just cannot move past how bad that decision was. I just hope in the whole scheme of things it becomes irrelevant. I would hate if that becomes a defining part of our season. We wont know of course until all things are done. 

20 hours ago, rjay said:

I pointed this one out on the 3 word thread...

Ray had a few howlers at the end of the game.

...putting the whistle away.

Now there's putting the whistle away on 50/50's in a tight game.

...but there's no putting it away on such an obvious free kick.

Cripps threw the ball at least 3 times and dropped it twice when tackled and Dow threw the ball with both hands up high and no free, nor comment from the broadcast.

Max blocked in most obvious block I have seen, front on, with 30 seconds left, which stopped him getting back for a mark. Yet they pay slight arm touches. Again nothing from commentators.

Probably 9 holding the ball frees to 2 in their favour.

 

Edited August 16, 20232 yr by Redleg

A few days in…. And I’m still salty.. 

20 hours ago, Brownie said:

Do they actually review umpire's performance?

And comeon, you can see the Carlton player only has eyes for the footy 😁

It's nothing to do with " eyes on the footy." The tunnelling free can be deliberate or accidental. If it occurs it should be paid. 

14 minutes ago, 58er said:

It's nothing to do with " eyes on the footy." The tunnelling free can be deliberate or accidental. If it occurs it should be paid. 

Just my attempt at humour @58er

38 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Cripps threw the ball at least 3 times and dropped it twice when tackled and Dow threw the ball with both hands up high and no free, nor comment from the broadcast.

Max blocked in most obvious block I have seen, front on, with 30 seconds left, which stopped him getting back for a mark. Yet they pay slight arm touches. Again nothing from commentators.

Probably 9 holding the ball frees to 2 in their favour.

 

I'm not sure that any of those were free kicks the way the rule is written. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I believe the rule now states that incorrect disposal is only penalised if the player has first had "prior opportunity". In other words, if in the Cripps and Dow examples neither player had prior opportunity, it would appear that it doesn't matter how they disposed of the ball. 

If I'm interpreting the matter correctly, perhaps the AFL could come out and make that point clear so fans of the game understand. (It's a separate question as to whether that ought to be the way the way the game should be played.) 

9 minutes ago, Brownie said:

Just my attempt at humour @58er

Really Brownie it was too subtle and close to the bone for us really still st this stage if the season and the overall umpiring not to mention the goalies role. 

22 hours ago, Colm said:

I’d love to be a fly on the wall for the umpires game review after a game like that. What’s the consequence for getting calls like the one a live wrong?! Do they just laugh it off and say they decided to let it go as it was the closing stages of a tight game? 
Do they look at every questionable(wrong) decision during a game and are happy if they keep it under a certain number? 
Does the amount of media attention they get in the aftermath of a game have a bearing on how in depth they review each game?

You wouldn’t think they can be happy with the the amount of costly errors they make during games but there doesn’t seem to be any improvement or real plan for improvement. 
I’m still off the opinion that the AFL has no intention of improving the standard of umpiring as bad decision create more media attention than good ones and they feel they currently have the balance right to suit their needs. 

Its a great argument really, they are accountable to no one except some secret committee. Will we see the day when umpires are interviewed after a game like the players are... "Hey, so you let that one go in the dying stages, can you please explain to the 50,000 people who want to kill you why?"

Interested to see where Clown 21 (Cameron outside the boundary line) or Razor Ray or I think it was Clown 33 (jvr trip) end up this week. Even the Goal Clown (anonymous of course). Dropped? I’m suspecting not!

7 minutes ago, Call Me What You Will said:

Interested to see where Clown 21 (Cameron outside the boundary line) or Razor Ray or I think it was Clown 33 (jvr trip) end up this week. Even the Goal Clown (anonymous of course). Dropped? I’m suspecting not!

They were all last seen taken for re-education .......

actually just a cab taking them to the "Arms" .. its Parma & Pot special....   all having a merry chortle reminiscing 

2 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm not sure that any of those were free kicks the way the rule is written. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I believe the rule now states that incorrect disposal is only penalised if the player has first had "prior opportunity". In other words, if in the Cripps and Dow examples neither player had prior opportunity, it would appear that it doesn't matter how they disposed of the ball. 

If I'm interpreting the matter correctly, perhaps the AFL could come out and make that point clear so fans of the game understand. (It's a separate question as to whether that ought to be the way the way the game should be played.) 

I don’t think that’s correct.  Incorrect disposal is incorrect disposal.  It’s penalised.  If a player has prior opportunity and doesn’t dispose of the ball it’s also penalised.  But if no prior they can just hold onto it.

i wish y'all would stop talking about umpiring.

i just gets me all triggered and depressed.