This is an interesting read:

https://chewthestat.com/freekickeveryone-a-study-of-the-free-kick-count-as-the-football-fans-favourite-scapegoat/
 

Im just curious, out of the 11 free kicks paid to Carlton in the first quarter, which ones didn’t you like?

Or conversely is there some we should of gotten but didn’t?

Or is it a combination of both?

 

As poor as the technology is to assist goal adjudications, I at least had some confidence in the cameras in the goal posts to determine if the ball was touched before it crossed the line.  Centimetre perfect it seemed ….. until I was watching Footscray- Richmond game.

A review was called for and rightly so, it was  a line ball. From one goal post camera it showed the ball had clearly crossed the line before it was touched. The other goal post camera clearly showed the ball was touched before it crossed the line.

The decision was ‘umpire’s call, insufficient evidence to make a definitive call’ (or words to that effect)

More accurately- The decision should have been ‘umpire’s call, conflicting evidence provided by cameras in the goal posts’! 

Can’t even get the goal camera technology sorted! 

Edited May 12, 2024May 12 by Wodjathefirst

6 hours ago, Go Lordie said:

Carlton 19 Dees 17. The Q1 imbalance was probably the result us being second to the ball. 

Unusual that Carlton were given 11 in the first quarter and then only eight for the remainder of the game though. Carlton were on a role and it's no surprise that they kicked six goals with that level of free payment. I mean their scoring dried up when the frees did so it did have an impact. 

51 minutes ago, Rossmillan said:

This is an interesting read:

https://chewthestat.com/freekickeveryone-a-study-of-the-free-kick-count-as-the-football-fans-favourite-scapegoat/
 

Im just curious, out of the 11 free kicks paid to Carlton in the first quarter, which ones didn’t you like?

Or conversely is there some we should of gotten but didn’t?

Or is it a combination of both?

 

Last week the umps killed us with htb calls. Against the blues the rule was removed for most of the game. 

Also the deliberate on was a joke. Obviously determined by the crowd noise.

You can find 100 s of frees on a game if you want to.

Extrapolate the 11 to 3 out for the game and its 44 to 12.

Who wouldn't object to that?

So it didn't continue but enough damage was done already. 

Also one wonders if the umps didn't try to level that discrepancy up?

Edited May 12, 2024May 12 by leave it to deever

12 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Unusual that Carlton were given 11 in the first quarter and then only eight for the remainder of the game though. Carlton were on a role and it's no surprise that they kicked six goals with that level of free payment. I mean their scoring dried up when the frees did so it did have an impact. 

It was 8-2 at quarter time and 12-3 somewhere in the second. The refusal to pay the same frees both ways is why the accusations of favouritism or cheating come. 

The coaching they receive has to be a contributing factor. 

The free kick count is the most irrelevant stat in footy.

If an umpires objective was to ensure an even free kick tally, then they’d be punted to the bush and never to return.

And we lost last Thursday because of our disgraceful first quarter, not because of a couple of umpiring decisions.

13 hours ago, daisycutter said:

you can't see how a relatively independent professional body managing umpiring could be better than a meddling haphazard, interfering, badly defined rule based amateur-time operation we have now?

Quite frankly it won't improve a thing other than running, watching games on the screen that's about it, umpires can only give decisions based on what they see and until they get rid of the congestion around the ball nothing will change and we all know coaches don't want that.

 

On 10/05/2024 at 11:48, Slartibartfast said:

There's one certainty in footy.  The umpires will make mistakes and supporters will continue to think it's targeted.

Get on with it, poo happens.

Largely agree however the brownlow betting scandal from all of two years ago sticks out like a sore thumb.

1 hour ago, demon3165 said:

Quite frankly it won't improve a thing other than running, watching games on the screen that's about it, umpires can only give decisions based on what they see and until they get rid of the congestion around the ball nothing will change and we all know coaches don't want that.

 

I'm with you on the full time professional umpire call, not sure it would make a lot of difference.

They should however have a full time professional training base & administration facility that would be HQ for the entire umpiring fraternity.

The umpiring biz seems like old school clubland and could be brought into current times.

...and work does need to be done on congestion. The coaches should have little to no say in rules & interpretations because as we all know...there is no interest like self interest.

Cutting interchange has been a no brainer for a while now.

Cutting the time to dispose of the ball to pay a free kick or ball up.

The epidemic of incorrect disposal could also be tightened up.

Just a few things...

Left of field & not so popular, bounce the ball rather than throw it up. The unpredictability always made it harder to set up around a ball up & meant the ball moved out of the area quicker.

Not married to that one but worth thinking about...we play with an oval ball & it's unpredictability makes the game more interesting.

If we want more certainty then using a round ball is the go.

Edited May 12, 2024May 12 by rjay

3 hours ago, leave it to deever said:

Unusual that Carlton were given 11 in the first quarter and then only eight for the remainder of the game though. Carlton were on a role and it's no surprise that they kicked six goals with that level of free payment. I mean their scoring dried up when the frees did so it did have an impact. 

You could flip it and say as we started playing better footy, we got more frees.

Apart from the inconsistency in adjudication, the thing that gets me is where the kicks are paid.

Without going back and watching it, I'm pretty sure they got two pretty soft ones in front of goal in the first quarter which resulted in goals.

Even if they could be more consistent I'd be happy.

It's just like the MRO decisions we see week in, week out. The inconsistency leaves it all open to doubt.

Turn it into a proper career path, pay them properly and drop them for poor performances.

Definitely interested in that statistical analysis. Just need to look at it all on a bigger screen.

On 09/05/2024 at 22:32, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

Does Demonland ever write to the club? I reckon it has the standing and authority to do so. It would certainly have my support.

To Whom it May Concern,

Hail to thee, brave custodians of the esteemed Melbourne Football Club! I hope this letter finds you well in these darkest of times. I pen this missive with a heart both emboldened by loyalty and beleaguered by grievance, on behalf of the ardent souls at Demonland. Verily, our spirits soar with every valorous contest you wage upon the hallowed greens, yet, of late, a shadow most vexatious hath been cast upon our beloved game by the officiators thereof.

It hath come to pass that week upon week, the sagacious umpires, guardians of fairness and decorum in our grand sport, seem to have misplaced their spectacles! For, with great consternation we observe a plethora of blatant penalties that go unnoticed when they would aid our noble Demons, whilst conversely, the meekest of infractions against our adversaries are met with swift retribution.

'Tis a plight most woeful, and we, the fervent congregation at Demonland, find ourselves at our wits’ end. Thus, we humbly beseech thee, o' gallant Melbourne Football Club, to wield thy considerable esteem and influence. Pray, convey our collective ire and perplexity to the high councils of the Australian Football League. Implore them, with all the grace and fervor thou can muster, to address this inequitable scourge that blights our matches.

Mayhap a gentle reminder to these esteemed umpires to polish their ocular aids, or better yet, to procure an eyeglass of greater potency, might rectify this lamentable oversight.

We place our trust in your capable hands, confident in the knowledge that ye shall champion our cause with the same vigor and passion with which you contest every ball. Together, let us strive for a future where the spirit of the game is preserved and all spectacles—both literal and figurative—are clear and unclouded.

In closing, we offer our unwavering support for the Melbourne Football Club and remain, as ever, your devoted fans and ardent supporters, assembled under the proud banner of Demonland.

Yours in sport and solidarity,

Lord Andyronicus the Third

Administrator of Demonland
Enthusiast of Fair Play and Optical Clarity

49 minutes ago, Demonland said:

To Whom it May Concern,

Hail to thee, brave custodians of the esteemed Melbourne Football Club! I hope this letter finds you well in these darkest of times. I pen this missive with a heart both emboldened by loyalty and beleaguered by grievance, on behalf of the ardent souls at Demonland. Verily, our spirits soar with every valorous contest you wage upon the hallowed greens, yet, of late, a shadow most vexatious hath been cast upon our beloved game by the officiators thereof.

It hath come to pass that week upon week, the sagacious umpires, guardians of fairness and decorum in our grand sport, seem to have misplaced their spectacles! For, with great consternation we observe a plethora of blatant penalties that go unnoticed when they would aid our noble Demons, whilst conversely, the meekest of infractions against our adversaries are met with swift retribution.

'Tis a plight most woeful, and we, the fervent congregation at Demonland, find ourselves at our wits’ end. Thus, we humbly beseech thee, o' gallant Melbourne Football Club, to wield thy considerable esteem and influence. Pray, convey our collective ire and perplexity to the high councils of the Australian Football League. Implore them, with all the grace and fervor thou can muster, to address this inequitable scourge that blights our matches.

Mayhap a gentle reminder to these esteemed umpires to polish their ocular aids, or better yet, to procure an eyeglass of greater potency, might rectify this lamentable oversight.

We place our trust in your capable hands, confident in the knowledge that ye shall champion our cause with the same vigor and passion with which you contest every ball. Together, let us strive for a future where the spirit of the game is preserved and all spectacles—both literal and figurative—are clear and unclouded.

In closing, we offer our unwavering support for the Melbourne Football Club and remain, as ever, your devoted fans and ardent supporters, assembled under the proud banner of Demonland.

Yours in sport and solidarity,

Lord Andyronicus the Third

Administrator of Demonland
Enthusiast of Fair Play and Optical Clarity

🙏 😆 👏 ❤️

I'm going to assume all your own work, too; I haven't heard AI can do convincing 'Elizabethan'.

A self addressed envelope and a silver groat were provided for return missive?

For same we wait, with a wonderful weaving word describing that upon which we serfs and yeoman, ever greatful to your nobility, are:

Tenterhooks.

 

Seriously, though, thanks for taking the time to create this. I hope you had fun; it looks like it 😊

2 minutes ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

🙏 😆 👏 ❤️

I'm going to assume all your own work, too; I haven't heard AI can do convincing 'Elizabethan'.

A self addressed envelope and a silver groat were provided for return missive?

For same we wait, with a wonderful weaving word describing that upon which we serfs and yeoman, ever greatful to your nobility, are:

Tenterhooks.

 

Seriously, though, thanks for taking the time to create this. I hope you had fun; it looks like it 😊

Full disclosure it was absolutely an AI job but I did have fun tweaking it a bit to make it a little bit more convincing

6 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Full disclosure it was absolutely an AI job but I did have fun tweaking it a bit to make it a little bit more convincing

Damn, I'm going to get AI to write my posts! 

Will save me 30 hours a week.

I'll just put all my DL posts into the AI machine and ask it to come up with posts in the style of binman.

For example, AI please give a 200 word post on the low hanging fruit solutions the AFL could immediately implement to improve the standard of umpiring.

And AI please a follow up post on the topic of the AFL deliberately maintaining stupid rules to create controversy and clicks.

Sheet - even my AI parameters are long!

p.s. Happy to donate the groat.

I've moved on enough to simply acknowledge that our poor start allowed the game to be decided by a combination of insufficient camera resolution and Brodie Kemp cheating.

The only solution is to dominate so thoroughly that there's no point even cheating against us.

Having just watched the replay its astounding how many times:

• Carlton players get tackled and simply drop the ball (looks like an instruction)
• Cripps throws the ball without penalty
• Cripps and Walsh are allowed to turn more than 360 deg before disposing of the ball

The free against Max for hotting the ball OOB when it was Pittonet was disgraceful

As was:

Bowey being pinged for Deliberate  when he was pushed in his side as he was kicking

The JVR tackle when Hollands was rewarded for throwing his head into the turf

Curnow pushing May into the pack before taking a chest mark and goaling. It seems In the back is a forgotten rule

Chopping the arms is paid maybe 1 in 5 times

An appalling umpiring evening.

 

As for us.

Fritsch is my most frustrating player. As good as he is he has very little intensity and can barely lay a tackle at times If only he had some JV mongrel

Petty  is way out of sorts. zero disposals 8m into the 3rd qtr. Weitering had 12. WTF?

 

Our goal kicking hasn't improved (but Tracc has improved his). When Tracc was heavily tagged there was not help for him

The umpires hate Clarry. Gets pinged for HTB and throwing while Cripps is Marine Boy with a 10m forcefield around him

Pittonet never looks at the ball. He only looks at Max. That should be an instant free.

At ball ups around the ground the Umps even said stand 1m apart. The players ignore them. Why do they selectively apply rules?

We were cleaned up with their slickness around the centre bounce. 5 goals straight out of the middle. They kicked the first goal of each quarter. Why can't we come out breathing fire?

Cripps and Walsh had over 70 damaging disposals between them. You could have written that script. We could not combat them

We struggled to clear the ball from our d50 while they waltzed out of ours

Billings is a poor decision maker. he is this year's Jordon. Stop and prop.

Woey was really good when he came on.

Sparrow was good when he moved to the middle but did turn it over a bit

And for newman not to get suspended when Kozzie has been done twice for the same thing shows me how corrupt the AFL and MRO really are.

Edited May 12, 2024May 12 by jnrmac

More than the umps.

I despise people sticking up for them.

Why should anyone support them?

They're well paid and deserve to have their performance heavily scrutinised.

Pay them more even.I dont care.

But make them accountable so we get the best,most consistent,most professional.

Umpire bashing is a human right. 

"They do the best they can"."It's a really hard job" etc etc.

Be good at your crucial job.

When in doubt, "Play ON".

Not hard.

Watching Adelaide v Brisbane, I am struck by how much the umpires just don't pay! BTW agree 100% with jnrmac above. But I watch players dropping the ball in tackles all the time - if this was paid regularly for just a week, the whole game would change. Throwing the ball: may as well scrap the need to handball. But also: a free kick is paid with the offender holding the ball in his hands, who then just places it in the ground. What happened to 50m? This has been a trend across the board recently - Rivers does it a lot, and don't get pinged. Whether it is us or them that does it, it deserves a 50m penalty.

 

Not to mention running too far, paying marks on short kicks - the list goes on and on. Simplify the rules and then enforce them!

On 11/05/2024 at 07:26, Wrecker46 said:

He was being held out of the contest and threw the bloke out of his way. Then at the very next contest he was being held out again farce

Yep, noticed these infringements, the responses and the neglect. 

On 10/05/2024 at 16:42, Redleg said:

 

great pick up 

 

D King right about how hard to call a decision when a Faker is on deesplay!

Some say making the umps real pros won’t change anything.

Others say the rules need changing. 

if the umps are pros they might have some power to get the AFL to change the most difficult to judge rules. 

On 11/05/2024 at 07:26, Wrecker46 said:

He was being held out of the contest and threw the bloke out of his way. Then at the very next contest he was being held out again farce

They just love pinging Clarrie for HTB (in an instant) or for "incorrect disposal".   20 frees against already this year .   Yet Cripps in particular (whole Carlton and Geelong teams actually) get free reign to drop in a tackle or throw at will.

On 11/05/2024 at 21:44, Anti-Saint said:

Firstly, I can't stand Linton St, nor Carltank, nor the AFL.

Secondly, I love the Deees!

The touch of the ball by May is impossible with the human eye - we need the tech, which cricket and tennis have had for years.

But those sports are international, 12-months, and confined to a small area.

Further, AFL won't spend the $s on tech as it is putting $s into the developing states.

 

They seemed to pick out the "touch" on ANB's goal in the final despite zero evidence on replay and zero protestations from the CFC players - cost us the game in the end.   Is the May touch review to be seen anywhere on AFL.com ?  

11 hours ago, Rossmillan said:

This is an interesting read:

https://chewthestat.com/freekickeveryone-a-study-of-the-free-kick-count-as-the-football-fans-favourite-scapegoat/
 

Im just curious, out of the 11 free kicks paid to Carlton in the first quarter, which ones didn’t you like?

Or conversely is there some we should of gotten but didn’t?

Or is it a combination of both?

 

Just off the top of my head, the de Konig (second goal of the game I think) against Max was extremely soft.

11 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

The free kick count is the most irrelevant stat in footy.

If an umpires objective was to ensure an even free kick tally, then they’d be punted to the bush and never to return.

And we lost last Thursday because of our disgraceful first quarter, not because of a couple of umpiring decisions.

perhaps our disgraceful first quarter was a consequence of our opponents having the umpires favour.

An 11-3 free kick ratio would allow the team receiving 11 to have a confidence that what they do will be approved and any interruption to their action will be penalised. a team receiving only3 free kicks and giving away 11 will restrict their actions and perhaps feel less confident and frustrated.

how did the free kick count not result in a 44 -12 total if umpires did not have some understanding of the disproportionate tally.

How lucky is this bloke, he has mother's day on top of umpire appreciation round. If you know what I mean.