The Real State of the game.

[demon3165 2,319]

1 minute ago, Monbon said:

Going round in circles is not discussion: some people define it as being pig headed.

When people just complain about something and have no solutions then I will defend my view whether you like it or not.

[demon3165 2,319]

3 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Well done Sherlock ;) Its what i suggested from the Start.

Maybe the Umpires should make a push for it. They ought to see themselves in a similar light to the players perhaps..  Paid professional participants.  A not unwarranted position imo.

And you know what Sherlock it's not going to happen things will stay the same so in the end people are still going to complain about it.

[Clintosaurus 6,904]

51 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Or maybe it’s the syndicates that is at the crux of the issue. What was Norf playing against the Pies? 

Pies were $7.50 at half time. Reckon a lot got onto that.

[beelzebub 22,718]

15 minutes ago, demon3165 said:

And you know what Sherlock it's not going to happen things will stay the same so in the end people are still going to complain about it.

Last time i looked neither you nor I controlled such things.

The game has evolved, its managenent has, the managing of involved groups...i.e players assc... coaches assc ..  they have too.  There already exists an umpires assc. 

The one constant about the AFL is it DOESNT stay the same.

[demon3165 2,319]

4 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Last time i looked neither you nor I controlled such things.

The game has evolved, its managenent has, the managing of involved groups...i.e players assc... coaches assc ..  they have too.  There already exists an umpires assc. 

The one constant about the AFL is it DOESNT stay the same.

Now that I agree with.

[Lucifers Hero 37,524]

12 hours ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

You’re missing the point. What happened to Adelaide could happen to any club, well, almost any club. Imagine how you’d feel if an umpire denied us of not only a win but a finals berth. 

That is a valid point, it can happen to any club. 

Sadly, It happened to us THREE times in the last year.

They were all against Carlton.  Each was influenced decided by a dubious 'touched' goal deemed a point or not adjudicated.

• 2023 H&A - Lost by 4 pts.   Petracca goal claimed to be touched, goal umpire fell for it, ARC 'inconclusive'.  Llater the Carlton players laughed about 'maybe' by a fingernail.  Umpire's call stood.

       iirc, this cost us 2nd spot on the ladder.  Oh, how different 2023 would have been.

• 2023 Semifinal - Lost by 2 pts.  ANB's goal callled a goal by umpire then overturned as deemed to be touched off the boot by a late ARC review.  Inconclusive vision but this time the umpires's call was overruled.

       This cost us a Prelim berth.  No telling how far we could have gone.

• 2024 H&A - Lost by 1 pt.  May's clear touch of a Curnow goal was not completed.  ARC review was slow and field umpire bounced the ball to restart play without a review decision.  Even Curnow knew it was touched.

There may be other dees matches that were decided on a dubious call but those THREE that stand out the most for me as they had a big impact on our finals chances in 2023 and may do in 2024. 

It may be selective memory on my part but we seem to regularly get a raw deal at critical points of games/season.  

 

 

[Clintosaurus 6,904]

Problem with the ARC is the images they get are from the broadcasters, and sometimes it is crisp and clear, but others from a Nokia 3310. Is this to influence the ARC decision making? The May/Curnow one was grainy but then a clear one appeared but was not looked at as the ump was about to bounce, yet on KB the ARC intervened and overturned Kossie's goal when the footage was not clear cut. Easy for people to think there is favouritism to Pies, Blues and a couple of others.

[Deepfreeze 185]

Watched the game. The commentators were onto that non 50 as soon as it happened. 4 umpires and they all missed or ignored it.

The Daicos non decision on incorrect disposal another.

And a filth goal came from what looked like a scoop from the ground (I stand to be corrected on that but looked like a throw).

All clubs are equal, but some are more equal than others. I know that paraphrase originally applied to pigs, but you could classify filth supporters as pigs except the porcine variety are more intelligent.

Edited June 18 by Deepfreeze

[Deemania since 56 6,322]

17 hours ago, Monbon said:

It seems to be a weekly occurrence now that games are won or lost due to crook umpiring decisions. Fer C/Sake, there's four of them now and yet yesterday two E Coli Wobblers were allowed to run over the mark of a North player and four umpires turned a blind eye. There is now an epidemic of these contentious and or/ non decisions which in my case have caused a kind of contempt for the state of the AFL, bordering on suspicion that more sinister aspects lurk behind the mythology of a Level Playing Field. 

This impression has been bubbling away and gathering momentum for years, and if umpiring is no longer impartial and appears to be critically pre-arranged, with errors slipping into decisions with poor execution, unpenalised, then it is beholden on us, (the fee-paying general public providing every inch of support and revenue) with concerns and specific examples, to be free to so-state the issues in whatever public domain we might choose. 

[Deemania since 56 6,322]

17 hours ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

I’m just curious about why no others in the media will call this out 

Fear, it would be terrible to fall off the cash-cow bandwagon and with it, one's own credibility.

[Clintosaurus 6,904]

35 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Fear, it would be terrible to fall off the cash-cow bandwagon and with it, one's own credibility.

You would end up being Grant Thomas.

[Moonshadow 16,609]

3 hours ago, BDA said:

Not sure why anybody would want to be an umpire. Thankless job.

Part time job, can still have a career outside

Paid over $100,000 per year as senior umpire

Keeps fitness up

Feeds the control freak ego

[Mel Bourne 3,987]

15 hours ago, demon3165 said:

And all you do is moan about it what is that going to solve.

The self-awareness levels are staggering in this one. 

[demon3165 2,319]

4 minutes ago, Mel Bourne said:

The self-awareness levels are staggering in 

And the lack of understanding that you have is staggering. 

[Mel Bourne 3,987]

4 minutes ago, demon3165 said:

And the lack of understanding that you have is staggering. 

Yes, I’ll admit I don’t understand 95% of your posts. 

[demon3165 2,319]

Just now, Mel Bourne said:

Yes, I’ll admit I don’t understand 95% of your posts. 

Couldn't careless, I think you have trouble understanding anything anyway.

[Sir Why You Little 35,321]

The Umpires are already scrutinised after every game by their own department, and we have the current mess. 
The amount of Cameras on the games will increase each year, the quality of those cameras will also improve. 
the only way to make umpiring better at the Top Level is to pay the Umpires a high wage and make them accountable to the public after each game, otherwise the current situation will just keep frustrating everybody. 
What happened to The Croms last Season should have been the line in the sand moment. 
They were denied a Finals Berth 

[Monbon 1,629]

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The Umpires are already scrutinised after every game by their own department, and we have the current mess. 
The amount of Cameras on the games will increase each year, the quality of those cameras will also improve. 
the only way to make umpiring better at the Top Level is to pay the Umpires a high wage and make them accountable to the public after each game, otherwise the current situation will just keep frustrating everybody. 
What happened to The Croms last Season should have been the line in the sand moment. 
They were denied a Finals Berth 

I'm not being facetious: is Croms GWS or the Crows??

[Sir Why You Little 35,321]

10 minutes ago, Monbon said:

I'm not being facetious: is Croms GWS or the Crows??

The Bird variety 

[Monbon 1,629]

Just came across this: 10 dodgy decisions this year, apart from the 3 in the E Coli Wobbler :

Leigh Matthews and J. Bartel: 

 

[Sir Why You Little 35,321]

8 minutes ago, Monbon said:

Just came across this: 10 dodgy decisions this year, apart from the 3 in the E Coli Wobbler :

Leigh Matthews and J. Bartel: 

 

The Situation is getting worse. The AFL need to strip back a lot of grey rules. 
reduce the interchange rotation to 30-40 a game

i cannot stand incorrect disposal being called play on

These suits have bastardised the game while being paid $millions

Enough…

[WalkingCivilWar 34,961]

3 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

2023 H&A - Lost by 4 pts.   Petracca goal claimed to be touched, goal umpire fell for it, ARC 'inconclusive'.  Llater the Carlton players laughed about 'maybe' by a fingernail.  Umpire's call stood.

       iirc, this cost us 2nd spot on the ladder.  Oh, how different 2023 would have been.

This happened right in front of us and we (understandably) went nuts because Tracc had kicked a goal, not a whisker of doubt.

Postgame, an interviewer asked Caleb Marchbank which part of his hand/arm touched the ball. He gave the worst possible answer. He said, “… Uhm…” 🤮 🤮🤮

Yes it cost us second spot on the ladder, moreover it cost us a home prelim. 

[BoBo 2,405]

IMO this isn’t hard to fix up. 
 

If the AFL advised the umpires to:

Enforce rules that are ALREADY IN THE BOOKS and monitored that interpretations of the rule were kept consistent, so they don’t drift away into places like the recent holding the ball fiasco.

That would take care of a lot of issues and the AFL are the only ones able to enforce it.

Evidenced by the very fact, that in the space of a week, they addressed the holding the ball interpretation. If it starts drifting away from what they initially told umpires in how to call it, bring it back to the initial advice.

The gap is that the AFL is reactive and not proactive. They allow interpretations to drift for months or even seasons until they everyone gets so annoyed that the AFL has to do something about it. 
 

This is all avoidable.

Secondly: You can set up thresholds for objectively incorrect calls round by round or in groups of rounds. If a round sees too many incorrect calls and it crosses a threshold of a particular rule:

Advise the umpires to look out for it before we again spend months/years asking why said rule isn’t applied correctly. 
 

Will there still be incorrect calls? Yes. Will there be subjective 50/50 calls? Yes. But the aim is to minimise the amount of objectively incorrect calls AND re-implementing rules that for some ludicrous reasons just aren’t called any more.

Apply the rules of the game. Monitor and get on top of when this doesn’t happen in the interpretations that the AFL wants and be proactive about it.

Pretty simple. 

[beelzebub 22,718]

35 minutes ago, BoBo said:

IMO this isn’t hard to fix up. 
 

If the AFL advised the umpires to:

Enforce rules that are ALREADY IN THE BOOKS and monitored that interpretations of the rule were kept consistent, so they don’t drift away into places like the recent holding the ball fiasco.

That would take care of a lot of issues and the AFL are the only ones able to enforce it.

Evidenced by the very fact, that in the space of a week, they addressed the holding the ball interpretation. If it starts drifting away from what they initially told umpires in how to call it, bring it back to the initial advice.

The gap is that the AFL is reactive and not proactive. They allow interpretations to drift for months or even seasons until they everyone gets so annoyed that the AFL has to do something about it. 
 

This is all avoidable.

Secondly: You can set up thresholds for objectively incorrect calls round by round or in groups of rounds. If a round sees too many incorrect calls and it crosses a threshold of a particular rule:

Advise the umpires to look out for it before we again spend months/years asking why said rule isn’t applied correctly. 
 

Will there still be incorrect calls? Yes. Will there be subjective 50/50 calls? Yes. But the aim is to minimise the amount of objectively incorrect calls AND re-implementing rules that for some ludicrous reasons just aren’t called any more.

Apply the rules of the game. Monitor and get on top of when this doesn’t happen in the interpretations that the AFL wants and be proactive about it.

Pretty simple. 

Agree...

There's but one caveat; the AFL would have to care.  I really don't think they do.

An amazing number of"occurrences" have go  in favour of a small notorious cabal of clubs. Ones with large membershios....and clout.

I really need say no more  

Edit.    

I truly think the change has to be instigated by the Umps.  They must be sick to death of being the brunt of criticisms regarding refereeing rules that are near impossible currently.

 

Edited June 18 by beelzebub

[demon3165 2,319]

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2024/06/18/brad-scott-was-asked-for-his-advice-to-laura-kane-regarding-clarifying/

From a coaches view of it ...