Jump to content

Standard of Umpiring

Monbon
Monbon
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

4 hours ago, Brownie said:

Amen Titus

Like us, umpires are trying to determine the nature of an event that no longer has any connection to reality.

It is the AFL’s crowning glory.

As usual, a very good read

https://titusoreily.com/afl/the-magical-fairyland-of-afl-umpiring?fbclid=PAZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAaaI33B5hYUmUR_7PUXnGsFqrNPNZnAD3J_TXME-rflpSMQd1OqT6WyHRn4_aem_IKWwmAJMc0wEZvTwjmyUTw

Perfect sentiment. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     

    Carlton are umpired differently to most other teams. No surprise they are where they are and their players are rarely ever suspended.

  • Quote
    • Like 6
    • Thanks 1

    Titus is far too forgiving of the umpires

    some are clearly not up to it

    the inconsistency tells me they are incompetent or don’t have eyes and a functioning brain (and with lashings of confusing rules) so a little bit from column A B and C

    just keep the rules the same for a few years and stop over- reacting and treat umpiring as a professional pathway 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    4 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

    Carlton are umpired differently to most other teams. No surprise they are where they are and their players are rarely ever suspended.

    If Daryl Hair was umpiring, they Cripps wouldn’t get away with any of his “ handballs”.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 2

    Perfection sought by the AFL is the enemy of practical. The AFL tinkering of the rules is an attempt to find perfection but in that pursuit they have increased complexity. Rules should where possible be made black and white to take interpretation out. For example out of bounds on full is an 100% unambiguous rule with interpretation limited to hair line decisions next to the line. But the basic principle is it in or out black and white. The closer you get to the contest the more interpretation come into it holding the ball is a classic of that. The higher the level of interpretation the higher the risk and controversy. Why not make holding the ball as black and white as possible. The default decision is if a player is tackled it is HTB. The interpretation is simply in the umpires interpretation did they have prior opportunity. A decision process like that is clear but the the process for the umpire is simple. If you read the current rule there are way to many interpretations this is what causes the confusion. The basic premise of how the rule is designed causes the confusion and ambiguity. Under the scenario proposed there will still be controversy but there will only one interpretation to argue not multiple.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    2 hours ago, Deesprate said:

    Perfection sought by the AFL is the enemy of practical. The AFL tinkering of the rules is an attempt to find perfection but in that pursuit they have increased complexity. Rules should where possible be made black and white to take interpretation out. For example out of bounds on full is an 100% unambiguous rule with interpretation limited to hair line decisions next to the line. But the basic principle is it in or out black and white. The closer you get to the contest the more interpretation come into it holding the ball is a classic of that. The higher the level of interpretation the higher the risk and controversy. Why not make holding the ball as black and white as possible. The default decision is if a player is tackled it is HTB. The interpretation is simply in the umpires interpretation did they have prior opportunity. A decision process like that is clear but the the process for the umpire is simple. If you read the current rule there are way to many interpretations this is what causes the confusion. The basic premise of how the rule is designed causes the confusion and ambiguity. Under the scenario proposed there will still be controversy but there will only one interpretation to argue not multiple.

    That's an interesting idea about HTB.  If they made the rule 'if you take posession of the ball and are tackled you have to get rid of the ball legally in a reasonable time' and forgot about prior opportunity altogether, then the only 'vague' thing would be 'reasonable time'.  It would reduce ball ups resulting from players taking the ball knowing they will be immediately tackled and lead to more tapping the ball to advantage etc. A more open game might result.  Doubtless there would some downide to the idea but worthh considering.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    5 hours ago, sue said:

    That's an interesting idea about HTB.  If they made the rule 'if you take posession of the ball and are tackled you have to get rid of the ball legally in a reasonable time' and forgot about prior opportunity altogether, then the only 'vague' thing would be 'reasonable time'.  It would reduce ball ups resulting from players taking the ball knowing they will be immediately tackled and lead to more tapping the ball to advantage etc. A more open game might result.  Doubtless there would some downide to the idea but worthh considering.

    I wonder what would happen if you just stated, you must dispose of it legally.

    Handball or kick. That's it

    If it's stripped, free kick

    If you're tackled and it's held to you, free kick

    If you've gone to ground, you must knock it clear (still a legal disposal)

    Jack Viney would probably get 20 kicks a game.

    No more "look at me trying to punch the ball out" fake rubbish 

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    23 minutes ago, Brownie said:

    I wonder what would happen if you just stated, you must dispose of it legally.

    Handball or kick. That's it

    If it's stripped, free kick

    If you're tackled and it's held to you, free kick

    If you've gone to ground, you must knock it clear (still a legal disposal)

    Jack Viney would probably get 20 kicks a game.

    No more "look at me trying to punch the ball out" fake rubbish 

     

    Agree again simplicity compared to the current dog breakfast.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    17 hours ago, Deesprate said:

    Perfection sought by the AFL is the enemy of practical. The AFL tinkering of the rules is an attempt to find perfection but in that pursuit they have increased complexity. Rules should where possible be made black and white to take interpretation out. For example out of bounds on full is an 100% unambiguous rule with interpretation limited to hair line decisions next to the line. But the basic principle is it in or out black and white. The closer you get to the contest the more interpretation come into it holding the ball is a classic of that. The higher the level of interpretation the higher the risk and controversy. Why not make holding the ball as black and white as possible. The default decision is if a player is tackled it is HTB. The interpretation is simply in the umpires interpretation did they have prior opportunity. A decision process like that is clear but the the process for the umpire is simple. If you read the current rule there are way to many interpretations this is what causes the confusion. The basic premise of how the rule is designed causes the confusion and ambiguity. Under the scenario proposed there will still be controversy but there will only one interpretation to argue not multiple.

    Players would just sit off the pack waiting for their opponent to take possession and then pounce. It would penalise the ball players and reward the tagger/scragger type players. Holding the ball used to be fine until the AFL stuffed it up with all their BS interpretations. If you take possession and have prior opportunity to dispose before being tackled and are then tackled, you must dispose of it legally or it is a free kick. None of this "ball was knocked out in the tackle" or giving players 720/1080 degree spins to get rid of it.

    If you dive on the ball and are tackled it is holding the ball. If you drag it in under your opponent and tackle them it is holding the ball against you. You could maybe outlaw 3rd man in but otherwise revert it to how it was about 15-20 years ago.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    So the AFL approached Scott from Essendon to explain why they never received free's rather than the club approaching the AFL for clarification. Haha. Egg on face AFL. Just watch Essendon get an armchair ride of free's against the Woods on Friday.

     

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    On 03/07/2024 at 12:44, The heart beats true said:

    The umpiring against Essendon in the third quarter on Saturday night was an absolute disgrace…

    and some of the best TV I’ve ever watched.

    The umpires are soooo vengeful.

  • Quote
    • Haha 2

    Draper mocked the umpires in Adelaide and got what he deserved. No point spooking when things go sour on you.

  • Quote

    • 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...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • PREVIEW: West Coast Eagles

      Saturday’s election night game in Perth between the West Coast Eagles and Melbourne represents 18th vs 15th which makes it a tough decision as to which party to favour. The Eagles have yet to break the ice under their new coach in Andrew McQualter who is the second understudy in a row to confront Demon Coach Simon Goodwin who was also winless until a fortnight ago. On that basis, many punters might be considering to go with the donkey vote but I’ve been assigned with the task of helping readers to come to a considered opinion on this matter of vital importance across the nation. It was almost a year ago that I wrote a preview here of the Demons’ away game against the Eagles (under the name William from Waalitj because it was Indigenous Round). 

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: West Coast

      The Demons hit the road in Round 8, heading to Perth to face the West Coast Eagles at Optus Stadium. With momentum building, the Dees will be aiming for a third straight victory to keep their season revival on course. Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 248 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Richmond

      The fans who turned up to the MCG for Melbourne’s Anzac Day Eve clash against Richmond would have been disappointed if they turned up to see a great spectacle. As much as this was a night for the 71,635 in attendance to commemorate heroes of the nation’s past wars, it was also a time for the Melbourne Football Club to consolidate upon its first win after a horrific start to the 2025 season. On this basis, despite the fact that it was an uninspiring and dour struggle for most of its 100 minutes, the night will be one for the fans to remember. They certainly got value out of the pre match activity honouring those who fought for their country. The MCG and the lights of the city as backdrop was made for nights such as these and, in my view, we received a more inspirational ceremony of Anzac culture than others both here and elsewhere around the country. 

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Richmond

      The match up of teams competing in our great Aussie game at its second highest level is a rarity for a work day Thursday morning but the blustery conditions that met the players at a windswept Casey Fields was something far more commonplace.They turned the opening stanza between the Casey Demons and a somewhat depleted Richmond VFL into a mess of fumbling unforced errors, spilt marks and wasted opportunities for both sides but they did set up a significant win for the home team which is exactly what transpired on this Anzac Day round opener. Casey opened up strong against the breeze with the first goal to Aidan Johnson, the Tigers quickly responded and the game degenerated into a defensive slog and the teams were level when the first siren sounded.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Richmond

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 28th April @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we analyse the Demons 2nd win for the year against the Tigers.
      Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
      If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/
      Call: 03 9016 3666
      Skype: Demonland31

      • 24 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: Richmond

      After five consecutive defeats, the Demons have now notched up back-to-back victories, comfortably accounting for the Tigers in the traditional ANZAC Eve clash. They surged to a commanding 44-point lead early in the final quarter before easing off the pedal, resting skipper Max Gawn and conceding the last four goals of the game to close out a solid 20-point win.

        • Thumb Down
        • Like
      • 294 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All