Standard of Umpiring

[Redleg 38,613]

Clarkson has just roasted the umpires and effectively Weightman, for allowing milking of nothing incidents, resulting in soft goals.

 

[george_on_the_outer 7,108]

And if any further proof was needed.....Geelong were absolutely gifted 4 goals from the umpires in the 2nd and 3rd quarters in the game against Essendon. 

Worst was the call of deliberate crossing the goal line by an Essendon player when there were two, yes two Geelong players inside the goal square at the same time.

[No10 336]

2 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

And if any further proof was needed.....Geelong were absolutely gifted 4 goals from the umpires in the 2nd and 3rd quarters in the game against Essendon. 

Worst was the call of deliberate crossing the goal line by an Essendon player when there were two, yes two Geelong players inside the goal square at the same time.

And Brad Scott called them out on it.

As did Clarkson.

[Hawk the Demon 595]

3 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

And if any further proof was needed.....Geelong were absolutely gifted 4 goals from the umpires in the 2nd and 3rd quarters in the game against Essendon. 

Worst was the call of deliberate crossing the goal line by an Essendon player when there were two, yes two Geelong players inside the goal square at the same time.

To assist the debate here is the law.

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:

(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;

(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;

(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or

(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full. 

The umpire has decided that (c) applied, and not (b) as the Geelong players go passive....

[No10 336]

50 minutes ago, Hawk the Demon said:

To assist the debate here is the law.

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:

(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;

(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;

(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or

(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full. 

The umpire has decided that (c) applied, and not (b) as the Geelong players go passive....

Rewarding the player that doesn’t go after the ball.

The Geel player slowed and threw his arms out, instead of chasing to tackle. Poor sportsmanship and poor decision imv.

[Jibroni 4,392]

Seems pretty clear to me the 4 umpire system is not working and it should gi back to 3 or even 2. I watch a lot of SANFL and recruiting quality umpires to cover all the games is a challenge. Would hate to be one.

[BoBo 2,450]

3 hours ago, Hawk the Demon said:

To assist the debate here is the law.

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:

(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;

(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;

(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or

(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full. 

The umpire has decided that (c) applied, and not (b) as the Geelong players go passive....

Man this is what I mean, how many other times has this exact thing happened, every week, for probably years now and no free kick given. 

[sue 8,630]

3 hours ago, Hawk the Demon said:

To assist the debate here is the law.

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:

(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;

(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;

(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or

(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full. 

The umpire has decided that (c) applied, and not (b) as the Geelong players go passive....

What legal expert writes these rules. Doesn’t say if those points are all required AND between points or just one or more are OR between points.   You have to deduce it is OR  from your knowledge of footy but that is not the way to write clear unambiguous rules. Might explain a lot about the state of the rules. 

[Dee*ceiving 1,275]

It's not just umpiring sadly it's the entire administration of the game that is a mess. 

KPIs are way too heavily skewed to $$$

TV networks dictate way to much, 'fix'-ture is screwed, too many games, 5 day breaks, stupid byes...

Changing rules in season, don't trial rules at lower levers 

Umpires not professional

4 umpires just means more amateurs making poor decisions. Make them pro and go back to two 

[Demon17 4,770]

4 hours ago, No10 said:

And Brad Scott called them out on it.

As did Clarkson.

Don't care. Where were they when the May pile on was in progress.

I'm expecting Maynard called out as a cheat tomorrow.  

Yeah right.

[Demon17 4,770]

6 minutes ago, Dee*ceiving said:

It's not just umpiring sadly it's the entire administration of the game that is a mess. 

KPIs are way too heavily skewed to $$$

TV networks dictate way to much, 'fix'-ture is screwed, too many games, 5 day breaks, stupid byes...

Changing rules in season, don't trial rules at lower levers 

Umpires not professional

4 umpires just means more amateurs making poor decisions. Make them pro and go back to two 

A friend works inside the afl. The pay is average unless yout top level. And in bred and conservative compared to most other businesses.

Don't expect change despite whose occupying the various chairs.

[John Crow Batty 8,376]

If the AFL is going to keep the 4 umpire system, one should be a master umpire, preferably a full time professional. The master umpire does not need to officiate normal play unless required to intervene. Thats for the other 3 umpires to do. However the master umpire has the power to reverse bad decisions or apply decisions where clearly one has been missed. The master umpire can confer with all other umpires to determine a correct ruling where there is doubt. The master umpire also has the power to direct and advise the other umpires on how they apply decisions during the game. At this time it appears all four umpires run their own show and not as a team with little coordination and a reluctance to intervene with a clearly wrong decision by the others. 

Edited Sunday at 07:44 by John Crow Batty

[TassieDevil 124]

Make a pathway for umpires as they do with players and pay them accordingly. 

A squad of professional umpires determined not to make mistakes and get relegated to VFL.

I rarely see games live in Hobart but the ones I see I found myself yelling at umpires about where to position themselves so they could see the play.

They are rank amateurs charged with officiating a professional sport. 

 

 

[Superunknown 3,656]

On 29/06/2024 at 15:36, Docs Demons said:

I was there last night, and it is very clear we do not get a good go from the umpires. Chatted with a guy from the cheer squad and he said we have to kick 2-3 goals extra a game to cover for umpires. He is dead set correct. Not sure if a few of our players back chat them but something is seriously wrong. 3 examples that resulted in Lions goals were dead set wrong. Camerons first goal, one of our players got checked off the ball by Daniher and went flying. No free. A couple involving May with his mark over on the wing and paid a mark and we set up down field for his kick only for a 2nd Umpire calling a block on Hipwood because he threw his arms up in the air. We were in no position to cover the change and another goal to Lions. Worst one was in the last when May clearly took the mark, had his arms chopped and it was called play on. Down they go and kick another goal to level the scores.

Even some Lions supporters near me agreed they got a good run of it. We need to front the AFL via President and CEO but of course we will be good little kids and shut up.

Lastly our President is alive. Saw here going into a corporate suite last night.

 

Agree

We need the president and CEO to issue a please explain - with clear examples over a period of time for sufficient statistical significance

we should say something 

but we won’t

I would find it extraordinary if the club thought it was ok and said nothing 

[Monbon 1,658]

5 hours ago, Hawk the Demon said:

To assist the debate here is the law.

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:

(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;

(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;

(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or

(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full. 

The umpire has decided that (c) applied, and not (b) as the Geelong players go passive....

In other words, the free kick against Neale-Bullen was total bullpoo, and against the laws of the game. Funny how I have not heard one media commentator mention this, probably because not many of them know the rules anyhow.

[Dee*ceiving 1,275]

1 hour ago, John Crow Batty said:

If the AFL is going to keep the 4 umpire system, one should be a master umpire, preferably a full time professional. The master umpire does not need to officiate normal play unless required to intervene. Thats for the other 3 umpires to do. However the master umpire has the power to reverse bad decisions or apply decisions where clearly one has been missed. The master umpire can confer with all other umpires to determine a correct ruling where there is doubt. The master umpire also has the power to direct and advise the other umpires on how they apply decisions during the game. At this time it appears all four umpires run their own show and not as a team with little coordination and a reluctance to intervene with a clearly wrong decision by the others. 

Great post. Something in this. The umpires definitely don't operate as a team. The challenge for the master umpire would be trying to keep an eye on everything. 

I wonder if we could manage with two on the ground and one in the arc with direct audio to the on field umpires?

[Older demon 2,326]

It would appear that Robbo has teed off in the Sun and demanded a Royal Commission-like review. Does anyone have access? 

Where does the solution lie? Is it Laura Kane or has this all started with McBurney's appointment? I never thought much of his umpiring back in the day.

Whatever happens I find it hard to watch our games let alone any others the umpiring is so inconsistent and unpredictable and influencing results.

[Smokey 4,218]

I think the constant change of the interpretation  of rules that umpires are seemingly having to adjust to on a weekly basis is the cause for a decline in what we perceive as good umpiring 

Edited Sunday at 12:06 by Smokey

[Smokey 4,218]

The other issue that seems prevalent to me is free kicks paid in the first 3 quarters that get ignored in the 4th, and even more so in the last 2 minutes 

Edited Sunday at 12:08 by Smokey

[Great Northern Summer 692]

On 29/06/2024 at 19:33, Brownie said:

Kate Roffey has some media skills and profile and should be out there being more vocal. That's what the powerful clubs do.

I like her, I really do. She has a lot of time for the fans and members.

It's very strange to see her go to ground like this.

Does she? You have a totally different take on her than what I have. Ignored me countless times when I’ve walked past her about to say hello. Comes across as someone with a superiority complex.

[Superunknown 3,656]

It’s like Where’s Wally, but Where’s Roffey

If the cheer squad say we need 2-3 goals a game for umpiring then something is wrong 

 

[FearTheBeard 984]

I think in most cases, if it walks like a free kick and quacks like a free kick then it probably is a free kick. This applies to Holding the Ball, High Contact and In the Back (which seemingly isnt a rule anymore).

The problem is and it is a massive problem in my opinion, is that now there are 4 umpires, it means that an extra 12 umpires are now listed as potential Field umpires and these guys just are not up to the standard yet.

Then at the other end of the spectrum are the experienced guys who seemingly always have to make it about them (I'm not going to list them because I don't think its fair to the individuals). 

We also have the problem where players are at the absolute worst for playing for free kicks of all kinds which makes it so hard for the umps.

It also does not help that the AFL keep messing with the rules and Laura Kane seemingly has everything that she touches blow up in the AFL' face.

I never watched footy back in the good old days, but I'd ask the people here if they thought that the standard of umpiring was better with 1 or 2 field umpires.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,832]

On 29/06/2024 at 14:12, Hellaintabadplacetobe said:

Nibblers was a free every day of the week.

The problem is, it will only get paid once a month, if that, whilst very similar plays will be a throw in.

There was a fairly similar one at the end of Swans/Freo (I think it was) yesterday. Result? Throw in.

Edited Sunday at 12:50 by Dr. Gonzo

[Dr. Gonzo 22,832]

10 hours ago, Hawk the Demon said:

To assist the debate here is the law.

A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player:

(a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line;

(b) is not under immediate physical pressure;

(c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or

(d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full. 

The umpire has decided that (c) applied, and not (b) as the Geelong players go passive....

Part a makes b, c and d redundant. He was within 9 metres of the goal line when taking possession so not a free kick.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,832]

6 hours ago, BoBo said:

Man this is what I mean, how many other times has this exact thing happened, every week, for probably years now and no free kick given. 

How many times does the umpire dissent rule get paid? It's a rule on the books, it happens all the time but the umpa only pull it out once in a blue moon and when they do it is at a critical moment/costs a team a goal.

The administration and officiating of this sport is an absolute farce.