Does that former umpire on Twitter still do the reviews of the weekend's games?

Think it was called 'Has the umpire stuffed up' or something.

On 09/06/2025 at 22:38, binman said:

This is one of the arguments the media often make when poo pooiing the idea of umpires going professional.

Not having a shot at you Nasher, but it's one if the arguments that does my head in because it's got a false assumption baked into it.

The assumption is a professional umpiring model would build on the current model - which is that most (all?) umpires are well paid professionals in other fields (usually white collar it would seem, and often lauded as smart, high achievers in that field) and part time umpires.

But they don't have to be. And perhaps that model is actually part of the problem.

An alternative professional model is having a base starting salary of say 130k for AFL umpires. And then bonuses on top - eg finals, marquee games, performance, accuracy, etc.

And perhaps have some levels, eg based on games officiated, performance etc so the base for the best is say 200k plus bonuses.

They train together as a group (aerobic, decision making, team work etc etc) officiate AFL games, AFLW games and go out to local footy clubs leagues and help train young umpires.

I suspect plenty of young men and women who love footy, want to be involved in AFL footy would but know they won't make it as a player, would see that as a legitimate career pathway. One that they could be involved in until their 40s.

We don't need high achieveing accountants and lawyers who are part time umpires.

We need high achieving umpires.

binman, i would add to your good points, to say that in a professional umpiring era a good source for umpires would be retired players. many afl players when they retire have no new real career to pursue. the afl could fast track them through a training acadmy then start them off umpiring in the vfl until they are ready for afl. i'm sure there would be plenty of players grateful for this opportunity. they could even start some umpiring academy work in the final years before their retirement from playing. many players are already doing this sort of studying/work-experience in other fields in preparation for after-footy life.

8 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

binman, i would add to your good points, to say that in a professional umpiring era a good source for umpires would be retired players. many afl players when they retire have no new real career to pursue. the afl could fast track them through a training acadmy then start them off umpiring in the vfl until they are ready for afl. i'm sure there would be plenty of players grateful for this opportunity. they could even start some umpiring academy work in the final years before their retirement from playing. many players are already doing this sort of studying/work-experience in other fields in preparation for after-footy life.

The problem with that would be the perception of bias (or over-compensating for it) when their former team plays (or in any game which might affect the ladder position of their old team).

Of course these days they might have playeed for so many teams .....

1 hour ago, DiscoStu17 said:

I think the main problem with 4 umpires is that they can overrule from a distance.

If they had designated boundaries in each quarter of the field, I believe it would be better.

By allowing umpires that are further away to overrule, as soon as the crowd roars they assume that the closer umpire cannot see a free kick, and so insert a free kick for the team with the dominant number of followers. And we all know who that is.

I also cannot believe that there is no definitive statistics to point out which umpires are guilty of overruling incorrectly.

Damned if they do and damned if they don't. I suspect for every overrule that we supporters don't like I expect there are at least as many over-rules we are glad were made.

link https://x.com/_684148249_/status/1802217029308715466

Max Gawn is not lone. @hasumpstuffedup was 100% in agreement, 50m penalty.

But instead the player who took the mark was called to play on before they were even ahead of their mark.

Coincidentally, the Magpies won by a point after "Zac Fisher got one last chance to win the game for the Kangaroos, but his hurried snap in the dying seconds drifted wide."

One wonders if a set shot from about 20-25m out might have gone through.

49 minutes ago, sue said:

The problem with that would be the perception of bias (or over-compensating for it) when their former team plays (or in any game which might affect the ladder position of their old team).

Of course these days they might have playeed for so many teams .....

i'm sure that can be sorted out. either by rescheduling, training, monitoring etc. you do realise we have ex player as goal umpire and he definitely umpires games of both his previous teams.

additionally, all existing umpires would have been a supporter of a team and there is no hint they are scheduled to avoid any conflicts

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

binman, i would add to your good points, to say that in a professional umpiring era a good source for umpires would be retired players. many afl players when they retire have no new real career to pursue. the afl could fast track them through a training acadmy then start them off umpiring in the vfl until they are ready for afl. i'm sure there would be plenty of players grateful for this opportunity. they could even start some umpiring academy work in the final years before their retirement from playing. many players are already doing this sort of studying/work-experience in other fields in preparation for after-footy life.

A brilliant idea - ex players would have the required fitness and hopefully also the 'feel' for the game.

It would create a career pathway for players, of who i think there are many, who as you suggest just dont know what to do in their post footy caeere, man of whom struggle wit their mental health because it's so hard to replace the adrenalin, routine and singular focus footy gives players (i mean its not the same as playing but jeez there be a bit of adrenaline and pressure involved in umpiring game in front of 80, 000 baying fans).

And ex-players would have instant cred when going out to local footy clubs and leagues to, for example work with young umpires, umpire match sims etc etc.

They could be given other skills and training, like coaching and instruction, skills that are very transferable.

Edited Wednesday at 02:595 days by binman

15 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i'm sure that can be sorted out. either by rescheduling, training, monitoring etc. you do realise we have ex player as goal umpire and he definitely umpires games of both his previous teams.

additionally, all existing umpires would have been a supporter of a team and there is no hint they are scheduled to avoid any conflicts

Yes, he's my favourite goal umpire. But goal umps don't rouse the indignation of supporters, less so with video reviews where the indignation is usually directed at the process and the AFL using cameras where the ball can travel a post width between frames.

While all umpires probably supported a team when young, their background is much more obscure than a player's. How would you feel with Maynard being an umpire (probably he would get the MRO job instead).

I don't object to the idea you have put forward - just worry about how to dampen the 'he used to play for x, no wonder he's biased' issue. We supporters do enough frothing at the mouth now. Improved umpires like you suggest would hopefully make the umpiring better. Perhaps to the point that the frothing would become more irrational and outweigh the downside of perceived bias.

11 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

At this stage the game for various reasons full time umpiring for all umpires is not a viable option IMO.

I still like to see the master umpire model which entails a full time professional umpire who oversees the other part time umpires. The master umpire directs and advises his/her underlings on application and interpreting of laws before and during games, watches from a distance but will not be burdened to make routine decisions in a game unless a bad umpiring clanger occurs and then he/she can intervene. The master umpire can spend the rest of the week being part of the senior off field umpiring panel, review games, study better ways to interpret decisions and scrutinise developing playing trends, liaise with other masters and help in training junior umpires. They could even become the AFL tribunal to adjudicate reported offences. They would be much better than the current shady lot.

I like

42 minutes ago, sue said:

Yes, he's my favourite goal umpire. But goal umps don't rouse the indignation of supporters, less so with video reviews where the indignation is usually directed at the process and the AFL using cameras where the ball can travel a post width between frames.

While all umpires probably supported a team when young, their background is much more obscure than a player's. How would you feel with Maynard being an umpire (probably he would get the MRO job instead).

I don't object to the idea you have put forward - just worry about how to dampen the 'he used to play for x, no wonder he's biased' issue. We supporters do enough frothing at the mouth now. Improved umpires like you suggest would hopefully make the umpiring better. Perhaps to the point that the frothing would become more irrational and outweigh the downside of perceived bias.

Would be easy enough to mitigate - just don't allow ex players to umpire their own team.

5 minutes ago, binman said:

I like

Would be easy enough to mitigate - just don't allow ex players to umpire their own team.

Except some players have played for 2 or 3 teams. And also perceptions on ladder of old club bias in other games. Scheduling may not be easy.

Maybe better to use long time vfl players who’d carry less perceived bias.

Leigh Fisher, who played for St Kilda, has umpired more than 250 games.

Someone posted that it was like watching world wrestling level bias from the umpires and - while people often complain about unps - it was the worst performance of any umpires I've seen in the modern era

I can think of fourteen examples of appalling decisions against us just off the top

17 hours ago, Norm Smith's Curse said:

Someone posted that it was like watching world wrestling level bias from the umpires and - while people often complain about unps - it was the worst performance of any umpires I've seen in the modern era

I can think of fourteen examples of appalling decisions against us just off the top

If I didn't know better (I don't), I would actually suspect that game of being rigged by the umpires. fees given at key stages. obvious frees missed. frees given when undeserved.
I mean, the AFL commissioner (I think) said he wanted the Dogs to win the flag in Jan of 2016, and the umpiring of them in that finals series was...interesting. Would the AFL like Collingwood to finish top so they can sell out 3 finals?

At this point theyre actively protesting not being full time

On 12/06/2025 at 10:12, biggestred said:

If I didn't know better (I don't), I would actually suspect that game of being rigged by the umpires. fees given at key stages. obvious frees missed. frees given when undeserved.
Would the AFL like Collingwood to finish top so they can sell out 3 finals?

Of course they would. AFL likes money. Collingwood generate lots of money. Simples.

One day an ump will spill the beans about how they are coached and in game instructions.

Edited 12 hours ago12 hr by Clintosaurus

Interestingly, Shane Richardson, the CEO of Wests Tigers in the NRL has called out refs as being inherently biased towards teams at or near the top of the ladder. When Storm etc are losing the refs are giving penalties and six agains to help them win. That will play out well for him.

Last week we blame the umpires for losing the free kick count 29-20.

Yesterday we win the free kick handily by +8. Yet we still blame the umpires.

I'd suggest we're all deflecting from the fact that we've been an unacceptable footy side since June last year.

4 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Last week we blame the umpires for losing the free kick count 29-20.

Yesterday we win the free kick handily by +8. Yet we still blame the umpires.

I'd suggest we're all deflecting from the fact that we've been an unacceptable footy side since June last year.

You just wait for someone to bemoan the fact that it's not the quantity of frees, it's where you get them etc.

6 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Last week we blame the umpires for losing the free kick count 29-20.

Yesterday we win the free kick handily by +8. Yet we still blame the umpires.

I'd suggest we're all deflecting from the fact that we've been an unacceptable footy side since June last year.

The in game umpiring was actually ok. But you cannot argue the 3-4 goals that were handed to Port from absolutely nothing frees. It murdered us.

26 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Last week we blame the umpires for losing the free kick count 29-20.

Yesterday we win the free kick handily by +8. Yet we still blame the umpires.

I'd suggest we're all deflecting from the fact that we've been an unacceptable footy side since June last year.

Both can be true

1 hour ago, biggestred said:

Both can be true

Yes. a team could win the free kick count 30-10, but if all 30 are in the back pocket and the opposition get all of their 10 in the attacking goal square, the impact on the result could be massive. An extreme example I know, but winning the count does mean nothing.

Also, the standard of umpiring didnt cost us the game yesterday but there were several very questionable decisions that were incredibly obviously wrong. The one against May for a start.

Look I'll concede that there was some really strange stuff in this game and a few cruel calls, but apart from the other stuff that we should be focussing on, it needs to be said that this team are experts in giving free kicks away, whether legit or not. We put ourselves in bad positions where your heart is in the mouth because the umpire's whistle is in his poised. Whether it's talking back, not giving the ball back, encroaching, sitting into someone's back (Which I reckon I saw May do at least 3 times yesterday in a tackle and NOT get pinged) we love a good free against.

3 quarter time took the biscuit for me, even throughout this game I felt we were in it, Port played a smart game but hardly a world beating performance. We came out in the 3rd and raised the bar, red time in that quarter was so important as the 50-50 moments ebbed and flowed, it was the most crucial part of the game as we were 11 points down, I remember thinking to myself if we just see this quarter out I will take it. The clock wouldn't count down quick enough but come on guys you can do it.

With 3 seconds left Jack Viney takes the ball on the wing, the tackle is dicey but he's pinged for holding the ball. One would think not to bother but with 3 seconds left and the ball on the wing, we're sweet! No, no, no, low and behold a 50 is paid and SPP bins it.

I can't tell you how much that moment ticked me off. You are never safe with this team, we have stunk in junk time for a very long time now. The flash through the mind in that moment was "How can Melbourne somehow make sure that before the end of this quarter, the ball sails through the opposition sticks?" When you've seen this crud so many times it becomes expected.

The key here is that whether this 50 was a good or bad decision, we constantly put ourselves in stupid positions like this where something like that can happen. The difference between 11 and 17 points at 3QT is a big one.

People would be well within their right to complain about this 50 being paid and not the one for Max at the end of last week's game but, we're constantly bemoaning these things when it counts but the sample data over time is that this happens often and isn't a coincidence.

11 minutes ago, layzie said:

Look I'll concede that there was some really strange stuff in this game and a few cruel calls, but apart from the other stuff that we should be focussing on, it needs to be said that this team are experts in giving free kicks away, whether legit or not. We put ourselves in bad positions where your heart is in the mouth because the umpire's whistle is in his poised. Whether it's talking back, not giving the ball back, encroaching, sitting into someone's back (Which I reckon I saw May do at least 3 times yesterday in a tackle and NOT get pinged) we love a good free against.

3 quarter time took the biscuit for me, even throughout this game I felt we were in it, Port played a smart game but hardly a world beating performance. We came out in the 3rd and raised the bar, red time in that quarter was so important as the 50-50 moments ebbed and flowed, it was the most crucial part of the game as we were 11 points down, I remember thinking to myself if we just see this quarter out I will take it. The clock wouldn't count down quick enough but come on guys you can do it.

With 3 seconds left Jack Viney takes the ball on the wing, the tackle is dicey but he's pinged for holding the ball. One would think not to bother but with 3 seconds left and the ball on the wing, we're sweet! No, no, no, low and behold a 50 is paid and SPP bins it.

I can't tell you how much that moment ticked me off. You are never safe with this team, we have stunk in junk time for a very long time now. The flash through the mind in that moment was "How can Melbourne somehow make sure that before the end of this quarter, the ball sails through the opposition sticks?" When you've seen this crud so many times it becomes expected.

The key here is that whether this 50 was a good or bad decision, we constantly put ourselves in stupid positions like this where something like that can happen. The difference between 11 and 17 points at 3QT is a big one.

People would be well within their right to complain about this 50 being paid and not the one for Max at the end of last week's game but, we're constantly bemoaning these things when it counts but the sample data over time is that this happens often and isn't a coincidence.

Should have been a free to JV in the 1st case shoved face first into the turf both arms pinned. Then 50m, even the commentators disagreed for once. Daylight robbery for a mean spirited act. Well done umpire, atrocious decision layzie.

2 hours ago, layzie said:

You just wait for someone to bemoan the fact that it's not the quantity of frees, it's where you get them etc.

I have already done that Layzie.

However, we lost against Port and I am not blaming umpiring.