Umpiring Should a Goal Umpire be able to make a call for foot on the line

[BlindUmp]

In our association the instruction given to the goal umpires if you see this point down to the line, most field umpires will take our word for it and it works well

 

[jake_tha_peg]

In our association the instruction given to the goal umpires if you see this point down to the line, most field umpires will take our word for it and it works well

If the field umpire "takes your word for it" having not seen it himself then he is a fool. You never guess on a free kick - if you do not see it then don't pay it. How can the fieldie be looking at the line as well as the goal ump.

stick to waving the flags.

 

[Dirty Bird]

If the field umpire "takes your word for it" having not seen it himself then he is a fool. You never guess on a free kick - if you do not see it then don't pay it. How can the fieldie be looking at the line as well as the goal ump.

stick to waving the flags.

4 things

1) Then alot of field umpires are fools if that's the case.
Or would you tell the goal umpire "I didn't see the ball cross the line, it's 'play-on'" when there has been an on-line situation where the ball crossed the line, and came back into play?

It's situations where you're not in the best position where you need to trust your other umpires.

2) It's very easy to look at the line as well as the goal umpire, it is in the same line of vision if you're in the correct position afterall....

3) Stop trolling, and stop bringing Bay 13 to the Umpires board.

4) Is there something wrong with you?
Everything you've shown in this thread and other stupid threads you brought up such as the one that got deleted due to it's overwhelming stupidity, shows you're 1 of 2 things.
1) You're a s**t person, who devalutes other peoples importance to pump up your own ego.
or
2) You've got a s**t life, who needs to be a keyboard warrior and troll others.

Yes, I'm kinda sad actually biting the bait you're putting up, but it's mainly due to how ****ed up you are and my need to try and put you in your place.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Don't treat people like s**t, because they may very well be more senior than you in what you're talking about and don't make stupid comments about other disciplines of umpiring. All are vital to the game whether you like it or not.

Irony at its finest

Dirty Bird or whatever your new alias is - some people are treated as 5H1T because they deserve it. I have read your little blog and all your previous postings under your other pseudonyms and I can confidently describe you as a dribbling *, a total oxygen thief with the personality of a limp lettuce leaf.

You read all my previous postings?
Holy s**t, I used to have no life, so that would mean you too have no life - because after checking the stats, I made 8,745 posts in my old account and another 2,468 posts in this account (11,213 overall)

The only other people I know that come on-line changing identities and hiding behind nom-de-plumes are paedos or similar creeps such as yourself. So I have to disappoint you and tell you I am not a pre-pubescent teenager that will drop everything and come meet you at the corner shop so we can discuss the merits of who's better - Jean Luc Picard or James T Kirk. I am sure it works well for you in the other forums you sad sad little person.

So you're now making wild generalisations?
Oh, and I'm not on any other forums anymore, so there that goes, that myth is de-buffed

BTW - going from all the info posted online and from your association website - i know exactly who you are and to say that you have overstated your umpiring position would be the understatement of the century but dont worry your secrets (and insecurities and lack of self worth) are safe with me.

Funny, my association website has nothing on me....

Why don't you run along and work on your costume for the midnight premier of Harry Potter or the next comic book convention.

Are there even such things as comic book conventions anymore?
And I'm not nerdy enough to go to the midnight screening.
I've only ever gone to 2 midnight screenings of anything.
1 of the Harry Potter films, but we won tickets for that. I can't even remember which 1 it was, all I know is it was in the big cinema at Reading Rhodes. The other was a Next Gen Star Trek film at Hoyts Penrith, I think First Contact but it could of been Innsurrection

ps - I am a star trek nerd. what do you want in a captain?
Explorer? I'd go Janeway
Battle situations? Probably Sisko
Overall? Janeway in a heartbeat.

 

[jake_tha_peg]

4 things

1) Then alot of field umpires are fools if that's the case.
Or would you tell the goal umpire "I didn't see the ball cross the line, it's 'play-on'" when there has been an on-line situation where the ball crossed the line, and came back into play?

It's situations where you're not in the best position where you need to trust your other umpires.

2) It's very easy to look at the line as well as the goal umpire, it is in the same line of vision if you're in the correct position afterall....

3) Stop trolling, and stop bringing Bay 13 to the Umpires board.

4) Is there something wrong with you?
Everything you've shown in this thread and other stupid threads you brought up such as the one that got deleted due to it's overwhelming stupidity, shows you're 1 of 2 things.
1) You're a s**t person, who devalutes other peoples importance to pump up your own ego.
or
2) You've got a s**t life, who needs to be a keyboard warrior and troll others.

Yes, I'm kinda sad actually biting the bait you're putting up, but it's mainly due to how ****ed up you are and my need to try and put you in your place.

I know I failed maths but i counted more than 4 things in there.

Tell me again how many games as FIELD umpire have you oficiated in again. you being so experienced and all.

There is so much ammo in your two posts that it might take me a while to return fire but i'm sure you are looking forward to it when i do (just gotta stop laughing first)

 

[jake_tha_peg]

Irony at its finest


You read all my previous postings?
Holy s**t, I used to have no life, so that would mean you too have no life - because after checking the stats, I made 8,745 posts in my old account and another 2,468 posts in this account (11,213 overall)

So you're now making wild generalisations?
Oh, and I'm not on any other forums anymore, so there that goes, that myth is de-buffed

Funny, my association website has nothing on me....

Are there even such things as comic book conventions anymore?
And I'm not nerdy enough to go to the midnight screening.
I've only ever gone to 2 midnight screenings of anything.
1 of the Harry Potter films, but we won tickets for that. I can't even remember which 1 it was, all I know is it was in the big cinema at Reading Rhodes. The other was a Next Gen Star Trek film at Hoyts Penrith, I think First Contact but it could of been Innsurrection

ps - I am a star trek nerd. what do you want in a captain?
Explorer? I'd go Janeway
Battle situations? Probably Sisko
Overall? Janeway in a heartbeat.

Okay...First of all - The first quote is NOT an example of irony. You might get away with calling it hypocritical but (since I was actually quoting your own post) then even that would be stretching it. I bet you listen to Alanis Morrissette's song "Isn't it ironic" whilst blindly pumping your fist in the air yelling right on Alannis every time she sings "Isn't it ironic". The REAL irony there is that NONE of the examples quoted in that song are actually ironic

 

[jake_tha_peg]

"So you're now making wild generalisations?
Oh, and I'm not on any other forums anymore, so there that goes, that myth is de-buffed"

Once agin its an epic fail. I didnt use a generalisation as I prefaced my remark with "in my opinion". If I had of said "
All people...that come on-line changing identities and hiding behind nom-de-plumes are paedos or similar creeps such as yourself. So I have to disappoint you and tell you I am not a pre-pubescent teenager that will drop everything and come meet you at the corner shop so we can discuss the merits of who's better - Jean Luc Picard or James T Kirk. I am sure it works well for you in the other forums you sad sad little person."

Then that would have been a generalisation. You could get away with calling it a frothy mouthed ranting diatribe from a clearly insane person - I would certainly cop that.

Oh and thanks for de-buffing that myth (I thought it was looking a bit shiny).....maybe you meant debunked.

 

[jake_tha_peg]

4 things

1) Then alot of field umpires are fools if that's the case.
Or would you tell the goal umpire "I didn't see the ball cross the line, it's 'play-on'" when there has been an on-line situation where the ball crossed the line, and came back into play?

It's situations where you're not in the best position where you need to trust your other umpires.

2) It's very easy to look at the line as well as the goal umpire, it is in the same line of vision if you're in the correct position afterall....

3) Stop trolling, and stop bringing Bay 13 to the Umpires board.

4) Is there something wrong with you?
Everything you've shown in this thread and other stupid threads you brought up such as the one that got deleted due to it's overwhelming stupidity, shows you're 1 of 2 things.
1) You're a s**t person, who devalutes other peoples importance to pump up your own ego.
or
2) You've got a s**t life, who needs to be a keyboard warrior and troll others.

Yes, I'm kinda sad actually biting the bait you're putting up, but it's mainly due to how ****ed up you are and my need to try and put you in your place.

1.Have a look at the keyword there Forest Gump - "free-kick". I wasn't talking about adjuticating goals or on the boundary like.

2. You are showing your ignorance there little fella. Spoken like someone who has never been in the middle. try this next time you are in a game - focus on the line and then try and focus on the field umpire 40 metres away AT THE SAME TIME. (key word there is focus).
3. why should I when you make it so easy for me. small things amuse small minds and they don't come much smaller than u.

4 Yes there is something wrong with me. I am wasting valuable hours of my life tormenting you. a bit like poking a dog with a stick through a fence as a kid - you know its wrong but when the dog goes ballistic....mmmmmm.

And I cannot let you continue to embarrass yourself trying to expound your stupid baseless theories on aussie rules - the dangerous thing about that is that someone from the AFL rules committe might trawl this board and get some of your stupid ideas in their heads.

 

[borgsta2006]

when I used to umpire the goalies had a signal they'd give to the fieldie to tell them the player was over. Then we called it, consulted with the goalie and got the ruling, then explained to the player.
Was quite simple really.

 

[BlindUmp]

when I used to umpire the goalies had a signal they'd give to the fieldie to tell them the player was over. Then we called it, consulted with the goalie and got the ruling, then explained to the player.
Was quite simple really.

Yeah it worked well with most of the goalies borgy

 

[GameOver]

try reading it again (or get your mummy to do it for you as she tucks you in). I said that the rule itself should be scrapped (not the enforcing of it). If you knew where the umpire is required to stand at kickouts (about 30 metres behind man on the mark) you would know that it is nigh on impossible to see if a boot has gone over the line from front on 30 metres awa (especially when the line is not clearly marked most of the time). When the full back kicks sideways out of the square you are looking side on = much easier to call a foot fault.

I was agreeing with you in some part until the highlighted. You are either a) a lazy umpire or b) poorly coached. If you were 30m behind the guy on the mark and there's a short kick into the pocket, you're looking up a$$3S... get closer to the guy on the mark (5-10m) so that you're ready for the short kick and then if it's a long one work your @$$ off to get to the contest.

I agree though, common sense approach counts. pinkie on the line, meh. Whole foot, pay it. It's a rule that brings too much attention to the umpire's for a measly 2cm or so anyway.

 

[jake_tha_peg]

I was agreeing with you in some part until the highlighted. You are either a) a lazy umpire or b) poorly coached. If you were 30m behind the guy on the mark and there's a short kick into the pocket, you're looking up a$$3S... get closer to the guy on the mark (5-10m) so that you're ready for the short kick and then if it's a long one work your @$$ off to get to the contest.

I agree though, common sense approach counts. pinkie on the line, meh. Whole foot, pay it. It's a rule that brings too much attention to the umpire's for a measly 2cm or so anyway.

Touche - I actually meant 30 metres from the goal line rather than the man on the mark. clearly i was typing in a white-heat blinded rage. I would have thought it depended on whether you are in a 3 ump or 2 umpire game. If you are 5 metres behind the man on the mark and there is a long kick in to the 50 metre arc then you could be in trouble - however i see your point.

As for your second point - I go back to my original point of view at the start of the thread - the rule itself is such that the penalty far outweighs the harm done by breaching it. That and penalising a team for interchange transgressions are like smashing walnuts with a sledgehammer.

 

[GameOver]

Touche - I actually meant 30 metres from the goal line rather than the man on the mark. clearly i was typing in a white-heat blinded rage. I would have thought it depended on whether you are in a 3 ump or 2 umpire game. If you are 5 metres behind the man on the mark and there is a long kick in to the 50 metre arc then you could be in trouble - however i see your point.

Shouldn't matter whether it's a 2 or 3. The 3rd umpire doesn't come into calculations. Long kick out wide is retained by the EZ not handed over. Long kick down the middle (assuming goes outside 50 and around the edge of square) is a handover. This is the same for a 2 or 3.

 

[Cronos]

Touche - I actually meant 30 metres from the goal line rather than the man on the mark. clearly i was typing in a white-heat blinded rage. I would have thought it depended on whether you are in a 3 ump or 2 umpire game. If you are 5 metres behind the man on the mark and there is a long kick in to the 50 metre arc then you could be in trouble - however i see your point.

So now your 30m from the man of the mark is actually 16m at most (HALF!)

As for your second point - I go back to my original point of view at the start of the thread - the rule itself is such that the penalty far outweighs the harm done by breaching it. That and penalising a team for interchange transgressions are like smashing walnuts with a sledgehammer.

This is why people bitch about umpires all the time because of a lack of consistency.

Your job as a field umpire is not to umpire to your own version of the rules, but to umpire to the rules as presented in the laws of the game. Whether you think the penalty is too harsh or too soft is irrelevant.

13.1.b The football must be kicked from within the Goal Square. For the avoidance of doubt, one foot of the Player must be behind any of the lines which defines the Goal Square at the time the Player Kicks the football.

When they wrote that law, they were even kind enough to remove doubt. If you think a pinkie over the line doesn't give any benefit, then why do players insist on kicking so close to the line. The line doesn't move. The line isn't a surprise. How any player can actually fall victim to this law is beyond me. If you allow the pinkie to go over, then why not a whole foot, after all, there's no advantage to it? How about a metre? Maybe right up to the man on the mark 5m away...

 

[GameOver]

This is why people bitch about umpires all the time because of a lack of consistency.

That's 1 reason and another is because umpires get too technical (like calling a pinkie over a line from 15m away). A whole foot over the line is clear and can't be argued. A toe, try telling a player, supporter, official that you were 100% certain that his toe was over the line. Sometimes people over complicate things and cause rods for their own backs by being too technical. Everyone has their own opinion on this and take mine for what you will. I'm sure borgsta will back me up here by saying common sense has worked for me and this is just plain common sense.

 

[mrcaohead]

Being a boundary umpire I'm sure I'm far more attractive and intelligent than all of you. Some good points are raised there but you cant just scrap a rule, there has to be some sort of boundary. And ofcourse you can rely on the goal umpire and take their word you ****ing dill, what do boundary umpires do when the ball is down near the goals and they can't see the line? A good boundary will look straight to the goalie to make the call. As for having goalies actually call this one though, keep in mind that means we have to go back to players waiting for the goalies to wave to kick which slows the game down more. The real questions are why do goalies wave their flags after a goal, isn't it fair obvious? And why are the goalies still the score keepers in the afl, it would make so much send to have 1 official scorer wouldn't it?

 

[Over The Post]

I don't see why goalies can't just point at the line and yell "yours" for an obvious infringement. Common sense.

From all the froffing and hysteria generated by our esteemed fieldie here, my thinking is he might be a certain personality well known in WRFL and now BFLUA circles, and has his very own hate blogs for people and organizations who don't see things his way...

Ignore him and he'll eventually find somewhere else to infest.

 

[Umpsupporter]

As a Goal umpire of 14 years, I know the definitive answer and that is NO.

We are Goal Umpires, we are the judges of the score, the Boundary umpires are the judges of the ball going over the boundary line and Field Umpires pay the free kicks etc. Full back kicking out and having foot on the line is not a score. It is not a Goal Umpire's business if we think the full back has kicked with his foot on the line, just as it is not the Field Umpire's or Boundary Umpire's business as to what a score is. I personally don't think Boundary Umpires should overule Goal Umpires on scoring decision which they can't anyway, unless the Goal Umpire asks for assistance. A field Umpire may advise the Goal Umpire what he thinks the decision is, but a consultation should only take place if the Goal Umpire is not sure what the score is. In the AFL there is too much time wasting, with the Field Umpire trying to over rule the Goal Umpire, which I don't think is right. Let the Goal Umpire make the scoring decisions if he is certain there should be no question particurly if he/she is in the correct decision. There is too much time wasting with consultations.

Same with the Field Umpire, a Goal umpire, doesn't and should not even think about questioning Field Umpires decision. If that's the case, a goal umpire is not keeping concentration on the job he is employed to make.

My advice is to concentrate on your own job and not even think about the Field Umpire's job.

 

[rickyp]

That's 1 reason and another is because umpires get too technical (like calling a pinkie over a line from 15m away). A whole foot over the line is clear and can't be argued. A toe, try telling a player, supporter, official that you were 100% certain that his toe was over the line. Sometimes people over complicate things and cause rods for their own backs by being too technical. Everyone has their own opinion on this and take mine for what you will. I'm sure borgsta will back me up here by saying common sense has worked for me and this is just plain common sense.

If their toe is over the line, half of their foot is on the line which is well past where they're meant to have it

 

[CQTiger]

As a Goal umpire of 14 years, I know the definitive answer and that is NO.

We are Goal Umpires, we are the judges of the score, the Boundary umpires are the judges of the ball going over the boundary line and Field Umpires pay the free kicks etc. Full back kicking out and having foot on the line is not a score. It is not a Goal Umpire's business if we think the full back has kicked with his foot on the line, just as it is not the Field Umpire's or Boundary Umpire's business as to what a score is. I personally don't think Boundary Umpires should overule Goal Umpires on scoring decision which they can't anyway, unless the Goal Umpire asks for assistance. A field Umpire may advise the Goal Umpire what he thinks the decision is, but a consultation should only take place if the Goal Umpire is not sure what the score is. In the AFL there is too much time wasting, with the Field Umpire trying to over rule the Goal Umpire, which I don't think is right. Let the Goal Umpire make the scoring decisions if he is certain there should be no question particurly if he/she is in the correct decision. There is too much time wasting with consultations.

Same with the Field Umpire, a Goal umpire, doesn't and should not even think about questioning Field Umpires decision. If that's the case, a goal umpire is not keeping concentration on the job he is employed to make.

My advice is to concentrate on your own job and not even think about the Field Umpire's job.

I think in this day and age that is a bit naive. Umpiring works best as a team to achieve the correct decision.Within obvious guidelines if one umpire misses something blatant and another umpire sees it then for the good of the game they should signal it. Do you turn a blind eye if you see a player take the ball over the boundary line near the goals and attempt to play on as the the boundary umpire was a 100 m behind play and missed it? I hope not.

 

[Dirty Bird]

As a Goal umpire of 14 years, I know the definitive answer and that is NO.

We are Goal Umpires, we are the judges of the score.

No, well, not now, we're now the FINAL judge of score.
If we're 100% certain of a score, go with it.
If someone else is 100% and you're just 99.9% sure of a score, go with him, and it's on his head.

I think in this day and age that is a bit naive. Umpiring works best as a team to achieve the correct decision.Within obvious guidelines if one umpire misses something blatant and another umpire sees it then for the good of the game they should signal it. Do you turn a blind eye if you see a player take the ball over the boundary line near the goals and attempt to play on as the the boundary umpire was a 100 m behind play and missed it? I hope not.

This ^^^

 

[jake_tha_peg]

As a Goal umpire of 14 years, I know the definitive answer and that is NO.

We are Goal Umpires, we are the judges of the score, the Boundary umpires are the judges of the ball going over the boundary line and Field Umpires pay the free kicks etc. Full back kicking out and having foot on the line is not a score. It is not a Goal Umpire's business if we think the full back has kicked with his foot on the line, just as it is not the Field Umpire's or Boundary Umpire's business as to what a score is. I personally don't think Boundary Umpires should overule Goal Umpires on scoring decision which they can't anyway, unless the Goal Umpire asks for assistance. A field Umpire may advise the Goal Umpire what he thinks the decision is, but a consultation should only take place if the Goal Umpire is not sure what the score is. In the AFL there is too much time wasting, with the Field Umpire trying to over rule the Goal Umpire, which I don't think is right. Let the Goal Umpire make the scoring decisions if he is certain there should be no question particurly if he/she is in the correct decision. There is too much time wasting with consultations.

Same with the Field Umpire, a Goal umpire, doesn't and should not even think about questioning Field Umpires decision. If that's the case, a goal umpire is not keeping concentration on the job he is employed to make.

My advice is to concentrate on your own job and not even think about the Field Umpire's job.

ABSOLUTELY 1000% correct Umps supporter. Couldn't agree more. This is the most common sense posted yet on this topic. When umps start wanting to expand their role in the game you have to question their motives (ie are they trying to impose themselves on the game and be noticed).

You have no right posting in this forum if you are going to be so sensible and talk common sense. You will put the rest to shame.

 

[Cronos]

When umps start wanting to expand their role in the game you have to question their motives (ie are they trying to impose themselves on the game and be noticed).

Or maybe they care about this game and realise that an extra set of eyes is always an advantage to making the right call.

I've been involved with umpiring for some time now, and would prefer the right call be made, rather than having everyone so ridiculously concerned about stepping on someone's toes.

 

[jake_tha_peg]

Or maybe they care about this game and realise that an extra set of eyes is always an advantage to making the right call.

I've been involved with umpiring for some time now, and would prefer the right call be made, rather than having everyone so ridiculously concerned about stepping on someone's toes.

Nice warm and fuzzy idea but computer says Nooooo. I think I was right in my post. If they "cared" about it so much - let them drop their flags and take up the whistle themselves.

Good Luck to everyon in their Finals Games this week btw...I will be sure to put the goalies back in their place if anyone tries to call a foot fault on a kick in.

 

[Cronos]

Nice warm and fuzzy idea but computer says Nooooo. I think I was right in my post. If they "cared" about it so much - let them drop their flags and take up the whistle themselves.

Good Luck to everyon in their Finals Games this week btw...I will be sure to put the goalies back in their place if anyone tries to call a foot fault on a kick in.

If you're a Field Umpire, then the over-inflated ego you display is what's going wrong with our game. And the comment about "if they cared so much"... Wow. I guess you'd prefer everyone abandoned the other disciplines and we stuck with the random guy on the sideline who will stand behind the goals for a beer after the game eh?