Umpiring Swans v Tigers - Should it have been 50?

[NaturalDisaster]

Should have been, since when was "not hearing a whistle" an excuse?

but I also understand why they didn't pay it. That said this will become a precedent, now every campaigner will try argue he didn't hear the whistle.

I am more concerned about the very first free of the game (still haven't deciphered what that was for) and the "prohibited contact" rule against Rioli which seemed to have been made up on the spot.

 

[HTPunter]

Riewoldt doesn't complain if umpire pays 50....

He complained while the umpire was deciding, so technically yes he could have

 

[kaiserchief13]

He complained while the umpire was deciding, so technically yes he could have

Why did the umpire need time to decide? Since when do umpires need time to decide? If anything a decision like this should be reviewable

 

[HTPunter]

Riewoldt doesn't complain if umpire pays 50....

And also you can argue this about EVERY dissent decision. Lloyd doesn't argue if he gets the HTB against Bolton tonight

 

[Purple Suit]

Dissent rule is up to the umpires discretion, 50 meters from a player kicking it away is not discretionary based

This is not true, everything is up to the umpires discretion thanks to the AFL.

 

[HTPunter]

Why did the umpire need time to decide? Since when do umpires need time to decide? If anything a decision like this should be reviewable

When it's a very uncommon scenario and the ump isn't sure?? Wtf nonsense is this lol the ump can decide however long it takes to make the right decision. Even the other week two frees were paid at once and they had to come together and decide.

 

[LSRU]

Riewoldt doesn't complain if umpire pays 50....

You wouldn’t find it disrespectful if someone stood in your face telling you how to do you job?

Isn’t umpire respect the crux of this (years) issue?

 

[giggler99]

These are spit second decisions two things .1) Warner might've thought it was his free for the whack he copped in the face .2) The ball is kicked in the crowd after the siren so no 50m penalty anyway! common sense prevailed.

 

[HTPunter]

Should have been, since when was "not hearing a whistle" an excuse?

but I also understand why they didn't pay it as they siren had gone and the Sydney player assumed it was just done.

I am more concerned about the very first free of the game (still haven't deciphered what that was for) and the "prohibited contact" rule against Rioli which seemed to have been made up on the spot.

Do people not watch other games? There was like 3 of those Rioli ones in the Hawks v Lions game alone, they've been cracking down on any elbow and fist contact at stoppages. Prohibited contact is a shitty rule yes but they pay it weekly.

 

[LSRU]

Massive short term memory on this one. I instinctively thought 50 as well.
But umpire discretion happens a lot in these free kick, ball kicked away scenarios. It just never mattered enough for us to care.

 

[damicky]

Yes because he was arguing BEFORE the decision was made either way. Before they decided that it wasn't 50 Grimes had already had to pull away Riewoldt who was in the umps face. Based on this year, that's dissent.

I am pretty sure you can appeal for a decision … that happens all the time

It can’t really be dissent until you have something to show dissent for

 

[branedotorg]

Should have been a free to Warner imo

 

[VL3OJ]

Also if anyone wants to argue it's 50, then they should also have to argue why it isn't a free against Riewoldt for dissent? In context of the season it's dissent all day long, so if you can pay a 50 after the siren you can reverse it. 2 teammates pushed him away so clearly he was having a fair crack.

How can you as a sports person not ask the question in this situation? I thought it was well handled by the umpires and imagine had the dissent rule not been enforced this years with both teams on the boundary and a single umpire. We just need to nuance this and to allow players to vent their own frustration at giving a free kick.

 

[damicky]

You wouldn’t find it disrespectful if someone stood in your face telling you how to do you job?

Isn’t umpire respect the crux of this (years) issue?

This happens to me many times a day

Apparently the customer is always right

 

[Purple Suit]

Do people not watch other games? There was like 3 of those Rioli ones in the Hawks v Lions game alone, they've been cracking down on any elbow and fist contact at stoppages. Prohibited contact is a shitty rule yes but they pay it weekly.

The holding the man frees are the bullshit focus of the year, Richmond only got back into it due to a crap call in the centre when Vlaustin dropped it.

Warner got a hand in the face but that soft as butter holding call at the death was embarrassing if it had of decided the game.

 

[AndyLucimitis]

In normal time that 50 would be paid because it would be deemed to be wasting time allowing your own players to get back and defend.

As siren had gone no time was being wasted.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[damicky]

Should have been, since when was "not hearing a whistle" an excuse?

but I also understand why they didn't pay it. That said this will become a precedent, now every campaigner will try argue he didn't hear the whistle.

I am more concerned about the very first free of the game (still haven't deciphered what that was for) and the "prohibited contact" rule against Rioli which seemed to have been made up on the spot.

That was the winning goal

 

[LSRU]

This happens to me many times a day

Apparently the customer is always right

Cool.

That doesn’t answer my question though does it?

Do you find it disrespectful?
And have you not heard 50s being paid this year for umpire disrespect?

 

[quotemokc]

I'd have thought you'd have to pretty shameless to want to draw a game based off a decision like that.

Fixed.

 

[damicky]

Cool.

That doesn’t answer my question though does it?

Do you find it disrespectful?
And have you not heard 50s being paid this year for umpire disrespect?

As I said earlier, you can appeal for a decision

 

[LSRU]

As I said earlier, you can appeal for a decision

Might want to let ol Grimey know. He seemed to think jack was doing a little more.

 

[BF Tiger]

Ultimately this one decision is neither here nor there. We should all be complaining about the general poor state of umpiring, the grey area written in to all the rules and the general confusion that a lot of players even have as to what is legal and what is not on the field.

 

[SSwans2011]

Fixed.

Absolutely, it makes it even more silly.

 

[LSRU]

Ultimately this one decision is neither here nor there. We should all be complaining about the general poor state of umpiring, the grey area written in to all the rules and the general confusion that a lot of players even have as to what is legal and what is not on the field.

Well said

 

[SSwans2011]

Should have been, since when was "not hearing a whistle" an excuse?

but I also understand why they didn't pay it. That said this will become a precedent, now every campaigner will try argue he didn't hear the whistle.

I am more concerned about the very first free of the game (still haven't deciphered what that was for) and the "prohibited contact" rule against Rioli which seemed to have been made up on the spot.

The prohibited contact against Riloi on Hayward in the third quarter was worse. I actually laughed out loud at that one.