Autopsy AFL 2022 Round 11 - Swans v Tigers Fri May 27th 7:50pm EST (SCG)

[Supercoach Bargain]

Brad Scott will review the decision/non-decision/general sh1tfight.

Wil say the umpires were brilliant.

 

[JT_the_Man]

Your not entitled. Its called dissent. Waving your arms in the air is dissent. Apply letter of law still same result.

Questioning and dissent are two different things, regardless of a couple of umpiring blunders through the year on the rule.

 

[Arr0w]

Mansell smacked Ginivan after the siren, umpire states we can't pay a free

Ball kicked away after the siren, can't pay a 50

 

[HTPunter]

If it was unsportsmanlike in nature then no, it could definitely be a free kick. Say for instance, the umpire paid the free and Warner acknowledged the umpire, told Prestia to get ducked and put the ball under his top and pretended he was a pregnant woman then I'm sure it'd be paid.

Provided play was not impeded or delayed and no unsportsmanlike conduct occurred then it can't be fifty.

The argument that play was impeded or delayed is laughable at best and is not one I'm going to entertain. If anyone wants to make that argument then I'm not sure I can stop them, as for them to reach that conclusion they'd need to be totally void of any common sense.

if we want to get into semantics then that's a dissent free all day for the aggressive nature in which the players approached the umpires questioning their decision. Not something I would've liked to see, though.

Your not entitled. Its called dissent. Waving your arms in the air is dissent. Apply letter of law still same result.

Yep! Not that anyone wants that to be a dissent free...but if we're going to be all technical, letter of the law...then before the ump pays 50, Riewoldt shows dissent bang reversed

 

[HTPunter]

Mansell smacked Ginivan after the siren, umpire states we can't pay a free

Ball kicked away after the siren, can't pay a 50

Th Th that's different!

 

[Sentinel]

Mansell smacked Ginivan after the siren, umpire states we can't pay a free

Ball kicked away after the siren, can't pay a 50

This is just wrong. One was after play had ended, the other wasn't. Play can continue after the siren in the case of a mark/free kick.

 

[Mister B]

Precedent has been set. If there's enough doubt you didn't hear the whistle just boot it as far as you can to let your team set up behind the play. Real can of worms that one opened.

Richardson was similar distance away on the boundary and said he didn't hear the whistle and didn't heart he free paid. If he couldn't hear it how on earth would a player be expected to hear it when the whistle went a split second before the siren?

 

[CarterS]

Brad Scott will review the decision/non-decision/general sh1tfight.

Wil say the umpires were brilliant.

 

[DazzaTys]

Regardless, 61 free kicks. Again, great game ruined by umpires with absolutely zero feel for the game. Just deadset ruining this great game.

 

[Eshay187]

What’s worse, this or when Rampe climbed the post?

 

[Grockadoc]

You need to include the previous sentence though:
"The end of a quarter occurs when any field Umpire or emergency Umpire first hears the siren sounded by the Timekeepers to signal the end of a quarter."

The quarter ends when the first umpire hears the siren. The raising of the hands and blowing the whistle is to (a) let the timekeepers know he has heard the siren (so they can stop blowing it) and (b) to indicate to the players that the quarter has finished - ie stop playing.

For the purpose of deciding whether something occurred before or after the siren though (eg a mark or free kick for example) the decision is based on when the first umpire on the field hears the siren, not when the arms are raised/whistle is blown.

This is why the rules state that it is the first umpire to hear the siren when the quarter ends. It's possible that the controlling umpire may not hear the siren and pay a mark (for example) which occurs after another umpire hears the siren. In that case the other umpire would step in and advise that the mark doesn't stand.

Where does it say that in the AFL rule book. It says it on Wikipedia, but not in the Laws of the Game handbook on the AFL website.

 

[Arr0w]

This is just wrong. One was after play had ended, the other wasn't.

Kick into the crowd was after the siren, same as the hit on Ginnivan

 

[PetterdHoisted]

2 points. Would have been a draw IF the goal was kicked.

Haha yes, gifted them a 4 point differential over us when it could have been zero

Just disgraceful stuff

Need umpires to umpire the rules of the game at all time, not try to please the home crowd, or feel sorry for a bloke who made the mistake of booting the ball away from Prestia

 

[Schauermann]

But credit to Buddy. I was one of the biggest doubters of that long contract. Expected him to be retired like 2 years ago. Drinking cocktails in the sun nowadays.

 

[Sentinel]

Kick into the crowd was after the siren, same as the hit on Ginnivan

Prestia had the free kick to take, despite the siren. Play wasn't finished. You're wrong.

 

[4tone]

A bit surprised the swans weren't paid a free and multiple 50;s for umpire dissent, like the bloke had about 10 tigers chewing his ear off.

 

[Corn Cobbers]

Mansell smacked Ginivan after the siren, umpire states we can't pay a free

Ball kicked away after the siren, can't pay a 50

First sentence correct

Second sentence incorrect

 

[Arr0w]

Prestia had the free kick to take, despite the siren. Play wasn't finished. You're wrong.

Actually no, not wrong

 

[Delediodamage]

Common sense is irrelevant, we see ridiculous free kicks and 50m penalties all the time

Obvious 50m penalty

Dunno mate. Have you seen some of the rubbish frees this year? They're mostly there by 'the book' but the best umpires have a better feel for the game and only pay the obvious. The prohibited contact paid against Rioli was hilarious for example. Technically it's a free, but who wants that to be paid? Nobody (surely!!!???)

 

[Farang83150]

From 30 points or so up

 

[Arr0w]

First sentence correct

Second sentence incorrect

Why the second incorrect?

 

[Brackets]

Mate, there was a free paid for 'dissent' called in relation to a free/decision gone unrewarded in this game. Did you watch it?

I have honestly not noticed one ever being awarded but I take your word.

The vast majority aren't punished from my observation though.

 

[sherb]

Where does it say that in the AFL rule book. It says it on Wikipedia, but not in the Laws of the Game handbook on the AFL website.

Rule 10.5, page 34

10.5 END OF QUARTER
(a) The end of a quarter occurs when any field Umpire or emergency Umpire first hears the siren sounded by the Timekeepers to signal the end of a quarter. The field Umpire shall acknowledge the siren and bring play to an end by blowing a whistle and holding both arms above their head.

https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2022/03/28/6d92ed7c-efc2-44dc-86bc-9fa1d9b338ad/2022-Laws-of-the-Game-Booklet.pdf

 

[Sentinel]

Actually no, not wrong

Actually yes, you are.

 

[Corn Cobbers]

Dunno mate. Have you seen some of the rubbish frees this year? They're mostly there by 'the book' but the best umpires have a better feel for the game and only pay the obvious. The prohibited contact paid against Rioli was hilarious for example. Technically it's a free, but who wants that to be paid? Nobody (surely!!!???)

Prestia was entitled to have the ball returned to him immediately so he could have a ping before everyone got back

50m every day of the week