Four field umpires

[Igavemyloveachicken]

Honestly at this point, get rid of the bounce.

Couldn't agree more, it kills a teams momentum when they have the call the ball back to throw it up, ruins the flow of the game for mine.

 

[theyellowsash]

i dont care if 4 umpires result in more free kicks per game. the 79 grand final had 91, and that seems to be remembered as a classic game. a high qty of free kicks means nothing to the quality of the game, if anything the more there are the better the game may be as its a much more open and free flowing contest.

just as long as the decisions make sense.

 

[theyellowsash]

I Dont mind four umpires if they get rid of boundary umpires and have the field umpires throw it in.

who would umpire if the ball has gone over the line?

 

[Hoops]

who would umpire if the ball has gone over the line?

The umpire closest to where the ball went out

 

[theyellowsash]

The umpire closest to where the ball went out

how? if theyre standing in the field of play, how are they supposed to see the line? you need someone standing on the line

 

[Hoops]

how? if theyre standing in the field of play, how are they supposed to see the line? you need someone standing on the line

There's four umpires one of them can stand on the line when required

 

[theyellowsash]

There's four umpires one of them can stand on the line when required

so youre going to add to the running requirements of the umpires by making them sprint from side to side across the full length of the ground so they can stand on the line?

so what you gonna do then the ball gets kicked out of a pack in the middle of the ground after a ball up? does the umpire need to somehow run 40m to boundary before the ball can get there? the players cant run faster than the ball when its kicked, let alone the umpires.

 

[Billy ray]

4 fields (operating in pairs)
4 boundary, 2 each side
4 goal, one behind each goal post and able to easily see if ball is OOB or a behind

no reason goal umpires cant do multiple games over a weekend

 

[My_Username]

Article said something about putting less stress on umpires bodies allowing them to have longer careers.

2 points.

1. This doesn't mean 4 on the field at a time...having 4 umps umpiring for 3 qtrs and having one on the bench would also work for this.
2. It brings us a step closer to umpiring as a full time career, which many here seem to like.

 

[Breretonisahood]

i dont care if 4 umpires result in more free kicks per game. the 79 grand final had 91, and that seems to be remembered as a classic game. a high qty of free kicks means nothing to the quality of the game, if anything the more there are the better the game may be as its a much more open and free flowing contest.

just as long as the decisions make sense.

Agreed that there were many more frees paid in those days. Difference is, in 1979 the free kicks were for the “fundamental” rules : HTB, HTM, in the back, incorrect disposal etc rather than bs like lack of intent OOB, rushed behinds, 3rd man up etc.

 

[Kick with the wind]

What is needed is a people's rush at the AFL hierarchy, similar to the Capital Hill Crush in Washington, and destroy the frightening thought of the 4 umpire theory and the fruitcakes who come up the idea. I knew those dropkicks were going to do this. Do they have any idea about the game and umpiring? I truly don't think so, they need to be exterminated. I would love to face these jokers and tell them what they're doing is foolish, dumb and preposterous. They have no right to fashion the game because of their theories. Who the hell do you think you are. I say get rid of them, they're useless and dangerous. To challenge whoever from the AFL would be a piece of cake in theories about umpiring. I would make mincemeat of them. Let's not let them do it . We have to stop these twits from doing it. God help our game.

 

[kozi]

When the rules are the problem more umpires isn't the answer.

 

[Bianconeri]

**** me

The evidence has never been clearer this year, the more free kicks the worse the game. I don't care about the stats but the early games seemed like one free kick after another and they were horrible. Since a few weeks ago it seems far fewer free kicks and the games have been awesome

Now add another umpire who needs to find a minimum of 10 frees a game to justify his position we will be back to averging 60 + frees

This makes me so mad. The game is better for 20 borderline free kicks to go unpaid than 1 non existent free to be paid, especially in front of goal

Not sure how more free kicks are bad. The more free kicks that get paid the less congestion there is and you get a more free flowing game.

 

[My_Username]

Not sure how more free kicks are bad. The more free kicks that get paid the less congestion there is and you get a more free flowing game.

Back in the day, yes.

Now players are fitter, and better rested (interchange), so the delay just allows them to run and setup to congest where the free kick lands.

 

[Dee Train]

We need more score reviews. Not enough crypto advertising time at the moment

 

[Bianconeri]

Back in the day, yes.

Now players are fitter, and better rested (interchange), so the delay just allows them to run and setup to congest where the free kick lands.

The more free kicks the more running to set up there is. Repeat stoppages allow teams to set up around the ball and not move very far more and free kick would help combat this.

 

[BigPond101]

Not sure how more free kicks are bad. The more free kicks that get paid the less congestion there is and you get a more free flowing game.

It just kills the enjoyment for me when every contest or pack mark I'm expecting the whistle to go and a free to be plucked out somewhere. But people enjoy different things so thats just my opinion

Someone said on the last page the cynical view is they want to increase scoring by having a 4th umpire paying heaps of frees inside 50. I would rather watch a low scoring game than a game with 40 goals where half of them come from free kicks in the goalsquare

 

[Fadge]

The WWE-FL just don't get it...

 

[Dirty Bird]

I Dont mind four umpires if they get rid of boundary umpires and have the field umpires throw it in.

Which in theory is good at the top level

However, you now take away the ambition of boundary umpires at lower levels.

So leagues elsewhere in the country might struggle to fill spots as less individiuals would take up the role of a boundary umpire.

 

[My_Username]

Which in theory is good at the top level

However, you now take away the ambition of boundary umpires at lower levels.

So leagues elsewhere in the country might struggle to fill spots as less individiuals would take up the role of a boundary umpire.

I agree, but if you think the AFL gives any consideration to lower levels, I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[CrowToon]

I don't mind at all that they are going to four. I don't even mind Eddie's call for 8.

I'd personally go for 6.

I think they are better off giving certain umpires roles and therefore certain frees to look out for. If the rule isn't in your remit then you can't call it.

For example, have 1x Umpire in each 50m arc. They are there only to adjudicate on marking contests. Make them experts in marking contests. Nothing else.

Have 1x umpire in each 50m who is responsible for all other decisions inside that 50m arc.

Have 2x umpires that patrol from arc to arc, not straying inside. Get them pretty much on either side of the square. They call all decisions in that neutral zone.

Abolish the idea forever that the non-controlling umpire from 50m away call anything. **** off.

The only exception to this might be a punch off the ball or serious violence.

We need to create umpires that are specialists in their role, especially inside the 50s where decisions can lead to scoring opportunities.

 

[BigVic]

The rule was trialled during the preseason cup (Wizard Home Loans Cup) in 2005

 

[Dirty Bird]

The rule was trialled during the preseason cup (Wizard Home Loans Cup) in 2005

And during the bye rounds in 2016-19

 

[aCunningPlan]

I understand how a fourth umpire may help the mid zone umpire by getting a view of the other side of play, but who will take control? That's the bit I can't quite wrap my head around. Yes out of zone umpires pay frees, but there is always one in control at any one time which is essential.
The end zone umpires already get in good positions to pay holding frees inside 50, but I get how it is a problem getting a good view of the play in the middle of the ground with quick passages through the corridor.

 

[madmug]

Caro seemed to indicate the main reason is to reduce the fitness required to hopefully get more female umpires.

their would be a lot of Umpires who are good decision makes & game managers who haven't quite got the fitness for AFL Umpiring.

This could lead to better decision making & better games with Umpires away from the corridors.

It'll certainly be interesting.