AFL Umpiring - do you honestly believe they are corruptible?

[Dogs till i die]

In all seriousness tho, the umpires have zero accountability and it does make you wonder. With our very complex rules and interpretations of them being flexible It would be extremely easy for the umpires to make certain things happen.

Since when has zero accountability been a good thing. Just think about your work place and the little extra things you get away with because you know you can. Like 5 mins extra on a lunch break. Or arriving 15 minutes late. Now imagine you have no accountability and could make than an extra hour lunch break or 45 mins late to work. You take what you can get.

And I'm sure that not every umpire is 100% clean.

Of course they are accountable, they get videod and reviewed each week within an inch of their lives. They are accountable to their coaches, their peers (if one was "not clean" as you say, their 2 on field peers would notice) and their selection committee.

You're sure some are not clean are you? Give me some facts that would stand up in court and not just 'cos its the vibe'.

 

[estibador]

Whilst the term ‘umpires influencing games’ gets thrown around, AFL would surely be one of the most difficult sports to have dirty umpires in. Compare a couple of other major sports.

Cricket - two umpires on the field, 10 wickets per team. Every wicket has value, especially top order batsmen. Give 1 out to a dodgy call or one not out when he was plumb who goes on to make a century and you’ve impact the result by a massive margin.

Soccer - given the low scoring nature, one penalty call can decide a game.

If we look at AFL, even a kick on the siren like the Shuey kick v Port that ultimately did decide the result - that’s a hell of a risky strategy if you’re trying to fix results. 22 goals were kicked in that game and after 5? quarters of football you’re relying on it still being within a kick.

I know umpires can affect the flow of a game and a string of kicks can have a big influence, but in a sport where 15 - 20 goals (or more) a game is the norm and possession counts now generally 300+ per team, it isn’t even a bright strategy to try and fix a sport as dynamic as ours.

But it's also one of the easiest sports to 'set the tone' in thanks to the 50/50 nature of our rules.

If all those 50/50's go one way early on then all of a sudden one team feels bulletproof and can attack every contest like a bull in a china shop with no fear of reprisal. Meanwhile the other team who are being pinged for every 50/50 go into their shell and start second guessing themselves for fear of giving away a free for every slip over the shoulder etc. Net result is team A completely wrestle the momentum away from team B and run away with the match.

And because that net result means one team ends up outplaying the other everyone insists any lopsided umpiring didn't matter anyway. And once the damage is done the umps can start umpiring evenly or even give a few 'make up' frees to team B to even up the count as we often see, so everyone says "they might have had a few calls go their way early, but that doesn't explain the margin of 'x' points."

So I'd argue it's actually one of the easier sports for umpires to influence without being called out for blatantly cheating, since due to the 50/50 nature of our rules nearly every single decision can be defended as correct to varying degrees, unlike the more black and white rules of cricket or soccer in the examples you proved.

I'm not suggesting this is a deliberate strategy from the umps, but as I've said before they're only human and subconscious bias plays a part. For example, there's no way anyone can convince me that the umps in the 2016 grand final were umpiring both teams evenly. One team were the media and public feelgood story that year and that was reflected in the treatment both teams received.

 

[mick500]

You're sure some are not clean are you? Give me some facts that would stand up in court and not just 'cos its the vibe'.

17 frees paid to bulldogs to 1 to the Crows in 1 game of football by 1 umpire (troy pannell) for the team he supports (bulldogs). That's something that COULD be argued in court.

I don't know why you are talking about court anyway, this is a forum not a court room and the question was posed "do you honestly believe the umpires are corruptable".

My answer is they are human with their own bias that normally doesn't fall to far from centre but in extreme cases like the pannell scenario they do. And they are generally weak and influenced by the home crowd.

 

[mick500]

You're sure some are not clean are you? Give me some facts that would stand up in court and not just 'cos its the vibe'.

Oh and if you don' like the bulldogs one because you're a human that's as biased as pannell, then

Theres always that North player on open mike that said an umpire was in some trouble and a north player came over and stuck up for him amd told everyone to back off and the umpire said "I will always look after you and won't pay them against you, and he lived up to what he said".

That's what i call "every umpire not being 100% clean."

 

[conrad_437]

17 frees paid to bulldogs to 1 to the Crows in 1 game of football by 1 umpire (troy pannell) for the team he supports (bulldogs). That's something that COULD be argued in court.

I don't know why you are talking about court anyway, this is a forum not a court room and the question was posed "do you honestly believe the umpires are corruptable".

My answer is they are human with their own bias that normally doesn't fall to far from centre but in extreme cases like the pannell scenario they do. And they are generally weak and influenced by the home crowd.

I love how we hear so much about this so called 'rigged' game that happened last year but yet we hear nothing about the so called 'dodgy' umpiring decisions.

 

[Cold Sober]

If people don't believe umpires influence games, grab a seasons worth of games played over west and observe, any season.
Its more a case of where and when they pay frees, also crowd involvement can influence

 

[Dogs till i die]

Oh and if you don' like the bulldogs one because you're a human that's as biased as pannell, then

Theres always that North player on open mike that said an umpire was in some trouble and a north player came over and stuck up for him amd told everyone to back off and the umpire said "I will always look after you and won't pay them against you, and he lived up to what he said".

That's what i call "every umpire not being 100% clean."

That umpire in question umpired 347 games 37 finals, 7 GF's, was 4 time "umpire of the year" and now Hall of Fame inductee - do you think he would have such an impressive CV and got that far by being biased or a cheat?

 

[Farm Boy]

Oh and if you don' like the bulldogs one because you're a human that's as biased as pannell, then

Theres always that North player on open mike that said an umpire was in some trouble and a north player came over and stuck up for him amd told everyone to back off and the umpire said "I will always look after you and won't pay them against you, and he lived up to what he said".

That's what i call "every umpire not being 100% clean."

I am not surprised to hear that. Umpires cheat.

 

[footy75]

I watched all the finals and (mostly) enjoyed reading the Game Day comments here on BF.

Sadly, about 50% of the live, in the moment comments are about umpiring, whether highlighting a poor decision, or one team being deliberately screwed, or claiming they have been paid off to help team X, or are otherwise cheating to achieve a rigged result.

Take this thread on face value - this question doesn't relate to any particular team or 'dream' Grand Final run, past or present.

"Do you believe that, poor decisions or possible crowd influence aside, AFL umpires could/would either cheat, be paid off, or follow some sort of directive from the AFL to ensure a certain outcome?" And if yes, based on what observation or evidence?

No they can´t be brought off in Australia.

What happens is they are influenced by crowds.

 

[footy75]

I'm not suggesting this is a deliberate strategy from the umps, but as I've said before they're only human and subconscious bias plays a part. For example, there's no way anyone can convince me that the umps in the 2016 grand final were umpiring both teams evenly. One team were the media and public feelgood story that year and that was reflected in the treatment both teams received.

Exactly. Umpires were heavily invested into the feel good, fairy tale hyperbole bullshit that was rammed down our throats by the media all week.
Most biased/worst umpired Grand Final ever.

 

[Angus Young]

I thought no until the 2016 Grand Final:


During 2 1/2 quarters the Swans get 1 free kick and the Bulldogs 15. It is impossible for that to be random and therefore must have been deliberate leading to questions of why. With the AFL a lot of the questions can be answered by looking at the money. The bookies made a fortune out of the Bulldog's win as did the Bulldogs and the AFL. Of course there was also the fairytale of a club that hadn't won a flag for many years, the Victorian vs interstate story and the dominance of a few teams winning most of the Grand Finals in recent history. I don't know how it worked but it happened.

yeah that was an absolute joke performance by those umpires. Completely unprofessional on grand final day to get sucked into fairy tales like that.

 

[MagpieJo]

Go you Crows!!
Seriously listen to the vicco trash media call. Need more of it these days,would show us where we really stand.

Seen about 100 games where we have been robbed worse than that. That free kick to Collingwoods jack Anthony for the after the siren win and goal, the hawthorn prelim, that bulldogs 17 to 1 free kick count and that's s just off the top of my dome.

Was “right in front of me” too and it was there. You were robbed in the grand final though, never stood a chance, simply the worst full game of umpiring I’ve ever seen. It’s like it was preset.

 

[mick500]

I love how we hear so much about this so called 'rigged' game that happened last year but yet we hear nothing about the so called 'dodgy' umpiring decisions.

The numbers speak for themselves lol. I can tell you I was screaming at my TV that day and that the commentators didn't notice it until it was being tweeted by people like us half way in to the 3rd qtr.

 

[mick500]

Was “right in front of me” too and it was there. You were robbed in the grand final though, never stood a chance, simply the worst full game of umpiring I’ve ever seen. It’s like it was preset.

Honestly I wouldn't know about grand final day. I tried to block It out because it would have ruined it for me. I'm usually all over it if we are being robbed, but I just knew we would have to be a 5 goal better side than we would have had to have been at Adelaide Oval to win with Richmond and the umpires and the crowd and have to stand up when dusty was dominating and running through the middle of the G with the crowd roaring. We didn't stand up. They did.

Pretty sure the umpiring early when we were winning was terrible, and I was angry at half time, but Richmond dominated us after that and were the better side and clearly deserved the win.

 

[MagpieJo]

Honestly I wouldn't know about grand final day. I tried to block It out because it would have ruined it for me. I'm usually all over it if we are being robbed, but I just knew we would have to be a 5 goal better side than we would have had to have been at Adelaide Oval to win with Richmond and the umpires and the crowd and have to stand up when dusty was dominating and running through the middle of the G with the crowd roaring. We didn't stand up. They did.

Pretty sure the umpiring early when we were winning was terrible, and I was angry at half time, but Richmond dominated us after that and were the better side and clearly deserved the win.

Oops you guys didn’t play the doggies! I meant the umpiring in 2016, sorry. But I do agree you were on the wrong end of the stick this year, but not to the extent of last year, you still could have won, and certainly the home crowd assisted.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Geelong loses grand finals in '89, '92, '94 and '95.

A former umpire having beers (probably too many) with a mutual acquaintance is posed the hypothetical.

If it's the dying seconds of the gf with the Cats a couple of points down and the ball is in their goal square and there's a very, very, iffy free kick, do you pay it?

Without hesitation the answer was, '*in' oath'.

They have their teams, they have their biases and they have one of the toughest jobs in world sport.

 

[Theo X]

Either that or they're re****ed.

 

[Looney]

Although we can't prove the umpires are corrupt, I do suspect the umpires are swayed by the sense of occasion.

Hawthorns quest for a three-peat
The romance of teams like Bulldogs and Tigers pulling off their long awaited premiership.

Is it possible we can house all the umpires in a remand centre type accommodation throughout the AFL season to deny them access to any form of media?

I've always wondered when a team that's a long way behind gets a run on and starts making a come back. Do the umpires get caught up in the occasion and subconsciously wishes for a fairytale ending?

 

[Darkyprotector]

That umpire in question umpired 347 games 37 finals, 7 GF's, was 4 time "umpire of the year" and now Hall of Fame inductee - do you think he would have such an impressive CV and got that far by being biased or a cheat?

Normally to get a resume like that you have swollen lips and dirty knees

 

[simba_]

That umpire in question umpired 347 games 37 finals, 7 GF's, was 4 time "umpire of the year" and now Hall of Fame inductee - do you think he would have such an impressive CV and got that far by being biased or a cheat?

yes. how can you receive such accolades in this big white land without conforming to the desires of the big white men who run it?

 

[Dogs till i die]

yes. how can you receive such accolades in this big white land without conforming to the desires of the big white men who run it?

Offensive comment Simba

 

[simba_]

Offensive comment Simba

didn't mean to offend anybody, just saying basically what the other guy said about not reaching the top without sore knees and lips..

 

[go_the_dockers]

I thought no until the 2016 Grand Final:


During 2 1/2 quarters the Swans get 1 free kick and the Bulldogs 15. It is impossible for that to be random and therefore must have been deliberate leading to questions of why. With the AFL a lot of the questions can be answered by looking at the money. The bookies made a fortune out of the Bulldog's win as did the Bulldogs and the AFL. Of course there was also the fairytale of a club that hadn't won a flag for many years, the Victorian vs interstate story and the dominance of a few teams winning most of the Grand Finals in recent history. I don't know how it worked but it happened.

Certain umpires hate or lover certain sides.

Lately little appears the Vic sides have got the better end of the deal. Maybe as all umpires are based in Melbourne that makes a difference. Even if only subconsciouslu

 

[MrChow]

Umpires shouldn't be allowed to umpire in games when their team is playing.

the State leagues should also have the same interpretations for free kicks, so that umps aren't having to adapt to different interpretations during development.

While Lindsay Thomas got a bad wrap with the umps - the Selwoods are huge offenders for leading and getting high tackles and diving for in the back- and the umps never have gotten tough on them ? Why? Media perhaps?

 

[ezard15]

They can't even administer the rules property let alone be so good at their job as to be able to administer rules but then decide to do it unfairly to help their own team/agenda.

You are giving them way too much credit