Umpiring Free kicks & free kick ladders

[Gibbke]

Has anyone came out and specifically said that the non-50 last night was officially because the umpire gave benefit of the doubt in regards to time wasting?

Don't know the exact rule, but once the siren goes no more frees are paid in the match. The only thing that can occur is a free kick given before the siren which needs to be then taken. No more time is added, so a player playing on immediately ends the match. The point of the shot clock and penalising a player for kicking a ball away after a free is given is to combat time wasting - if the game has no more time to be added, this surely a moot point...

So my question is this - does the shot clock apply after the siren? If it doesn't, then I'd be thinking the non-50 last night is consistent and logical, both examples of where the game is over except for an entitled free kick subject to it being a set shot only. If it does, it not only legitimises the controversy, because regardless of whether he heard it he did it...noone gets that leeway any other time...but also seems a bit unfair in the situation where the siren blows as the player is running in to kick. We've seen many games where the player hears the siren and stops, goes back, recomposes himself after the distraction...would be a bit rough if he's legally used twenty seconds and then is forced to go back and do it all again in less than ten..

 

[Supercoach Bargain]

Dissent rule doesn't apply in Darwin.

 

[Bjo187]

Notice how much players are acting more at the moment knowing that the umpires will blow the whistle for everything, it's not a good look, getting rewarded every time.

 

[Wallaby]

Well, in Ted Whitten's last game, the umpire paid 112 free kicks, so EJ would probably be wondering if they've lost the peas out of their whistles.

Don't talk sense you'll upset everyone's preconceptions.
Seriously, for those of you who havent, go back and watch a game from the 1970s - some of the umpiring decisions are completely baffling to our eyes. The holding the ball interpretations are some of the strangest. The game is umpired far better today (except against my team of course).

Re Friday, I have no real problem with the 50 not being paid against the Swans (except for IT WAS AGAINST MY TEAM!! Conspiracy!!! Etc..) - it was basic common sense - however, common sense has never been used before in deciding 50s - it has always been to the letter of the law. In this case, the Swans player had time to stop (he wasn't 'in the act of kicking' when the whistle went, the ball had gone over the line (and he had seen it go over the line - that's a free kick and 50 anyway if you don't stop and give the ball immediately to the bounday ump).
Letter of the Law - 50.
Common Sense - not 50.

I also don't mind them paying a free for the Rioli 'elbow'. The pathetic 'I'm tougher than you' bullshit has bee a standard in the VFL/AFL for 100 years and it is embarassing really (and frightening at amateur/local level where king hits and cheap shots still occur). I'd be happy if the AFL Announced 'Any deliberate forceful contact delivered to an opposition player while there is no contest for the ball at the time is a free kick' (yes, I know - 'Turning the game into Netball, you weak prick' - whatever, just grow up).
But don't decide to implement that rule at the 15-minute mark of the 3rd quarter of a game in Rd 11.

 

[BigPond101]

Notice how much players are acting more at the moment knowing that the umpires will blow the whistle for everything, it's not a good look, getting rewarded every time.

Yeah also charging head first into your opponent to draw a free has come back into vogue. The umpires stopped paying it the last few years but with their instructions to up the free kick count this year they are paying it again. Not exactly great for head injuries and concussions

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Ask Brad Close

You might have to fill me in on that one Hoops?

Has anyone came out and specifically said that the non-50 last night was officially because the umpire gave benefit of the doubt in regards to time wasting?

Don't know the exact rule, but once the siren goes no more frees are paid in the match. The only thing that can occur is a free kick given before the siren which needs to be then taken. No more time is added, so a player playing on immediately ends the match. The point of the shot clock and penalising a player for kicking a ball away after a free is given is to combat time wasting - if the game has no more time to be added, this surely a moot point...

So my question is this - does the shot clock apply after the siren? If it doesn't, then I'd be thinking the non-50 last night is consistent and logical, both examples of where the game is over except for an entitled free kick subject to it being a set shot only. If it does, it not only legitimises the controversy, because regardless of whether he heard it he did it...noone gets that leeway any other time...but also seems a bit unfair in the situation where the siren blows as the player is running in to kick. We've seen many games where the player hears the siren and stops, goes back, recomposes himself after the distraction...would be a bit rough if he's legally used twenty seconds and then is forced to go back and do it all again in less than ten..

50 metre penalties can be applied after the siren. Otherwise there is nothing stopping the opposition running over the mark or having players on shoulders on the mark.

In terms of time wasting, that can still be applied after the siren. The fact that he was out of normal goal-scoring range for him is irrelevant - there were numerous players in the match on Friday on both teams that could've made the distance even if it bounced through. There was nothing stopping Dion Prestia from taking his kick very quickly before any opponent could get back to block the goals. By Warner booting the footy into the crowd any chance of that was taken away. Sydney were then given the opportunity to get all 18 players back.

But yeah, no free kicks can be awarded after the siren.

 

[_yobbo_]

Has anyone came out and specifically said that the non-50 last night was officially because the umpire gave benefit of the doubt in regards to time wasting?

Don't know the exact rule, but once the siren goes no more frees are paid in the match. The only thing that can occur is a free kick given before the siren which needs to be then taken. No more time is added, so a player playing on immediately ends the match. The point of the shot clock and penalising a player for kicking a ball away after a free is given is to combat time wasting - if the game has no more time to be added, this surely a moot point...

So my question is this - does the shot clock apply after the siren? If it doesn't, then I'd be thinking the non-50 last night is consistent and logical, both examples of where the game is over except for an entitled free kick subject to it being a set shot only. If it does, it not only legitimises the controversy, because regardless of whether he heard it he did it...noone gets that leeway any other time...but also seems a bit unfair in the situation where the siren blows as the player is running in to kick. We've seen many games where the player hears the siren and stops, goes back, recomposes himself after the distraction...would be a bit rough if he's legally used twenty seconds and then is forced to go back and do it all again in less than ten..

There has been a 50-meter penalty paid for not returning the ball on the full after the 1/2 time siren earlier this year. The umpire explained on Friday night it was due to crowd noise and common sense, so every 50 given for running on and kicking a goal after a free is paid the other way should not be rewarded for the same reasons but I don't think common sense is that common

 

[#33]

Another problem is that fans are obsessing over every little detail about footy these days and making mountains out of molehills. Watch the game and then forgot about it until next week's game.

 

[HeadOfUmpiringDepartment]

From watching the game, all 60 were correct and there. People need to learn not to abuse umpires and focus on why their team lost due to poor play.

 

[Gibbke]

50 metre penalties can be applied after the siren. Otherwise there is nothing stopping the opposition running over the mark or having players on shoulders on the mark.

In terms of time wasting, that can still be applied after the siren. The fact that he was out of normal goal-scoring range for him is irrelevant - there were numerous players in the match on Friday on both teams that could've made the distance even if it bounced through. There was nothing stopping Dion Prestia from taking his kick very quickly before any opponent could get back to block the goals. By Warner booting the footy into the crowd any chance of that was taken away. Sydney were then given the opportunity to get all 18 players back.

But yeah, no free kicks can be awarded after the siren.

The quick kick scenario is extremely unlikely. Noone would do that if the game was on the line from that distance. The running over the mark scenario is a very good point though...

 

[TheOptimum18]

Yeah... No surprise the most hard-tackling, high-pressuring, aggressively-defensive team would also be the most penalised.

Hardwick is prepared to lose the free kick count every week, knowing that his players are harassing the f**k out of their opponents and forcing them into costly turnovers.

And Richmond supporters agree that we play in a manner that means we lose the free kick count more often than not.

But when you look at our free kick count in the home and away season compared to finals, the contrast is stark. We play the same system, with probably more aggression and pressure, yet we go from 1435 FOR - 1718 AGAINST in the home and away season, to about 50/50 with 224/227 in finals.

I'm not talking about conspiracies or anything here, these two comparisons tells you that umpiring is wrong at the moment. If every home and away game was umpired like a final, no one would care, and more people would probably enjoy the game.

 

[deck]

Dissent rule doesn't apply in Darwin.

Or at the MCG today. How long did Cripps hang on to the ball and argue with the umpire over the free kick.

 

[situationz]

Prohibited contact? Wow. What is that?

"Prohibited contact" = I want to pay a free kick but they didn't do anything that's actually against any rules

 

[adogsfan5]

THIS was a free kick tonight.

Now that's when you can officially say the game is ducked

One of the worst I’ve seen. So bad.

 

[Igavemyloveachicken]

Well, in Ted Whitten's last game, the umpire paid 112 free kicks, so EJ would probably be wondering if they've lost the peas out of their whistles.

More the softness of the free's on Friday night.
Are you serious about 112 free kicks, to quote Brian Taylor, wowee.

 

[Mr Ripper]

More the softness of the free's on Friday night.
Are you serious about 112 free kicks, to quote Brian Taylor, wowee.

AFL Tables - Footscray v Hawthorn - Sat, 2-May-1970 2:05 PM - Match Stats

 

[Eshay187]

Out of interest what was the game like to watch in the 1970's when games regularly had 100+ free kicks given?

60 free kicks in a match would have been well below average in the 1970's and slightly below average in the mid 1980's.

I've seen plenty of highlights from the 70's and 80's and the occasional classic game on replay (89 grand final for instance) but I wouldn't have sat through many full games and must admit not really think much about the umpiring.

The 1970 grand final is considered one of the all time greatest games ever and had 91 free kicks.

View attachment 1410371

Did anyone in this thread read this post?

Also, I don’t come on here much, do these threads happen every time Richmond lose?

 

[Eshay187]

Also, am I the only one who is fine with the Rioli free? Running up behind someone and intentionally whacking them in the ribs from behind…pretty happy to see it stamped out. Pretty low act. Obviously consistency required.

You guys are always saying “the game is getting soft” and want to go back to the good old days of coathangers and dropped elbows…an era with an average of 90 frees a day.

Starting to get the feeling that people simply love to complain.

 

[Trent the flight Steward]

There has been a 50-meter penalty paid for not returning the ball on the full after the 1/2 time siren earlier this year. The umpire explained on Friday night it was due to crowd noise and common sense, so every 50 given for running on and kicking a goal after a free is paid the other way should not be rewarded for the same reasons but I don't think common sense is that common

That was for not giving the ball back on the full, totally different rule, then the one where the player doesn't hear the whistle and kicks it away.

All rules are written so the umpire can use common sense to adjudicate, it doesn't say the umpire must pay a 50 metre penalty.

How jack Riewoldt didn't get a week suspension, astounds me talk about dissent, no cares if you put your arms up about a decision, the AFL is trying to crack down on jack doing what he did after the siren and it didn't go his way

 

[TheOptimum18]

That was for not giving the ball back on the full, totally different rule, then the one where the player doesn't hear the whistle and kicks it away.

All rules are written so the umpire can use common sense to adjudicate, it doesn't say the umpire must pay a 50 metre penalty.

How jack Riewoldt didn't get a week suspension, astounds me talk about dissent, no cares if you put your arms up about a decision, the AFL is trying to crack down on jack doing what he did after the siren and it didn't go his way

So what did Jack do that was more than a free kick if the rule was consistently adjudicated?

 

[Igavemyloveachicken]

Also, am I the only one who is fine with the Rioli free? Running up behind someone and intentionally whacking them in the ribs from behind…pretty happy to see it stamped out. Pretty low act. Obviously consistency required.

You guys are always saying “the game is getting soft” and want to go back to the good old days of coathangers and dropped elbows…an era with an average of 90 frees a day.

Starting to get the feeling that people simply love to complain.

No one wants the game to go back to coat-hanger and dropped elbows I wouldn't have thought.
There's room for intimidation and or stirring up an opponent though, there was no force to that incident, it was s#it stirring at best.
If the act had of been done with any force or intent to hurt then the impact would of shown as such.

 

[Trent the flight Steward]

So what did Jack do that was more than a free kick if the rule was consistently adjudicated?

He completely overdid it was demonstrative, if we going to give guys a week for accidental head knocks, if we are serious about dissent they should have got a week

 

[dean33]

Umpires are cooked it's got to be coming from the top though

My brother bumped into a senior afl umpire on the weekend, asked him why they are paying so many ridiculous free kicks. The answer he gave was “it’s a directive from above and they get chastised if they don’t.” That still doesn’t excuse paying bullshit ones all night on Friday and then suddenly wanting to use “common sense” for the last one.

 

[dean33]

Also, am I the only one who is fine with the Rioli free? Running up behind someone and intentionally whacking them in the ribs from behind…pretty happy to see it stamped out. Pretty low act. Obviously consistency required.

You guys are always saying “the game is getting soft” and want to go back to the good old days of coathangers and dropped elbows…an era with an average of 90 frees a day.

Starting to get the feeling that people simply love to complain.

If you are happy with the Rioli one you should be watching netball not AFL.

 

[dean33]

Out of interest what was the game like to watch in the 1970's when games regularly had 100+ free kicks given?

60 free kicks in a match would have been well below average in the 1970's and slightly below average in the mid 1980's.

I've seen plenty of highlights from the 70's and 80's and the occasional classic game on replay (89 grand final for instance) but I wouldn't have sat through many full games and must admit not really think much about the umpiring.

The 1970 grand final is considered one of the all time greatest games ever and had 91 free kicks.

View attachment 1410371

Completely different game to the 90’s, let alone 80’s and 70’s. The game back then was so much slower and chalk and cheese to what it is today. Free kicks back then helped move the game along while today it slows the game down. How people enjoy seeing 60 free kicks a game like what we saw on Friday night is beyond me.