Umpiring Questionable Umpiring Decisions

[tigs2010]

Wonder if Laura will bring back her segment to stick up for her beloved Pies. Clearly a non 50 based on her last segment

 

[HairyO]

There were at least 3 DOOB that were not correct and a clear missed 50m penalty to Collingwood that would have won them the game. There was also a shocking htb paid to Sydney that should have been a too high to Collingwood.

Justice after the Roos got beaten when the umpires swallowed their whistles when 2 Pies players ran over the mark in the last minute.

 

[davemc_lions]

I applaud McRae for saying it would have been paid at the " G".
It's now official, in that Collingwood get the MCG travel advantage, the MCG finals advantage and the MCG umpiring advantage.

He basically admits what most of us know..
If you play the pies at the G you will not get a free when it counts. They play there most games in a year, hence why they win so many close games.

Bit worried about the Lions game next week. Umps will now pay 100% everything pies way to say sorry.

 

[deck]

And with that remark by Fly, goes his MCG free kick privileges. Bloke needs to grin and bear it, and simply move on.

If we have some MCG free kick privilege we must be completely reamed everywhere else as we average slightly more free kick against than free kicks for.

 

[T4P]

Can we reframe this thread to be 'Questionable Rule Design'?

The umpires get the blame unfairly - so many of these rules are contradictory and subjective, leaving zero consistency for application.

There is no other professional sport that has this level of inconsistency in umpiring, nor this level of volatility in rule changes. Make the rules clear, and make the umpirable.

You can't have 'incorrect disposal' and allow players to drop the ball, then get free kicks because their tackler didn't see that they had dropped the ball. You can't have rules which unfairly punish players from getting to the ball first. You can't have rules that gift goals for minor infractions that don't really impact the game. Make the rules clear. Also employ your umpires full time ffs.

The results of more and more games are being materially affected by this rubbish. Getting real sick of it.

 

[guruisatiger]

Why the **** didn't big lanky yanky take the ball out of the ruck and have a shot at goal???.then he Taps it straight to blakey
Game over

 

[Worm4]

If we have some MCG free kick privilege we must be completely reamed everywhere else as we average slightly more free kick against than free kicks for.

Collingwood average more for, than against ? Well its about to get worse

 

[BringFevBack2021]

How the rule was interpreted last night was how I would like it interpreted - the trouble is it isn’t how it is interpreted every week

Just make it last touch out is a FK against, reward teams for trying to keep it alive and penalise sides for running it over or not being in a position to keep it in

Would also eliminate all the confusion

 

[DapperDon]

Oh, you think Sydney umps are your ally. But you merely adopted the annoyance; We were born in it, moulded by it. We didn't see the frees until It was already game over, by then it was nothing to us!

 

[Cleansweep17]

Pies were robbed last night ngl.

And I loved it

 

[Lsta062]

The 50-metre penalty was obviously there. But I don’t think many people will have sympathy for Collingwood with their recent umpiring run. All clubs probably have at least 1 game in the last 3 seasons where Collingwood benefitted from umpiring

 

[RedV3x]

The 50-metre penalty was obviously there.

The 50m penalty was introduced to stop players holding up the game, stop players taking late cheap shots and stop players deliberately going over the mark. None of those things happened.

Yes, officicious umpires may pay those early in the game but i hate it when good games are spoiled by meaningless minor infractions.
i just finished watching the Lions Vs Giants game and noticed they didn't penalise more nimble players from over-running the mark.

 

[Lsta062]

The 50m penalty was introduced to stop players holding up the game, stop players taking late cheap shots and stop players deliberately going over the mark. None of those things happened.

Yes, officicious umpires may pay those early in the game but i hate it when good games are spoiled by meaningless minor infractions.
i just finished watching the Lions Vs Giants game and noticed they didn't penalise more nimble players from over-running the mark.

Was that minor though? I felt like that 50 was one of those clear ones that normally get paid IMO.

But I’d much rather umpires let genuine free kicks go late in the game than paying one that wasn’t there.

 

[Fadge]

How the rule was interpreted last night was how I would like it interpreted - the trouble is it isn’t how it is interpreted every week

Just make it last touch out is a FK against, reward teams for trying to keep it alive and penalise sides for running it over or not being in a position to keep it in

Would also eliminate all the confusion

So if you attack the ball and fumble it over the line, or get tackled/pushed and lose control of it, it's a free kick against?

If a player is in reach of a kick from the opposition, but doesn't touch it and let's it go over the line, they get a free kick?

Is that really what you want?

 

[2notepockets]

Remember the days before the stand rule when the umpire set the mark and made players kick over it...

Classic rules of the game committee justifying their existence by fixing something that wasn't broke

 

[HotPiesWithSauce]

I don't want games decided by 50m penalties, which is why I'm ok with last night just as I was fine with the kangaroos one. In both games, it was the team that let go of a big lead that lost the game, not one umpire indecision.

What does amuse me is the hypocrisy of a lot of people in here who were screaming bloody murder when it happened in Collingwood's favor and are now perfectly fine with it.
Just proves that it was never about the decision and always about anti-Collingwood.

And don't give me this "karma" bullshit - we don't control the whistle, the umpires do, sometimes in our favor and sometimes, like last night, it went against us.

 

[matthew_s]

What’s with not recalling centre bounces that clearly skew outside the centre circle?

Massive, obvious one that clearly advantaged North in the last qtr today. Noticed a few in the Eagles game last week as well.

 

[BringFevBack2021]

So if you attack the ball and fumble it over the line, or get tackled/pushed and lose control of it, it's a free kick against?

If a player is in reach of a kick from the opposition, but doesn't touch it and let's it go over the line, they get a free kick?

Is that really what you want?

Fallacies and loaded questions

However, I’d ask you - do you think Cox’s FK against for there? Because I don’t.

The rule isn’t currently working, he was trying to keep it in.

Moore was trying to knock it forwards, and it went out - I can understand it being paid but we are basically at the point where knocking it forward and seeing it out is deliberate.

What I would like to see solved, is players seeking contact so that they can take it out. It’s a really amateurish look.

Reward knocking it back into the corridor, owning that becomes even more important.

 

[Fadge]

Fallacies and loaded questions

Why?

The first example (penalising the ball winner) is exactly what would happen if the last touch rule was introduced.

The second example is already happening now.

 

[deck]

Collingwood average more for, than against ? Well its about to get worse

Obviously can't read.

 

[deck]

Moore was trying to knock it forwards, and it went out - I can understand it being paid but we are basically at the point where knocking it forward and seeing it out is deliberate.

The whole point of the rule now is umpires don't have to guess on what the player was thinking. If it isn't going towards a player it is a free kick. I had no problem with any of them last night but thought Nick's was stiff as he actually stopped it originally from going out.

 

[BringFevBack2021]

Why?

The first example (penalising the ball winner) is exactly what would happen if the last touch rule was introduced.

The second example is already happening now.

It wouldn’t have to

I understand your concern about removing the strategy of winning the ball on the boundary to force the stoppage but if your team has kicked it poorly and you get there before your opponent you can always knock it inboard to keep it alive or concede the free and setup behind the ball

 

[Fadge]

It wouldn’t have to

I understand your concern about removing the strategy of winning the ball on the boundary to force the stoppage but if your team has kicked it poorly and you get there before your opponent you can always knock it inboard to keep it alive or concede the free and setup behind the ball

Yeah, either option would work well if the ball is inside your defensive 50...

 

[BringFevBack2021]

Yeah, either option would work well if the ball is inside your defensive 50...

It’s just my personal opinion on it, you don’t need to agree

I can’t see your logic, you can’t see mine

It’s fine, sometimes you don’t agree

Have a good night

 

[Duckimus Prime]

You can’t really judge the rules when you’re playing Sydney, but seriously insufficient intent has become completely ridiculous these days.

THose two at the end of the game would've been called when its was still "deliberate".