Umpiring Round 4 Suns v Crows - Was it a Mark to Rankine?

[NeutralFan]

If it was a defender in their backline, the umpire wouldn't of had stage fright and paid either or. Same with the Blicavs HTB against the Lions few years back.

Always thought umps in the back of their head have an easier time making decisions in backlines as they can be not as controversial as a decision that directly can impact scoreboard.

 

[Plugger35]

But the AFL said on Sunday morning that Rankine should have been paid a mark, or awarded a free kick for being held.

Ouch

I don't think Rankine should have been paid a mark as he didn't hold it long enough but he should have been awarded a free kick.

That being said if Rankine had held on to the mark then he wouldn't have needed to rely on the umpires awarding him a free kick.

 

[GC2015]

If we want to dissect every umpiring decision can we mention the crow throw missed in the suns goal square or do only the ones in the last 2 minutes count?

How about the two handed push in the back from O'Brien that took Witts out of the ruck contest and led to the Rankine situation 8 seconds later? Literally in the same sequence of play. That was inside the last 2 minutes and wasn't called, but no one says anything about that. The Rankine situation doesn't happen if the umpires correctly call O'Brien for pushing Witts in the back in that ruck contest. Swings and roundabouts.

Here is the push in the back from O'Brien 8 seconds before the Rankine situation if you haven't seen it:

 

[bloodypredictable]

The only reason he didn't hold onto the ball longer was that he was being tackled as he took the mark. If you watch closely, he clearly has the ball securely in his arms, so it should have been paid as a mark. Instead, he drops the ball due to the tackle, which automatically results in a free kick. It's one of the worst calls I've seen in recent memory. But that's just how AFL goes. I've been discussing poor umpiring decisions with friends and family since the '90s. You simply have to accept that they're part of the game.

 

[nutstar]

How about the two handed push in the back from O'Brien that took Witts out of the ruck contest and led to the Rankine situation 8 seconds later? Literally in the same sequence of play. That was inside the last 2 minutes and wasn't called, but no one says anything about that. The Rankine situation doesn't happen if the umpires correctly call O'Brien for pushing Witts in the back in that ruck contest. Swings and roundabouts.

Here is the push in the back from O'Brien 8 seconds before the Rankine situation if you haven't seen it:

View attachment 2274106

Clear 2 handed push, but that doesn’t help the narrative that the crows were robbed

 

[PiCkLeJuiCe]

How about the two handed push in the back from O'Brien that took Witts out of the ruck contest and led to the Rankine situation 8 seconds later? Literally in the same sequence of play. That was inside the last 2 minutes and wasn't called, but no one says anything about that. The Rankine situation doesn't happen if the umpires correctly call O'Brien for pushing Witts in the back in that ruck contest. Swings and roundabouts.

Here is the push in the back from O'Brien 8 seconds before the Rankine situation if you haven't seen it:

View attachment 2274106

20 - 10
21 - 13
25 - 14

It's clear as day that teams aren't being awarded the frees they deserve against the Suns.

 

[GC2015]

20 - 10
21 - 13
25 - 14

It's clear as day that teams aren't being awarded the frees they deserve against the Suns.

Essendon had the best free kick differential in 2024. Did you mention that last year or are you just being selective with when you want to highlight it? I don't remember anyone talking about Essendon receiving more free kicks than any other club last year.

Anyone that's being honest when they see the clip of the Witts-O'Brien ruck contest 8 seconds before the Rankine situation knows that O'Brien got away with a push in the back. There's so many over the course of a game that don't get called. To focus solely on one, while ignoring another the other way that occurred literally 8 seconds beforehand, is selective outrage.

 

[maskmcgee]

How about the two handed push in the back from O'Brien that took Witts out of the ruck contest and led to the Rankine situation 8 seconds later? Literally in the same sequence of play. That was inside the last 2 minutes and wasn't called, but no one says anything about that. The Rankine situation doesn't happen if the umpires correctly call O'Brien for pushing Witts in the back in that ruck contest. Swings and roundabouts.

Here is the push in the back from O'Brien 8 seconds before the Rankine situation if you haven't seen it:

View attachment 2274106

Different rules in the ruck noob

 

[MrBarry]

Clear 2 handed push, but that doesn’t help the narrative that the crows were robbed

We were robbed, the free kick count was 25-14 free kick count in your favour on top on top of Rankine being denied an absolutely blatant shot at goal

Just accept you were extremely fortunate to come away from that game with 4 points and move on. You don't need to downplay it.

 

[nutstar]

We were robbed, the free kick count was 25-14 free kick count in your favour on top on top of Rankine being denied an absolutely blatant shot at goal

Just accept you were extremely fortunate to come away from that game with 4 points and move on. You don't need to downplay it.

Or you can carry on crying about how you’re constantly robbed and feel sorry for yourself, and I’ll accept that sometimes you get the rub of the green and other times you don’t, I won’t call it fortunate because from where I was sitting the better side won in the end

 

[deck]

That being said if Rankine had held on to the mark then he wouldn't have needed to rely on the umpires awarding him a free kick.

If he wasn't tackled he would've held on to the mark.

Sad to hear the Crows have had cry though and acting like that decision was the only decision that had a direct result on the game.

That's what I hate about the AFL coming out and saying a decision is wrong. It only drives peoples bias yet there were 40 frees paid plus all the ones that weren't.

 

[MrBarry]

Or you can carry on crying about how you’re constantly robbed and feel sorry for yourself, and I’ll accept that sometimes you get the rub of the green and other times you don’t, I won’t call it fortunate because from where I was sitting the better side won in the end

What other teams in the last few years have been on the end of the same number of these ridiculous situations?

 

[hdi]

Not a mark IMO. The spoil was clean with side on body contact. There was then some holding as both fell to the ground, but marginal impact on the play as the ball had already cleared the immediate area. Could have played a soft holding call, but more than fine with play on.

 

[raskolnikov]

If we want to dissect every umpiring decision can we mention the crow throw missed in the suns goal square or do only the ones in the last 2 minutes count?

Don't be silly. Only the Crows get bad decisions go against them.

Like our game against them last year. They had the rub of the green all night, including some absolute howlers. But only the Draper decision was incorrect apparently.

 

[WetCrow1991]

Not a mark IMO. The spoil was clean with side on body contact. There was then some holding as both fell to the ground, but marginal impact on the play as the ball had already cleared the immediate area. Could have played a soft holding call, but more than fine with play on.

Cool troll bro. Maybe look up what a spoil is.

 

[PiCkLeJuiCe]

Essendon had the best free kick differential in 2024. Did you mention that last year or are you just being selective with when you want to highlight it? I don't remember anyone talking about Essendon receiving more free kicks than any other club last year.

Anyone that's being honest when they see the clip of the Witts-O'Brien ruck contest 8 seconds before the Rankine situation knows that O'Brien got away with a push in the back. There's so many over the course of a game that don't get called. To focus solely on one, while ignoring another the other way that occurred literally 8 seconds beforehand, is selective outrage.

Essendon received 18% more frees than they gave away in 2024. GC are getting 78% more. Brisbane are second at 28%.

Will the gap close? Yes it will, but right now, GC are getting historically high (even a record) number of free kicks compared to what's being paid the other way.

 

[CrowToon]

According to the AFL the correct answer is A B and D. The only incorrect answer was C.

How are people still saying play on is fine.

The AFL has even admitted it

 

[My_Username]

I've seen less paid, I've seen more unpaid.

 

[GC2015]

Different rules in the ruck noob

Feel free to read the 2025 rules on the AFL website. It clearly states that players can't be pushed in the back (unless the player pushing is protecting their existing position) and specifically in the ruck a player can't push an opposition ruck out of the contest. If this occurs then a free kick is to be awarded and in this case Witts should have been awarded a free kick after O'Brien two-hand pushes him in the back so he can't contest against him in the ruck. Maybe read the rules before embarrassing yourself with a comment like that next time, champ. I'll even give you a direct link so you don't make this mistake again:

Laws of the Game - AFL.com.au

The AFL Laws of Australian Football allow for the game to be played in a safe and fun environment

www.afl.com.au

Essendon received 18% more frees than they gave away in 2024. GC are getting 78% more. Brisbane are second at 28%.

Will the gap close? Yes it will, but right now, GC are getting historically high (even a record) number of free kicks compared to what's being paid the other way.

I'm confident that the gap will close (like you suggested) and no one will be talking about it as we get closer to the business end of the season. Having said that, Adelaide will get their opportunity to get the rub of the green in round 19 when they host us at Adelaide Oval. The beauty of a reverse fixture after a controversial clash early in the season and I hope the Crows fans keep this same energy so we're given a prime time slot for that game and they pack out the AO for it. Could even be the beginning of a genuinely rivalry and that's a massive win for the AFL considering it would've been viewed as a nothing fixture in the past.

 

[Hobbes]

Gonna be one of those that say it was neither a mark, nor a free kick. Watched it live and was uncertain, and surely benefit of the doubt should go to the defending team in these kind of scenarios.

A touch unlucky not being paid a mark, but plenty of those during games are also not paid.

Similarly, a touch unlucky not being a free kick for holding, but again plenty of those during games are also not paid.

A half mark and a half free kick does not equal an Adelaide possession via a mark or free kick, that's not how it works.

If he had the ball, he marked it.

If he didn’t have the ball, he was tackled without the ball.

half plus half does mean a whole if the lack of one means the other.

 

[Sweeetleftfoot]

Not a mark, but it’s a free kick. If it happened in the first quarter then it wouldn’t be a talking point. Not the reason the crows lost.

 

[Saint12]

The only reason he didn't hold onto the ball longer was that he was being tackled as he took the mark. If you watch closely, he clearly has the ball securely in his arms, so it should have been paid as a mark. Instead, he drops the ball due to the tackle, which automatically results in a free kick. It's one of the worst calls I've seen in recent memory. But that's just how AFL goes. I've been discussing poor umpiring decisions with friends and family since the '90s. You simply have to accept that they're part of the game.

Could even argue it should been paid a mark and 50 metre penalty

 

[Obeanie1]

Didn't hold onto it for long enough, play on

Bear hug tackle not a factor?

See plenty of forwards get free when arms wrapped around their opponent contesting a mark.

It's a mark or a free kick.

Play on not the correct call. AFL agreed.

 

[flyinghi64]

Not the only putrid decision or non decision in that game.

 

[1achie]

If it was a defender in their backline, the umpire wouldn't of had stage fright and paid either or. Same with the Blicavs HTB against the Lions few years back.

Always thought umps in the back of their head have an easier time making decisions in backlines as they can be not as controversial as a decision that directly can impact scoreboard.

Huh?
You realise that one team's back line is the other team's forward line?
Your post makes zero sense.