MRP / Trib. Umpiring, MRO, Tribunal, Rule Changes - 50m penalties for raising arms?

[Whispering_Jack]

More susceptible... isn't this Merrett's 3rd in a year?

Severe concussion - as in some players seem to be knocked out cold and require a stretcher for seemingly minor head high contact.

 

[Maddogm]

The AFL seems to have this obsession with results based thinking, as in we judge the method based on how good, or in this case how bad the end result was. Every other context I've seen it referred to it's very much as a negative. An extreme example of this would be saying based on Luke Parkers goal on the weekend players should be practicing bicycle kicks as they result in goals.

 

[Liberator]

How many concussions would an average player have to experience these days before being retired from the game? Six? Seven?

 

[yodellinhank]

no - 1st was headaches from a migraine that he gets from time to time, 2nd was a poke in the eye.

So the company line is this is the first concussion

So they say... this ******* company

How many concussions would an average player have to experience these days before being retired from the game? Six? Seven?

Call me a cynic...

 

[blitzer]

How many concussions would an average player have to experience these days before being retired from the game? Six? Seven?

Surely time period is a key aspect. So if you get another concussion whilst recovering from a first one I'm sure its a lot worse than if you get one minor concussion every year.

I have no idea of number. I do recall Brodie Smith had a bad run with concussions for a while but he got back to playing his best (before sadly doing his ACL).

 

[Lore]

Hmm. Bump.

Four field umpires trial...

SIX MORE free kicks a game were paid under the AFL's trial of four field umpires, while an additional free kick was paid inside the 50m arcs.

Champion Data statistics reveal free kicks rose to an average 48 a game over the round 13 and 14 umpire trial, up from 42 under the existing three field umpire system over this year's first 12 rounds.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-06-25/free-kicks-on-the-rise-under-fourump-trial


I guess the question is, are they legit free kicks that they're just seeing better from the additional angle? Or are they trying to justify their existence by over-umpiring?

Also, does four field umpires per game mean that the best umps are getting more work? Or does it mean poorer quality umpires are getting a gig?

 

[pepsi]

I think tecnhically you could find a free kick in nearly every contest. But do we want the game to be over officiated and every slight/minor infringement called?

 

[AcuteWhistle]

& seems to have coincided with lower scoring with 3 scores in excess of 100 & plenty well under that mark.

Do not like.

 

[Lore]

I think tecnhically you could find a free kick in nearly every contest. But do we want the game to be over officiated and every slight/minor infringement called?

Creates more stoppages, I suppose. Do we want an average of 48 free kicks per game? I assume some of those will actually be 50m penalties as well. A free goal here or there can be pretty influential on the momentum of a game.

I actually think the game is over-officiated anyway. What exactly is the point of the rules? To maintain the integrity of the sport and prevent serious injuries (to the head etc) right? So finding silly frees for stupid rules serves no real purpose except to give the umpires far too much say in the outcome and flow of the game (they're meant to officiate it, not take to the field as the third team on the scoreboard).

They need to be harder on incorrect disposal, throwing or dropping the ball, since hand balling is an integral part of the sport. The exclusion zone on the other hand should be retired, since it serves no overall purpose. Interfering with a player taking a free kick is one thing, but running within 15 metres of him is a stupid reason to give away a fifty.

I don't know how many times they called something 'off the ball' the other night, but it seemed like a lot. I don't even know what they were for, whatever it was the incident itself didn't affect the play until the free kick was called. If there's an incident off the ball, it should be MRP (or if we had yellow cards, perhaps that), not a free kick.

 

[Old Campaigner]

If more umpires made it worse, would fewer umpires improve the game?

 

[Zach Package]

If more umpires made it worse, would fewer umpires improve the game?

I like the suggestion from a caller on SEN.

Umpires flying around with jet packs

 

[Mercurial89]

If they want to ease congestion just up the umpire number to 6.

When a player receives two free kicks they are removed from the field. When an umpire gets 2 calls wrong (reviewed via replay) they are removed from the game.

As the game goes on less players on field and less umpires calling for free kicks before the last quarter becomes free flowing football.

Also give the umpires jet packs.

 

[Whispering_Jack]

4 umpires is too much. 3 is perfect IMO.

 

[Stopher]

Let's bring in VAR, that'd sort all the problems.

 

[Lore]

Apparently some clubs have been doing some trials with some potential new rules, and other clubs have now been "invited" to trial them as well.

The AFL has suggested several rule tweaks, including extending the length of the goalsquare for kick-outs to 25m and teams fielding six players in the three zones of the ground at centre bounces.

Among the other options are fewer interchange rotations – they were slashed from 120 to 90 ahead of the 2016 season – and reducing the number of players on the field to 16 per side.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-06-29/all-clubs-to-trial-potential-new-rule-changes

So:

• Goal square extended to 25m for kick outs (halfway to the 50m arc?)
• Offside rule during centre bounces - six players in each of the three zones on the ground
• Fewer interchange rotations (no specific number given)
• 16 per side

Lowering the interchange cap I'm okay with, depending on how far it is lowered and whether they then have a bigger bench or bring in a sub as a 5th or 6th man (to allow young players that have less of a tank to get a game... maybe even like the 23rd man rule at VFL level). An offside rule at centre bounces I don't really care about, I'm not sure it makes a whole lot of difference unless there are a LOT of centre bounces anyway. The goal square thing... well the idea is good but 25m is stupid. It's a goal square not the key on a basketball court ffs. 16 per side gtfo. It's s**t in AFLW, it's s**t in AFLX. If you love this game at all, leave that the hell alone.

 

[quotemokc]

If they are thinking about extending the goal square, I would prefer just to have a semi circle from the boundary posts around like netball.

 

[Maddogm]

All I can think of for the goal square is the kickouts will be able to go a bit further - meaning more area for the forward press to cover making it a bit harder to lock it in.

The centre bounce one basically just means the players who run in off the back/front of the square have to start further back

 

[cAsEy_18]

I have often wondered this as an idea. It would likely get passed over pretty quickly, but I believe it has merit.

The AFL should allow every club to nominate an umpire that they would not like to officiate their games.

Maybe it's only supporters who think certain umpires are against them. But if clubs happen to think it too, then there would be no harm in this suggestion. The nominations themselves do not have to become public knowledge. It would be simple enough to fixture the umpires simply to not umpire that particular team.

Probably a moot point if clubs see no real issue with any particular umpire. I suppose they could simply choose not to nominate. But the other advantage of this is if a particular umpire was nominated by 5-6 different clubs, it would probably highlight something to the AFL.

Just a random thought that is unlikely to ever happen. But I can't really see a downside to it.

 

[Lore]

I have often wondered this as an idea. It would likely get passed over pretty quickly, but I believe it has merit.

The AFL should allow every club to nominate an umpire that they would not like to officiate their games.

Maybe it's only supporters who think certain umpires are against them. But if clubs happen to think it too, then there would be no harm in this suggestion. The nominations themselves do not have to become public knowledge. It would be simple enough to fixture the umpires simply to not umpire that particular team.

Probably a moot point if clubs see no real issue with any particular umpire. I suppose they could simply choose not to nominate. But the other advantage of this is if a particular umpire was nominated by 5-6 different clubs, it would probably highlight something to the AFL.

Just a random thought that is unlikely to ever happen. But I can't really see a downside to it.

Won't happen, because the AFL will never admit that there was any reason not to accept a league official at a game.

Apparently NFL teams get a list of all the missed calls from the previous week and what they should have been. They don't retrospectively change the calls or anything but at least then you know whether to coach for that as a new interpretation or whether the ump just got it wrong.

 

[Zach Package]

Won't happen, because the AFL will never admit that there was any reason not to accept a league official at a game.

Apparently NFL teams get a list of all the missed calls from the previous week and what they should have been. They don't retrospectively change the calls or anything but at least then you know whether to coach for that as a new interpretation or whether the ump just got it wrong.

NFL and NBA publicly release '2 minute reports' that go over all the contentious stuff that they got right or wrong in the last two minutes of games and I know the NBA generally get their head of officiating on TV to explain it over the telecast.

 

[Lore]

NFL and NBA publicly release '2 minute reports' that go over all the contentious stuff that they got right or wrong in the last two minutes of games and I know the NBA generally get their head of officiating on TV to explain it over the telecast.

If we're going to Americanise the league we can start with that.

 

[Mercurial89]

I dont think our media is responsible enough for that conversation to be mature.

Thats half the problem with the way the league is run, the news cycle that has been built around the game is part of the issue. Its why we dont have great access, its why we dont have actual in depth game analysis or why players dont open up and be themselves.

To be frank i just dont think the industry is professional enough for positive change.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

So i sat down last night and decided to have this rant, with facts, in doing so hoping people may call me less salty than i probably am.

But this is single handedly the most consistent week to week assreeming i have seen this club go through with the umpires in recent memory, if not ever.

So lets look at the last 3 rounds.

WCE vs ESS - 33 - 17 Free Kicks
NTH vs ESS - 21 - 11 Free Kicks
CWD vs ESS - 26 - 17 Free Kicks

Total - 80 - 45 in the last 3 weeks.

Is it just me?

Who does a guy have to blow to get a fair game called?

 

[Mootsy]

could it also be a case of essendon giving away too many clumsy free-kicks?
possibly, but certainly, in a season so close for every team, it could be a problem of bias umpiring.

every year a team has to go through it though, every season there is one team who would have the lowest free-kick count and a team that has the highest.

the main problem is umpires are part-time, they get abuse from fans and there seems to be a lack of focus on umpiring as a fully-fledged/respected department of the AFL, in a league where players are paid very high wages. They should be trying to improve the department/standards every year to make things easier on everybody.

It could be improved, no doubt.

But to be honest, I still think we would have lost to the Magpies, they set-up better than Essendon.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

could it also be a case of essendon giving away too many clumsy free-kicks?
possibly, but certainly, in a season so close for every team, it could be a problem of bias umpiring.

every year a team has to go through it though, every season there is one team who would have the lowest free-kick count and a team that has the highest.

the main problem is umpires are part-time, they get abuse from fans and there seems to be a lack of focus on umpiring as a fully-fledged/respected department of the AFL, in a league where players are paid very high wages. They should be trying to improve the department/standards every year to make things easier on everybody.

It could be improved, no doubt.

But to be honest, I still think we would have lost to the Magpies, they set-up better than Essendon.

We are mid run on free kicks against. If we were known to to stupid fee kicks i would expect to see us at the top of the list.

Seems to be only in the last few weeks we are copping a reeming.