Why is it an issue to cover up corruption?
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Umpiring Should umpires be coached during a game?
- Thread starter ferball
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
No, why is it corruption?
I might be naive, but what's the issue with an umpire being coached during a game?
If they're missing stuff, or sucking, what's wrong with an observer with better perspective telling them?
I'm happy to be corrected, but I'm unsure what the issue is?
All umpire's above a certain level are watched and given feedback
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Mar 4, 2015
- 4,100
- 5,050
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Central District
'Coached' is an interesting play on words as what one can consider coaching another can consider instructing.
And thats when you have to ask, is an umpire making a decision on how they interpret what they see unfold infront of them based on prior coached example or are they being instructed to make or not make calls in the moment based on a desired outcome.
And thats when you have to ask, is an umpire making a decision on how they interpret what they see unfold infront of them based on prior coached example or are they being instructed to make or not make calls in the moment based on a desired outcome.
It's the same - trying to manufacture a desired result.
that's usually the case.
it's called fine-tuning. It easily could be discussing recent adjustments to interpretations.
I think they absolutely should.
Examples of Hawthorn players driving their own heads into the turf may not be easy to identify by the field umpire on the ground - but the rest of us watching on TV could see it clear as day.
Those types of situations should absolutely be relayed to field umpires so they're aware of it.
Grundy pulling GWS' ruckman's jumper all day during ruck contests is a similar example. It happened at every context, but the the field umpire's view was impeded (by desig by Grundy).
It was an obvious tactic to grind and wear down the big guy from the Giants over the course of the day. And it worked. He was spent by the last quarter.
Umpires should definitely be instructed of these things. I see zero reason why they shouldn't?
Examples of Hawthorn players driving their own heads into the turf may not be easy to identify by the field umpire on the ground - but the rest of us watching on TV could see it clear as day.
Those types of situations should absolutely be relayed to field umpires so they're aware of it.
Grundy pulling GWS' ruckman's jumper all day during ruck contests is a similar example. It happened at every context, but the the field umpire's view was impeded (by desig by Grundy).
It was an obvious tactic to grind and wear down the big guy from the Giants over the course of the day. And it worked. He was spent by the last quarter.
Umpires should definitely be instructed of these things. I see zero reason why they shouldn't?
Grundy is doing it again tonight already.
I can't understand how the umpire don't see it?
All ruck contests bar centre bouncedowns are illegal under the old interpretations.
IMO all ruck contests should mimic the centre bouncedowns.
So despite what the AFL says it’s now fact that the umpire/s in the sky are actually telling umpires what to do during games.
Umpire in the north game tonight paid a free kick (incorrectly) to North then reversed his decision. You could hear him responding to Essendon players “I’ve got word, I’ve got word”.
I don’t care that this particular decision was overturned but it just highlights how non-transparent the AFL is and I think it undermines the true essence of umpiring.
It’s also blatantly obvious with all of the late calls that the umps are getting told what to pay and what not to pay.
Umpire in the north game tonight paid a free kick (incorrectly) to North then reversed his decision. You could hear him responding to Essendon players “I’ve got word, I’ve got word”.
I don’t care that this particular decision was overturned but it just highlights how non-transparent the AFL is and I think it undermines the true essence of umpiring.
It’s also blatantly obvious with all of the late calls that the umps are getting told what to pay and what not to pay.
Dirty Bird
Pokémon Master
The conspiracy theories here are strong.
There isn't collusion.
And for the most part, the coach doesn't get involved other than half and full time.
And the parts they do get involved, it's not calling a free, it's saying focus on x. And 99% of the time, x is 'pay attention to this matchup, as this player is tagging that player very closely'
There isn't collusion.
And for the most part, the coach doesn't get involved other than half and full time.
And the parts they do get involved, it's not calling a free, it's saying focus on x. And 99% of the time, x is 'pay attention to this matchup, as this player is tagging that player very closely'
- Oct 9, 2017
- 666
- 1,230
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Bushdid911 approves of this theory. Tinfoil hat brigade unite!
I think more importantly is to ask the umpire what he saw that he thought was a free kick.
I have three reasons for it being an issue:
- transparency. It's been covered here, but if you're going to have it (which they clearly do, despite Laura Kanes lies yesterday), at least do it like the NFL and have all audio piped into the tv stream for complete transparency. No secret squirrel crap the AFL just loves.
- replays. Having off field people make decisions based on replays (which again, Laura admitted occured in the Kangaroos free kick over turn) is an incredibly slippery slope. If you over turn one clearly wrong free kick using replays, you have to over turn them all. So if a team is adamant that the wrong decision has been paid, do they refuse to play until old mate checks a replay and notifies the umpires the correct decision? Cricket has learnt that unpires simply can't watch replays (except in official reviews), yet AFL again lags behind everyone else.
- lost time. This is an extension of the replay issue, but a few times this year we have seen score reviews take place after the "incident', with play continuing for 10-20 seconds before another stoppage, and then the goal umpire calling for a review - If that review is successful, the 10-20 seconds of play after it simply stops existing/"never took place". But the time isn't put back on the clock.
Again, if we are going down the route of replays and reviews, the NFL model must be used where they also check the time at which the incident took place, and reset the clock.
Could you imagine the above taking place in a grand final, a team needs 2 points for a win, a ball possibly crosses the point line, no call, play continues with no stoppages, they then snap and goal - BUT goal umpire "just wants to check if the ball was over the line earlier" - they already do this, so it's entirely possible.
Ball was over, point is paid, goal "never took place", yet time isn't restored due to no mechanism in place to do so.
It's a ticking time bomb in my opnion, and these things have a habit of appearing in crunch games.
- transparency. It's been covered here, but if you're going to have it (which they clearly do, despite Laura Kanes lies yesterday), at least do it like the NFL and have all audio piped into the tv stream for complete transparency. No secret squirrel crap the AFL just loves.
- replays. Having off field people make decisions based on replays (which again, Laura admitted occured in the Kangaroos free kick over turn) is an incredibly slippery slope. If you over turn one clearly wrong free kick using replays, you have to over turn them all. So if a team is adamant that the wrong decision has been paid, do they refuse to play until old mate checks a replay and notifies the umpires the correct decision? Cricket has learnt that unpires simply can't watch replays (except in official reviews), yet AFL again lags behind everyone else.
- lost time. This is an extension of the replay issue, but a few times this year we have seen score reviews take place after the "incident', with play continuing for 10-20 seconds before another stoppage, and then the goal umpire calling for a review - If that review is successful, the 10-20 seconds of play after it simply stops existing/"never took place". But the time isn't put back on the clock.
Again, if we are going down the route of replays and reviews, the NFL model must be used where they also check the time at which the incident took place, and reset the clock.
Could you imagine the above taking place in a grand final, a team needs 2 points for a win, a ball possibly crosses the point line, no call, play continues with no stoppages, they then snap and goal - BUT goal umpire "just wants to check if the ball was over the line earlier" - they already do this, so it's entirely possible.
Ball was over, point is paid, goal "never took place", yet time isn't restored due to no mechanism in place to do so.
It's a ticking time bomb in my opnion, and these things have a habit of appearing in crunch games.
Depending on how much is being said there could be a cognitive loading issue. when we are listening to instructions we pay less attention to what we see. Perhaps the reason the quality of umpiring has gone down is because umpires are concentrating on what they are hearing and reducing attention on what is happening in front of them.
Umpires today are coached , instructed, advised and evaluated constantly against an advisor's interpretation.
Umpiring has certainly become more regimented and that would be good if we had a clear consensus of the laws.
IMO the laws were interpreted better when umpires themselves "felt" for the game and
worked on the premise "eyes for the ball".
- Mar 4, 2015
- 4,100
- 5,050
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Central District
If they're going to be 'coached' during play then I want to hear the coaching so I know its not just directing to achieve a desired result.
Could easily be added to the broadcast audio, so what do they have to hide?
Could easily be added to the broadcast audio, so what do they have to hide?
- Apr 25, 2011
- 2,304
- 4,972
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
The audio would make sense of frees etc. Otherwise, as a viewer rather than participant... A free can be paid that you (or commentators) don't see and you are left scratching you're head. Know the warnings given by umps to the various players etc.
Can have a voice to text in an app or feed at the bottom of a tv screen - including the main screen at the stadiums or something.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
MYOB
Premium Gold
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2024
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2024
Veteran
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2023
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2023
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2022
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2022
Western Bulldogs - Mitch Honeychurch Player Sponsor 2018
I can tell you categorically that the umpires coaches do not speak to them during the quarters.
They go down at 1/2 time and speak to them, but do not speak to them during the actual game.
They go down at 1/2 time and speak to them, but do not speak to them during the actual game.
Similar threads
