Remove this Banner Ad

Umpiring Technical question for umpires

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pornstar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

P

Pornstar

Club Legend
Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2001
Posts
1,585
Reaction score
7
Location
West Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
I've always wondered what the technical ruling would be on the following situation:

Let's say a player is sprinting forward on the lead, with his opponent right on his heels. He takes the mark and their momentum takes them forward another 5-10 meters over the mark. Now if the marking player turns around as soon as he stops and kicks the ball immediately (without deviating from his line) can the opponent, who is right there in front of him, smother the ball, or would that be a 50m penalty against him? On one hand he is interfering with the kicker 10 meters over the mark, but on the other hand he hasn't been given the opportunity to run back to the mark so would the kicker be deemed to have played on even though he hadn't run off his line.

Does anyone what the rule book would say about this scenario?
 
Smother should be legal as the player who marked it didn;t take the opportunity to go back, thus not giving the player on the mark time either. Common sense applies and it is not really as technical as it should be.
 
borgsta2006 said:
Smother should be legal as the player who marked it didn;t take the opportunity to go back, thus not giving the player on the mark time either. Common sense applies and it is not really as technical as it should be.
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about common sense, i'm talking about what the umpires should technically rule. What if the guy marks the ball 55 out and there's nobody in the goal square, doesn't he have the right to kick the ball as soon as he likes? Why does he have to wait for his opponent to casually walk back to the mark before he can take his kick?

I would think that technically if you have taken a mark and have not been deemed to have played on, then if an opponent interferes with the kick it should be 50m.
 
Pornstar said:
I'm not talking about common sense, i'm talking about what the umpires should technically rule. What if the guy marks the ball 55 out and there's nobody in the goal square, doesn't he have the right to kick the ball as soon as he likes? Why does he have to wait for his opponent to casually walk back to the mark before he can take his kick?

I would think that technically if you have taken a mark and have not been deemed to have played on, then if an opponent interferes with the kick it should be 50m.
Click to expand...

Well apparently common sense seems to be lacking from all umpire's knowledge in games. If you paid 50m for this, you would pay 50m technically every time a player follows the other player OVER the mark whilst trying to pull up wouldn't you?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

borgsta2006 said:
Smother should be legal as the player who marked it didn;t take the opportunity to go back, thus not giving the player on the mark time either. Common sense applies and it is not really as technical as it should be.
Click to expand...

OMG, are you for real? I am yet to see ANY umpire actually use common sense. If they did so the Giesh would sack them in an instant!
 
borgsta2006 said:
You haven't watched too many games then:D
Click to expand...

Did you watch Freo/Demons yesterday? A free kick in the centre of the ground but the ball accidentally strikes Davey on the calf in the same flow of play (at around the same time) and rolls 10mtrs away. Nothing Davey could do about it but the ump awards a 50mtr penalty and shot on goal.

NO COMMON SENSE USED AT ALL which appears to be the norm these days:mad:.
 
Beckers said:
Did you watch Freo/Demons yesterday? A free kick in the centre of the ground but the ball accidentally strikes Davey on the calf in the same flow of play (at around the same time) and rolls 10mtrs away. Nothing Davey could do about it but the ump awards a 50mtr penalty and shot on goal.

NO COMMON SENSE USED AT ALL which appears to be the norm these days:mad:.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That was terrible. Imagine having a thread every time a player has a shank of a kick or an error that costs a side dearly.
That's what it is like on here with the umpiring. IMO it is not terrible, it just is that every decision is so heavily scrutinised.
 
borgsta2006 said:
Agreed. That was terrible. Imagine having a thread every time a player has a shank of a kick or an error that costs a side dearly.
That's what it is like on here with the umpiring. IMO it is not terrible, it just is that every decision is so heavily scrutinised.
Click to expand...

That was one of MANY similar decisions every week where common sense would earn umpires more respect than the standard sledgehammer to walnut approach.
 
Agree with both of you on this... unfortunately common sense doesn't seem to be so common these days and that's not just on the footy field... however, the rules don't allow the umpires to be 100% correct and that is part of the game... 'Hands in the back', 'chopping of the arms' are just too hard to get every time... I'm dirty on the AFL umps this year re: holding the ball... seem to have relaxed slightly in recent weeks but earlier in the year there was no chance of players releasing the footy and they were pinged (diving on the footy or dragging it in are seperate from this as they should lose their right for prior opportunity)
 
common sense should apply meaning a re-set of the mark or effective communication to the player to quickly come back on the mark, the momentum of the player should mean he has the right to be over the mark, but if he comes back straight away, then that is fine, however if the player on the mark proceeds to try and smother the ball 'after' the umpire has told him to come back he has encroached over the mark he has set, meaning a 50m penalty should apply
 
borgsta2006 said:
Agreed. That was terrible. Imagine having a thread every time a player has a shank of a kick or an error that costs a side dearly.
That's what it is like on here with the umpiring. IMO it is not terrible, it just is that every decision is so heavily scrutinised.
Click to expand...
This argument is wrong.
If I as a player stuff up my moans and grunts acknowledge this to myself and my team mates. My coach may even pull me aside, call out the runner or mention it in the huddle at the breaks - heck one of my teammates might even have a word to me. I may even get dropped.

As a student at school my wrongdoings are evidenced in detention or by poor marks and I have to face the consequences.

As a part-time worker my wrong doings can cost me my job, make me stay back an extra half hour to fix these mistakes and the boss gets the shits at me.

For all of my mistakes I am held accountable. Just like life. A gambling problem may mean I miss out on paying my car insurance. This = bad. An arrogance problem may mean someone takes me the wrong way and starts a fight with me. This = bad. But I face the music.

Umpires on the other hand, by golly do not question their decision. They are right 100% of the time and have no accountability. At the elite level, yes they do get dropped for one or two weeks if they make massive howlers that get airtime in the media. But for the most part they arent held accountable, and in the grassroots footy the umpires have ZERO accountability. Dare not say as much as "Excuse me Sir but what was that free kick for?" because you will be yellow carded and watching from the sidelines.

It could be argued that they have zilch accountability for their mistakes because their ranks are so low. Like the Kevin Sheedy ad it is because people abuse them. HECK. Did you see the abuse Matthew Knights copped on the weekend. He, himself, was still dedicated to the Essendon cause, he wasnt going to go sulk in a corner. Yet because he isnt an umpire he got held accountable. Umpires need to toughen up. Supporters give opposition lip much more then they lip up to the umpires.

Umpires are a weak breed of people. The type of people who left school midway through year 10, found it too hard. Then they were too retarted to get an apprenticeship so worked at McDonalds. Now they are in adulthood and have worked their way up to part-time Assistant manager on the weekdays (always blaming Junior staff for overcooking the fries when questioned by Ronald and never accepting responsibility) getting the tidy sum of $10 an hour. Some umpires even branch out to live in a bungalow, while others still sleep beside their mothers.

Sometimes I am down at the local oval having a kick on my non-training days and the orange shirt wearing scum are their having a training session. They stand around talking and kicking the footy like my 9yo sister for 30mins, run 2 warm ups with the show off 25yos absolutely blitzing the older blokes and the kiddies (boundary umpires) showing no team work whatsoever. Then they stretch for another 30 minutes. Its normally tea time by then so Ive given up showing off that I can actually kick a drop punt and go home. But at other times I have stayed and all they have done is go over a couple of common rules eg push in the back, holding the ball and made the kids do boundary throw ins. I say who gives a f*** if they can run a couple of laps and know a couple of rules. I would much rather the umpires sit around a table, heck the McDonalds board room for all I care, and read the rules book for once in their life. Even watch some footy, and by watch footy I dont mean reminise about how they used to sit on the bench and back pocket back in Under 12s.

F***ing umpires. I'll give em one thing. Consistent. Consistently sh8t and consistently making up/changing rules.


















tl;dr
 

Remove this Banner Ad

In answer to the original question - the umpire should not allow the player to play on but come in, reset the mark WHERE it was taken and play resumes. Despite what you idiots say, I bet in 90% of games then this would be what takes place.

BTW Carlton Blue - you are welcome to come on down to train with OUR umpires group - good luck keeping up. I am willing to back the fastest five runners in our umpires group against the fastest five in your footy club any day.

one word for you - TOOL!
 
I have no idea about your umpires and you have no idea about my team mates. Stupid bet. In my league 99% of players would beat every umpire in a foot race.
But thats beside the point because I honestly dont care if an umpire could beat Usain Bolt over 100m, beat Steve Monoghetti over 50km and lift more then Arnie Swarzenegger because I just want them to make correct decisions. That requires mental not physical ability and with the 3 (2 in local league) umpires they dont need to be that fit anyway.

For the record I agree with your ruling you put forward to the opening poster.
 
carltonblue said:
This argument is wrong.
If I as a player stuff up my moans and grunts acknowledge this to myself and my team mates. My coach may even pull me aside, call out the runner or mention it in the huddle at the breaks - heck one of my teammates might even have a word to me. I may even get dropped.

As a student at school my wrongdoings are evidenced in detention or by poor marks and I have to face the consequences.

As a part-time worker my wrong doings can cost me my job, make me stay back an extra half hour to fix these mistakes and the boss gets the shits at me.

For all of my mistakes I am held accountable. Just like life. A gambling problem may mean I miss out on paying my car insurance. This = bad. An arrogance problem may mean someone takes me the wrong way and starts a fight with me. This = bad. But I face the music.

Umpires on the other hand, by golly do not question their decision. They are right 100% of the time and have no accountability. At the elite level, yes they do get dropped for one or two weeks if they make massive howlers that get airtime in the media. But for the most part they arent held accountable, and in the grassroots footy the umpires have ZERO accountability. Dare not say as much as "Excuse me Sir but what was that free kick for?" because you will be yellow carded and watching from the sidelines.

It could be argued that they have zilch accountability for their mistakes because their ranks are so low. Like the Kevin Sheedy ad it is because people abuse them. HECK. Did you see the abuse Matthew Knights copped on the weekend. He, himself, was still dedicated to the Essendon cause, he wasnt going to go sulk in a corner. Yet because he isnt an umpire he got held accountable. Umpires need to toughen up. Supporters give opposition lip much more then they lip up to the umpires.

Umpires are a weak breed of people. The type of people who left school midway through year 10, found it too hard. Then they were too retarted to get an apprenticeship so worked at McDonalds. Now they are in adulthood and have worked their way up to part-time Assistant manager on the weekdays (always blaming Junior staff for overcooking the fries when questioned by Ronald and never accepting responsibility) getting the tidy sum of $10 an hour. Some umpires even branch out to live in a bungalow, while others still sleep beside their mothers.

Sometimes I am down at the local oval having a kick on my non-training days and the orange shirt wearing scum are their having a training session. They stand around talking and kicking the footy like my 9yo sister for 30mins, run 2 warm ups with the show off 25yos absolutely blitzing the older blokes and the kiddies (boundary umpires) showing no team work whatsoever. Then they stretch for another 30 minutes. Its normally tea time by then so Ive given up showing off that I can actually kick a drop punt and go home. But at other times I have stayed and all they have done is go over a couple of common rules eg push in the back, holding the ball and made the kids do boundary throw ins. I say who gives a f*** if they can run a couple of laps and know a couple of rules. I would much rather the umpires sit around a table, heck the McDonalds board room for all I care, and read the rules book for once in their life. Even watch some footy, and by watch footy I dont mean reminise about how they used to sit on the bench and back pocket back in Under 12s.

F***ing umpires. I'll give em one thing. Consistent. Consistently sh8t and consistently making up/changing rules.


















tl;dr
Click to expand...
what a load of abusive, ungrateful and uneducated dribble !

Try making your point without all the abusive language and insults, so that we readers may have chance at understanding your point.

You show no appreciation for the difficult role the umpires have and the wonderful complexity of making split second decisions. The only reason you can criticise and make judgements is due to the luxury of hindsight, the camera replay, which the umpires dont have the luxury of using.

imagine how slow our games would be if each move on a footy field was played back so we could all see what happened. Even if that happened we would all still disagree on the interpretation.

Obviously you have not experienced the pressure of always having to be right. No where in the rule book does it say that the umpires are right, but they are the ones endowed with the authority to make the best call they can based on what they see. We as players and spectators are to respect that.

Without the umpires we wouldnt have a game. i don't hear you offering to do the job better. Where would footy be without those who volunteer their time and effort to umpire all the games from Auskick to AFL

Before you accuse others of being uneducated, try to at least come across as educated yourself
 
Pornstar said:
I've always wondered what the technical ruling would be on the following situation:

Let's say a player is sprinting forward on the lead, with his opponent right on his heels. He takes the mark and their momentum takes them forward another 5-10 meters over the mark. Now if the marking player turns around as soon as he stops and kicks the ball immediately (without deviating from his line) can the opponent, who is right there in front of him, smother the ball, or would that be a 50m penalty against him? On one hand he is interfering with the kicker 10 meters over the mark, but on the other hand he hasn't been given the opportunity to run back to the mark so would the kicker be deemed to have played on even though he hadn't run off his line.

Does anyone what the rule book would say about this scenario?
Click to expand...

I'd be pulling play up and directing the player taking the mark to kick over the man on the mark. No point paying the 50m penalty. Just a little bit of common sense.
 
pazza said:
I'd be pulling play up and directing the player taking the mark to kick over the man on the mark. No point paying the 50m penalty. Just a little bit of common sense.
Click to expand...

This comes under common sense rule. The umpire needs to set the mark for the player otherwise it can be argued that the player on the mark wasn't aware where he should be standing. If the player smothers the kick then the correct action will be to blow time on. set the mark and have the player take his kick again. If the player kicks the ball and it is NOT smothered then the correct call is play on (no penalty for running over the mark).
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Between The Lines said:
what a load of abusive, ungrateful and uneducated dribble !

Try making your point without all the abusive language and insults, so that we readers may have chance at understanding your point.
Click to expand...

His/Her account has been cancelled so probably no point in going any further BTL.

Poor post by the poster in question, must have eventually realised his/her contributions were not overly insightful/informative.
 
Pity there isn't a 7 second delay like on radio

Moderators must see it all, a little like the football umpires :)
 
Hey I [strike]am[/strike] was an umpire too!
 
Ha Ha why am I not surprised. Feel like I missed my calling, I know there is a frustrated AFL umpire living someone deep inside me. I know i wouldn't be fit enough physically, let alone the mental stamina required ...
 
Pornstar said:
I've always wondered what the technical ruling would be on the following situation:

Let's say a player is sprinting forward on the lead, with his opponent right on his heels. He takes the mark and their momentum takes them forward another 5-10 meters over the mark. Now if the marking player turns around as soon as he stops and kicks the ball immediately (without deviating from his line) can the opponent, who is right there in front of him, smother the ball, or would that be a 50m penalty against him? On one hand he is interfering with the kicker 10 meters over the mark, but on the other hand he hasn't been given the opportunity to run back to the mark so would the kicker be deemed to have played on even though he hadn't run off his line.

Does anyone what the rule book would say about this scenario?
Click to expand...
If the umpire calls play on play would continue if no playon call i would set the man back on the mark and start the set play again.
 
Always wondered this...
After a behind, if the umpire calls "play on" to the player taking the kick in is he still required to kick it to himself if he wants to leave the square?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom