Terrible umpiring

[Spielvogel]

The umpiring was atrocious yesterday. how about that fifty on chaplin? the fifty on rance for the cute little shove? embarrassing. There were children at that game yesterday and we are trying to teach them that nonsense? If this sort of stuff continues we all may as-well buy a membership with the Melbourne heart. dead set.

No doubt we were done by a brilliant team who at this stage are a better footy side but we don't need that nonsense out there yesterday. Its not often i wake up the morning after the loss and I'm STILL angry about it.

 

[Maybenextyear]

I agree. We were smashed in the 3rd quarter and the umpiring had nothing to do with that by damn there were some pretty average calls yesterday. How the hell was a trip not called on King? The umpire was right in front of it. The Chaplin 50 and the soft as custard 50 on Rance against Cloke was laughable.

As for holding the ball....flip a coin. You can take 5 steps , get caught , not dispose of it.....play on. Yet 3 minutes later you can have the ball foe a milisecond and have 5 players jump on you.....holding the ball.

The whistle can blow these days and you really have know idea which way it will be paid.

 

[ShaneDoan]

Can't blame the loss on the umpires but the fact that every time we touched Cloke he got a free and when Jack and Vicks were held and mauled nothing was paid. The lack of consistency in the umps didn't help.

 

[mcuzzy]

The umpiring was atrocious yesterday. how about that fifty on chaplin? the fifty on rance for the cute little shove? embarrassing. There were children at that game yesterday and we are trying to teach them that nonsense? If this sort of stuff continues we all may as-well buy a membership with the Melbourne heart. dead set.

No doubt we were done by a brilliant team who at this stage are a better footy side but we don't need that nonsense out there yesterday. Its not often i wake up the morning after the loss and I'm STILL angry about it.

That's an insult to the A-League. I've been supporting Victory since 2006 and despite the refereeing standards being fairly poor at times, they are far better than anything I see in the AFL.

 

[Spielvogel]

That's an insult to the A-League. I've been supporting Victory since 2006 and despite the refereeing standards being fairly poor at times, they are far better than anything I see in the AFL.

Well considering they've had one rule change in its history (offside, 1925) it would be pretty easy in comparison to afl to officiate. I agree all soccer forms are well refereed but my post was in regards to the soft ways the rules are in soccer.

 

[Dusty Cotch]

Collingwood are a good side.... a top 4 side they are hard to beat without the free ride they got yesterday.The two senior umpires in Meredith & Rosebury gave us nothing all day .Meredith in particular was very biased.We were disappointing but the umpiring was atrociously inconsistent in Collingwoods favour! That is after being at the game & watching the reply when i had calmed down.

 

[mcuzzy]

Well considering they've had one rule change in its history (offside, 1925) it would be pretty easy in comparison to afl to officiate. I agree all soccer forms are well refereed but my post was in regards to the soft ways the rules are in soccer.

goes to show it's a good game and the rules are fine, although there have been more changes than that, about seven I think. AFL will get their rules right eventually and hopefully it's for the better at the end.

Not sure I'd call soccer 'soft' either. I've played both sports and soccer definitely isn't soft.

 

[partycorolla]

.....is overcome by good teams.... end of discussion

 

[carn tigez]

The umpiring was shit.............
...............................................................
Anyway, doesn't matter. Umpires were fine .

 

[carn tigez]

Hey just quietly can someone actually explain WTF is dropping the ball these days? I thought i finally figured it out last year now i have no idea.

Doesn't really exist anymore. If you had prior opportunity to dispose of it, you have to get away a legal disposal unless the ball is knocked loose before the tackle, ie when placing your arms around the player (though they will sometimes pay this one anyway).

If you didn't have prior opportunity and the ball 'spills free' it's play on. Only if you have your hands clearly free and drop the ball without looking like you tried your best to kick or handball will they pay dropping the ball.

A lot of older people tend to think any time you get tackled and don't kick or handball it, it's holding the ball. My entire dad's side of the family does this, I don't even bother trying to explain it to them anymore. I just let them enjoy their 15 minute communal complaint about the fact that umpires never pay dropping the ball anymore every single time they are together and a footy match is on.

 

[tugga]

Umpiring didn't influence the result of the game is what I meant smart arse.

 

[Livonski]

Collingwood are a good side.... a top 4 side they are hard to beat without the free ride they got yesterday.The two senior umpires in Meredith & Rosebury gave us nothing all day .Meredith in particular was very biased.We were disappointing but the umpiring was atrociously inconsistent in Collingwoods favour! That is after being at the game & watching the reply when i had calmed down.

I've never had any idea which umpire was which, who paid what, who was biased and who gave us a ride. I look on the scoreboard when they come out, make sure it's not McBurney or Razor Ray then never give their names another thought.
Too hard to follow the footballers to have any time for the umps.
Were some howler decisions. McGuane got headlocked in front of us in q3 I think and ump had perfect view...nothing. Swans dropping the ball mostly gets paid (Geel vs Hawks last year didn't, cost Hawks the game!), and the 50s were stupid, and inconsistent.
Umps had no influence yesterday.

 

[Tigerland]

Didn't affect the result but they were rubbish.

The two that pissed me off the most were the 50m penalty against Chaplin and the Swan non holding the ball. How the f#&k did he dispose of it?

The 50m penalty against Chaplin was made by someone who obviously has never played the game. You can't just stop dead and he gave no warning. Just paid it straight away. Over-umpiring at it's worst.

Those umps won't be there grand final day - amateur hour. Just awful.

The umps doing the GWS v Melb game were rubbish as well. The standard of umpiring is getting worse no doubt about it.

 

[HFF]

Can't blame the loss on the umpires but the fact that every time we touched Cloke he got a free and when Jack and Vicks were held and mauled nothing was paid. The lack of consistency in the umps didn't help.

Just in regards to the Cloke point of the post but I'm not sure Cloke needed nor received much "protection" from the umps at all as he pretty much marked everything that came his way. He was just simply huge.

There is a lack on consistency though week to week.

 

[CQTiger]

I am alot like many who doesnt know which umpire awarded the free and I wonder if champion data produce stats for Gieschen to analyse his boys. I'd love a look at some of the results and see who is a "hands in the back " or "a dropping the ball" fanatic
Some other interesting ones would be

• non officiating umpire making a call
• Recalled centre bounces
• disputing a goal umpire call
• 50 m penalties (and what for)
• position on field where free given

On the video goal umpiring it is an absolute joke and should be scrapped and left for obvious wrong side of the post. A touch ball is impossible to pick most of it can be sound related(even with 80000 screaming fans)
The AFL could spend a million dollars and get it alot better but they are not that serious about it

 

[partycorolla]

I am alot like many who doesnt know which umpire awarded the free and I wonder if champion data produce stats for Gieschen to analyse his boys. I'd love a look at some of the results and see who is a "hands in the back " or "a dropping the ball" fanatic
Some other interesting ones would be

• non officiating umpire making a call
• Recalled centre bounces
• disputing a goal umpire call
• 50 m penalties (and what for)
• position on field where free given

On the video goal umpiring it is an absolute joke and should be scrapped and left for obvious wrong side of the post. A touch ball is impossible to pick most of it can be sound related(even with 80000 screaming fans)

The AFL could spend a million dollars and get it alot better but they are not that serious about it

I should start by saying I have a professional relationship with a prominent AFL umpire and also I umpired football with a few of the guys still in the senior squad at the level below VFL (years ago now). I am in no way saying that umpires get it right all of the time and I give them hell at all Tiger games..... but in general, they all have far better efficiency than most of our favourite players.

The umpires all receive a match review and comprehensive report on all their decisions/non-decisions. This includes feedback on positioning, bouncing, communication etc They have targets to meet each week and when they don't meet these they are generally dropped. They are certainly accountable, many of them don't agree with some of the rule changes that have come in during previous years but they just try to do their job as best they can. Funnily enough, they often do group reviews of certain types of frees that may have been missed or tactics that teams might use in a negating sense and this (and I'm basing this off my own viewing) often seems to result in a 'correction' during the next couple of rounds.

There is no doubt that the department has lost a lot of experience in the last few years and there is also no doubt that the AFL laws committee is trying to make a tough game (to umpire) harder by trying to take the 'interpretation' out of it. I think we as supporters all agree that a game with less free kicks (particularly the tiggy-touchwood ones) is a better game to watch. As a former umpire, the most annoying thing I hear from supporters is the one about 'consistency'. What a load of crap. If an ump has missed a free kick or incorrectly given one, then the last thing they should do is compound it by paying another incorrect one.

What annoys me most about some of the umpires in the games now, is when umps guess (as one ump did with a free kick to Cloke during the 4th on Sat). The umpire on that occasion was side on to the contest, 40 metres away and the alleged contact took place on the blind side of the umpire (boundary side). He couldn't see it and blew his whistle seemingly because of Cloke's reaction. An umpire shouldn't blow the whistle unless they are 100% sure. They may still get it wrong but they should never ever guess.

On the video umpire, I agree it is not working all that well, no doubt the AFL will have stats, that say it is....

Now I will finish by saying we had the worst of the umpiring on Saturday without any shadow of doubt..... but umpiring never has and never will be the cause of a loss. Unless a team has a perfect game, where they don't miss a target, a shot on goal, a tackle, a spoil etc..... and if they do that, they won't lose!

Sorry that went a bit long but the 'umps cost us' call is just ridiculous, a cop out and generally just a human instinct which is to blame anything else rather than just admitting that the team wasn't good enough....

 

[Livonski]

Great post partycorolla made a lot of sense.
I think the consistency thing is around decisions like the Swan non holding the ball non decision. It gets paid almost always and so consistency would suggest Swan should have been pinged. That frustrated me.
I was right behind the Rance high contact on Cloke, and while he may have guessed, he guessed correctly. From my angle it was a roundhouse smack in the head.

 

[Barge]

Normally the ump calls them back to the mark, but that time he just gave 50 straight away. And 50 to Cloke for Rances chest push was over umpiring at its worst.

Pies fan here and couldn't agree more!

 

[Bojangles17]

Now I will finish by saying we had the worst of the umpiring on Saturday without any shadow of doubt..... but umpiring never has and never will be the cause of a loss. Unless a team has a perfect game, where they don't miss a target, a shot on goal, a tackle, a spoil etc..... and if they do that, they won't lose!

Sorry that went a bit long but the 'umps cost us' call is just ridiculous, a cop out and generally just a human instinct which is to blame anything else rather than just admitting that the team wasn't good enough....

good post PC, there never was any suggestion that the umpiring was the catalyst for our defeat, just take it on face value out of the op that it was terrible on basis some glaring decisions were completely overlooked by umpires right on the scene

 

[Tigerbob]

Umpiring in that third quarter swung momentum. I don't care what anyone says. Once momentum shifted we weren't good enough to swing it back without damage being done, but that umpiring was a disgrace. Soft free kicks and 50 meter penalties handed to them, missing some obvious ones for us.

Collingwood are a top team, they didn't need the assistance they received in that third quarter that they got. The umpires were the momentum swingers.

 

[WATIGE]

As a former umpire, the most annoying thing I hear from supporters is the one about 'consistency'. What a load of crap. If an ump has missed a free kick or incorrectly given one, then the last thing they should do is compound it by paying another incorrect one.

Good Post.

But....
Have to call you on the consistency point - with the way the rules are these days I, and I am sure many others, have given into the AFL's plan and understand that the AFL have constructed the rules so that in any situation there are now at least three available free kicks to be paid, that way the AFL never have to admit publicly that an ump may have made a wrong call. Slightly cynical I know but not far from the facts of the situation. All I want is for the three umps on the feild to call the same frees the same way for the day - if they start calling it, keep calling it - after all it is there, we all know that now.

A question for you with your inside info - in the analysis that goes on of the umprires calls do they map an umpires "style"? If so do they then try and assign like umpires to achive a consistency of calls for the day?

I wouldn't be surprised if they do take these stats but assign what they would term "complimentary umpires" whereby calls that one ump doesn't make often are the ones that one of the others does. The AFL would be deluded enough to think this was balancing the system while doing the more obvious of contributing to "inconsistency" in calls on the day and thus pissing off we the paying public!!!!

(I have a nephew who is taking on umpiring and I admire him for going into such a thankless role - as I do most of the AFL guys bar McBurney ).

 

[carn tigez]

The umpires all receive a match review and comprehensive report on all their decisions/non-decisions. This includes feedback on positioning, bouncing, communication etc They have targets to meet each week and when they don't meet these they are generally dropped.

The thing with this is, I watched a lot of Geesh's videos on the AFL site last year where he was questioned about certain decisions from the previous round. So many times he justified free kicks because to the letter of the law they were there, but to any sane and reasonable person they were not. The issue was there'd be others where the free kick wasn't there to the letter of the law, but he'd justify it by giving the context of the free kick and saying that context made it a correct call. Either pay everything to the letter of the law or don't, but don't pay some and not others. That's where the consistency thing comes in, I don't think anyone sees someone pinged for in the back when they didn't touch the player's back and expect that call to be made all game. It's consistency of interpretation, not consistency of incorrectness.

 

[partycorolla]

good post PC, there never was any suggestion that the umpiring was the catalyst for our defeat, just take it on face value out of the op that it was terrible on basis some glaring decisions were completely overlooked by umpires right on the scene

Sorry Bo, wasn't talking about this game or even this club, it was a general statement and one that is made by fans of many clubs from time to time

 

[partycorolla]

Good Post.

But....
Have to call you on the consistency point - with the way the rules are these days I, and I am sure many others, have given into the AFL's plan and understand that the AFL have constructed the rules so that in any situation there are now at least three available free kicks to be paid, that way the AFL never have to admit publicly that an ump may have made a wrong call. Slightly cynical I know but not far from the facts of the situation. All I want is for the three umps on the feild to call the same frees the same way for the day - if they start calling it, keep calling it - after all it is there, we all know that now.

A question for you with your inside info - in the analysis that goes on of the umprires calls do they map an umpires "style"? If so do they then try and assign like umpires to achive a consistency of calls for the day?

I wouldn't be surprised if they do take these stats but assign what they would term "complimentary umpires" whereby calls that one ump doesn't make often are the ones that one of the others does. The AFL would be deluded enough to think this was balancing the system while doing the more obvious of contributing to "inconsistency" in calls on the day and thus pissing off we the paying public!!!!

(I have a nephew who is taking on umpiring and I admire him for going into such a thankless role - as I do most of the AFL guys bar McBurney ).

Not at all disagreeing with you here. My point is that an umpire who may stuff up a decision (and we often know after it's happened, sometimes by player reaction, sometimes by the replay, sometimes by a coach or another umpire telling us at qtr time) should not compound his mistake by awarding the same incorrect decision/interpretation again.

As for your question about style, it was never termed like that when I was umpiring and in my discussions with said umpire but there would certainly be feedback given about each decision (i.e. technically correct decision but could have been let go as had no impact on the contest etc etc - probably a crap example but I'm buggered today!).

Umpire #32.... Mollison maybe? He blows his whistle an awful lot in the games that I see, just lacks what I term 'feel' for the game. Usually in games at most levels, you should see more free kicks paid early in the game which 'set the scene' for the way the game will be umpired that day. This is where the 'wrong' decision/intepretation can cause a problem for later (in player's/supporters eyes). Ideally, every game should be umpired like the last 10 minutes of a grand final, no tiggy touchwood frees, you have to earn them (IMO ).

Good luck to your nephew.... he will learn some terrific people skills in high pressure environments....earn some coin and get fit along the way. Hopefully your nephew plays still, previously or will.... best way to learn a 'feel' for the game.

 

[partycorolla]

The thing with this is, I watched a lot of Geesh's videos on the AFL site last year where he was questioned about certain decisions from the previous round. So many times he justified free kicks because to the letter of the law they were there, but to any sane and reasonable person they were not. The issue was there'd be others where the free kick wasn't there to the letter of the law, but he'd justify it by giving the context of the free kick and saying that context made it a correct call. Either pay everything to the letter of the law or don't, but don't pay some and not others. That's where the consistency thing comes in, I don't think anyone sees someone pinged for in the back when they didn't touch the player's back and expect that call to be made all game. It's consistency of interpretation, not consistency of incorrectness.

Don't get me started on the Giesch.... I feel he protects umpires/decisions far more than he needs to.....probably instructed to do so by the AFL. This is where the 'feel' for the game comes in to it for me. Yes, if you argued the free kick in a court of law, it may technically have been there but in the context of a match or group of matches, it should never have been paid. A good example of this would be the 'shepherding' free paid against McGuane in the Bulldogs game..... yes technically it was a free, which is fine except it wasn't paid about 5000 times before it over the last 10 years and probably won't be again. I have no idea what the Giesch said about it but was absolute rubbish.