The answer to the umpiring problem.

[Fudd]

In my opinion there is one simple way of addressing the appaling situaution that umpiring is currently in.

Give them less decisions to make.

As soon as the AFL realises that we as fans dont watch footy for our enjoyment of the copiousl ridiculous decisions that are dealt out every week the better.
I think all the rules should be looked at and reevaluated as to their place in the game.
High Contact: How often do we groan with the soft over the shoulder frees? is touching someone on the shoulder really putting him at danger or putting him at some disadvantage? Should take a leaf out of Rugbys book and pay a free only when contact is made forcibly with the head.

Push in the back: Not suggesting we remove this rule, just change it so that its only when in a marking contest a free is warranted for a push in the back. Who cares if when two guys are scrapping for the ball on the deck, one falls on the other, or if in the tackle the man is propelled forward? granted it takes real skill to properly tackle someone with falling in their back, but if the umpires cant tell the difference half the time, the rule should be changed.

50 metre penaltys: Only the most serious of offenses should be awarded a 50 metre penalty. The cost is just far to high for running over the mark or disagreeing with a decision. Bring in the 25 metre penalty. Also if umpires are going to pull one out of the bag for holding a jumper after a mark is taken, as happened to mark williams on the weekend i think, they need to make it clear that everytime anysuch contact is made, impeding a player, they will pay the free. Sick of seeing crap like that paid, and yet for the remainder of the game blokes had to deal with players wrestling and scragging them to hold up play after a mark.

Those are just a few changes i would make to take the umpire out of the game. Im just sick of seeing 2 guys going hard at it and just waiting for the whistle to blow for some ridiculous reason that half the time neither of the players are aware of.
Please discuss, and suggest any rule changes you owuld like to see.

 

[outback jack]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

only thing that i'd like to see if the ump's bounce the ball straight away. Like get in there and throw it u'd within 5 sec. These days they clean the ball, blow time on and it makes it tougher for the ball to come out hence they pay more stupid frees that arent really there. With the ball moving quickly i think the rest will take care of itself.

 

[RooDog]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

In my opinion there is one simple way of addressing the appaling situaution that umpiring is currently in.

Give them less decisions to make.

As soon as the AFL realises that we as fans dont watch footy for our enjoyment of the copiousl ridiculous decisions that are dealt out every week the better.
I think all the rules should be looked at and reevaluated as to their place in the game.

1.High Contact: How often do we groan with the soft over the shoulder frees? is touching someone on the shoulder really putting him at danger or putting him at some disadvantage? Should take a leaf out of Rugbys book and pay a free only when contact is made forcibly with the head.

2.Push in the back: Not suggesting we remove this rule, just change it so that its only when in a marking contest a free is warranted for a push in the back. Who cares if when two guys are scrapping for the ball on the deck, one falls on the other, or if in the tackle the man is propelled forward? granted it takes real skill to properly tackle someone with falling in their back, but if the umpires cant tell the difference half the time, the rule should be changed.

3.50 metre penaltys: Only the most serious of offenses should be awarded a 50 metre penalty. The cost is just far to high for running over the mark or disagreeing with a decision. Bring in the 25 metre penalty. Also if umpires are going to pull one out of the bag for holding a jumper after a mark is taken, as happened to mark williams on the weekend i think, they need to make it clear that everytime anysuch contact is made, impeding a player, they will pay the free. Sick of seeing crap like that paid, and yet for the remainder of the game blokes had to deal with players wrestling and scragging them to hold up play after a mark.

Those are just a few changes i would make to take the umpire out of the game. Im just sick of seeing 2 guys going hard at it and just waiting for the whistle to blow for some ridiculous reason that half the time neither of the players are aware of.
Please discuss, and suggest any rule changes you owuld like to see.

1. makes it a tougher decision than it already is so thats not a good idea, with that you then have to have the umpires decide what is frceable and what is not, at the moment its simple, any contact over shoulder height is too high.

2. once again antoher stupid idea, so under your rule a bloke can be running along and a play can tackle him from behind and absolutely bury him into the ground and its not a free kick. mate if two players are on the ground and ones good enough to get there first the other bloke shouldnt be allowed just to jump in his back.

3. so players should be allowed to run through the mark.... players know its a no go zone and the good players are switched on and dont do it, the jumper pulling one is if they totally restrict them from playing on then its 50 and i think they are consistent with it.

mate you obvioulsy have no idea.

 

[Fudd]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

1. makes it a tougher decision than it already is so thats not a good idea, with that you then have to have the umpires decide what is frceable and what is not, at the moment its simple, any contact over shoulder height is too high.

2. once again antoher stupid idea, so under your rule a bloke can be running along and a play can tackle him from behind and absolutely bury him into the ground and its not a free kick. mate if two players are on the ground and ones good enough to get there first the other bloke shouldnt be allowed just to jump in his back.

3. so players should be allowed to run through the mark.... players know its a no go zone and the good players are switched on and dont do it, the jumper pulling one is if they totally restrict them from playing on then its 50 and i think they are consistent with it.

mate you obvioulsy have no idea.

'Mate' i was simply trying come up with some ideas as to how to make everything simpler and stop umpires from ruining games by over officiating. The rules that are in place would be fine, if the umpires were good enough to pay them consistantly for both sides. At the moment they clearly arent. I just feel that there is too much pathetic soft frees being paid on a totally inconsistant basis.

 

[RooDog]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

'Mate' i was simply trying come up with some ideas as to how to make everything simpler and stop umpires from ruining games by over officiating. The rules that are in place would be fine, if the umpires were good enough to pay them consistantly for both sides. At the moment they clearly arent. I just feel that there is too much pathetic soft frees being paid on a totally inconsistant basis.

yer and i was just playing the devils advocate and pointing out the flaws with the argument. The problem isnt the consistency here its interpretation, you get one bloke who looks at an incident sees it as a free kick to one team, you get one bloke who would ball it up and one bloke who thinks its a free to the other team than the first bloke. Its never going to change with 3 umpires because you cant change how 3 people think so that they think exactly alike, it will never work, we do need 3 umpires and unfortunately this will be a problem til the cows come home.

 

[Crowked]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

Sack Jeff Geisham.

The guy is completely useless. I wouldnt let him walk my dog, never mind contolling something so important. On top of his uselessness, he is about as one eyed Victorian as it gets, and given the recent umpiring trends, this might explain a few things.

 

[GoSarge]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

I think we should call on the crowd to umpire games at AAMI. If 45000 people at AAMI yells out BBBAAAALLLLLLLLLLL!!!. Then the Crows player will be awarded a free kick. This will also be a cost saving initiative as the AFL wont have to send umpires over from Victoria.

 

[Damp Squarie]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

1. makes it a tougher decision than it already is so thats not a good idea, with that you then have to have the umpires decide what is frceable and what is not, at the moment its simple, any contact over shoulder height is too high.

2. once again antoher stupid idea, so under your rule a bloke can be running along and a play can tackle him from behind and absolutely bury him into the ground and its not a free kick. mate if two players are on the ground and ones good enough to get there first the other bloke shouldnt be allowed just to jump in his back.

3. so players should be allowed to run through the mark.... players know its a no go zone and the good players are switched on and dont do it, the jumper pulling one is if they totally restrict them from playing on then its 50 and i think they are consistent with it.

mate you obvioulsy have no idea.

L L
Subtle as a sledgehammer RooDog.

 

[Damp Squarie]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

All I want is consistency .
The holding the ball decision is the one that sh! ts me to tears the most.

Id like the umpires to participate in match conditions where they

1. Go for the ball
2. Get it as they are wrapped up in a tackle
3. Are then jump on and surrounded

...and then told they made no attempt to get rid of it.

They gotta be realistic!
We all know those that make no attempt to knock it out. Penalize 'em but FFS dont ping the guy who CANT get it out.

 

[AdelaideFan]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

1. makes it a tougher decision than it already is so thats not a good idea, with that you then have to have the umpires decide what is frceable and what is not, at the moment its simple, any contact over shoulder height is too high.

2. once again antoher stupid idea, so under your rule a bloke can be running along and a play can tackle him from behind and absolutely bury him into the ground and its not a free kick. mate if two players are on the ground and ones good enough to get there first the other bloke shouldnt be allowed just to jump in his back.

3. so players should be allowed to run through the mark.... players know its a no go zone and the good players are switched on and dont do it, the jumper pulling one is if they totally restrict them from playing on then its 50 and i think they are consistent with it.

mate you obvioulsy have no idea.

Agree with you roo dog. Statement three in particular. Being able to run through the mark when your side has the ball is one of the most effective ways of breaking up a tag. All players know the rule here and lets be honest it is quite a simple one. You dont run through. It is not every often you see a free paid for this infringement.

Umpiring would be a very hard job and not something I would wish to take on. It is much easier to sit at the ground watching the big screen or watching the tv, replays etc and see the calls. Some of the mistakes are absolutely disgraceful but unfortunately like you said having three umpires you will get three differeing opinions on a passage of play.

People may call for my head but having dubious umpiring decisions is a part of our game and I would argue in some ways does make it more of a specticle for those watching. It is not good when it costs teams a game admittedly but it does add to our game watching these three men in white prance around blowing there whistles and making all sorts of weird hand gestures.

On another note bring back the wide brimmed goal umpire hats and the white trenchies. They are a great part of our game. Where else do you see a white trench coat in sport??

 

[Crowz Gal]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

only thing that i'd like to see if the ump's bounce the ball straight away. Like get in there and throw it u'd within 5 sec. These days they clean the ball, blow time on and it makes it tougher for the ball to come out hence they pay more stupid frees that arent really there. With the ball moving quickly i think the rest will take care of itself.

Just on the time wasting, did anyone notice vs. Hawthorn, when the young Hawk had the last shot @ goal the amount if time he took. Time off wasnt called and he virtually wasted 40 seconds taking his shot. With the team only down by 10 points you'd think time off would have been called or the guy would have hurried it along???

 

[PrideOf]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

Some answers to the umpiring problem:

1. Change the focus of umpires from 'how high can he bounce the footy?' to 'can he actually make consistent decisions over 120 minutes?' That will get us some good decision makers for a change.
2. Get rid of the third umpire - all it does is add another opinion and further inconsistency during a game.
3. Get the umps to mix with players informally. They need to learn they are a part of the game, not the reason for it.
4. Take the microphones away. Firstly, it turns some umpires into policemen, and others into comedians when they are blatantly neither. Secondly, I think the umpire should have the freedom to give a mouthful back to a player who's just sounded off at him. It worked in the 1980s and 1990s, it can work now.
5. Allow coaches the opportunity to criticise umps in a post-match presser. You'll find that most coaches won't whinge too much because they'll become known as whingers. And you cannot underestimate the improvement to be had once umpires start to become accountable for their decisions.
6. Sack Gieschen. That's a given.
7. Give Gieschen's replacement the job of fronting the media every Monday in a press conference the same as the coaches give. In the workplace, if a boss gets flack over one employee week after week, the employee is dealt with. The same can happen to umpires.
8. Get rid of this idea that there's a 'free kick of the week'. All free kicks were created equal, so pay them if they're there.
9. Put a bonfire under the Rules Committee and replace it with either club people or supporters.

I hope this helps, but having been a top umpire, I know the culture. It's going to be very, very, very hard to change - which is sad, because the game needs it.

 

[ignoranus]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

High tech approach
A panel of umpires (or just one) watching the video feeds in the mixing room.
Connected by voice radio link to one umpire on the ground who just does what he is told.
Three umpires on the ground, each blowing their whistle when they feel like it does seem to lie at the root of the consistency problem.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

Some answers to the umpiring problem:

1. Change the focus of umpires from 'how high can he bounce the footy?' to 'can he actually make consistent decisions over 120 minutes?' That will get us some good decision makers for a change.
2. Get rid of the third umpire - all it does is add another opinion and further inconsistency during a game.
3. Get the umps to mix with players informally. They need to learn they are a part of the game, not the reason for it.
4. Take the microphones away. Firstly, it turns some umpires into policemen, and others into comedians when they are blatantly neither. Secondly, I think the umpire should have the freedom to give a mouthful back to a player who's just sounded off at him. It worked in the 1980s and 1990s, it can work now.
5. Allow coaches the opportunity to criticise umps in a post-match presser. You'll find that most coaches won't whinge too much because they'll become known as whingers. And you cannot underestimate the improvement to be had once umpires start to become accountable for their decisions.
6. Sack Gieschen. That's a given.
7. Give Gieschen's replacement the job of fronting the media every Monday in a press conference the same as the coaches give. In the workplace, if a boss gets flack over one employee week after week, the employee is dealt with. The same can happen to umpires.
8. Get rid of this idea that there's a 'free kick of the week'. All free kicks were created equal, so pay them if they're there.
9. Put a bonfire under the Rules Committee and replace it with either club people or supporters.

I hope this helps, but having been a top umpire, I know the culture. It's going to be very, very, very hard to change - which is sad, because the game needs it.

Top post PrideOf as you have covered all the major issues IMO.

If the AFL don't think that the workload would be too much on 2 umpires if they reduced to 3, could consider involving the boundary umpires in some (obvious) decisions & increase them to 4 (from 2+1 interchange at present). Have the central umpires patrolling the central coridoor. The boundary umpires could only make calls on some decisions - eg. deliberate out of bounds.

 

[PrideOf]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

The boundary umpires could only make calls on some decisions - eg. deliberate out of bounds.

That would be the only call I'd give them Kane - and remove the call from the field umpires so there's no confusion. The boundary riders (providing they're up with the play) have a perfect view of the intent of the player.

 

[The Toolman]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

Does the umpiring of today really spoil a game?? Umpiring today is no worse or better than at any time in the past. It's always been a case of 'those bloody white maggots' but I have rarely seen those maggots ruin a good game. They all interpret differently and that makes it frustrating. If it was one umpire making all the decisions all day, then his interpretations would be consistent. Three guys viewing a game from differing positions on the ground will make differing decisions. Annoying, yes. But game affecting...nah!

However, I do have a problem with players not being able to have a few words to the umpy on the ground. In the old days you could give him a serve and the worse that would happen is that your chances of Brownlow/Magarey votes for that day went out the window.

And umps not being subjected to any real criticisism for some bad decisions after the game annoys me. If players and coaches can be lamblasted by all and sundry for a bad performance, then umpires should be open for a blast as well.

Umpires.....just ignore em....they are a necessary evil.

 

[tinman]

Solution:
take the worst two umpires (as voted by the coaches) plus Gieshen out the back and shoot them. This will place the remainder "on notice".

Shoot one umpire a week until they get it right.

The wages they are paid are very attractive, so no cr@p please about not finding replacements.

 

[bass_drum]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

That would be the only call I'd give them Kane - and remove the call from the field umpires so there's no confusion. The boundary riders (providing they're up with the play) have a perfect view of the intent of the player.

Too right. They may as well just scrap that rule anyway. I can't remember who it was but one of our boys got away with this in the last quarter on Sunday (it may have been Roo). It was as deliberate as I've ever seen yet we got away with it. Yet a player who simply steps over the line isn't called.
I don't get it.

 

[portentous]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

My biggest "beefs" with the umpiring are
1. The player with the ball, at the bottom of the pack MUST be protected.
2. Soft free kicks paid in the ruck when generally defenders get away with blue murder against forwards.

It should be simple enough to address with additional training. Personally, I like to see the whistle blown less, rather than more, often.

 

[PrideOf]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

My biggest "beefs" with the umpiring are
1. The player with the ball, at the bottom of the pack MUST be protected.
2. Soft free kicks paid in the ruck when generally defenders get away with blue murder against forwards.

It should be simple enough to address with additional training. Personally, I like to see the whistle blown less, rather than more, often.

I think it's more about accountability than training. The third umpire, don't forget, was brought in to stop holding by backmen behind the play. Because the umps don't HAVE to pay frees to forwards, they don't. If they knew their career was riding on it, they would.

 

[portentous]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

I think it's more about accountability than training. The third umpire, don't forget, was brought in to stop holding by backmen behind the play. Because the umps don't HAVE to pay frees to forwards, they don't. If they knew their career was riding on it, they would.

Now you tell me. I thought the third umpire was brought in to get the casting vote on what colour outfits they wore each week.

 

[PrideOf]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

Now you tell me. I thought the third umpire was brought in to get the casting vote on what colour outfits they wore each week.

No, that's specified in AFL Policy number 134325, section a, paragraph ii. Can't work the tribunal out, but at least that little wrinkle has been ironed out.

 

[slappy]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

Does the umpiring of today really spoil a game??

well they do their best and thats all you can ask.

Three guys viewing a game from differing positions on the ground will make differing decisions. Annoying, yes. But game affecting...nah!

this is the classic derek humphrey-smith line of thinking. regardless of how many idiotic decisions are made, they definetely dont affect the game ever because um well er they couldnt, its just not possible.

but i would say its not all the umpires fault. if the rules committee just left the rules alone then the umps job would be a lot easier. and whoever is giving instructions to the umps to crackdown on specific areas of the game, like the current crackdown on swearing, needs to be shot.

 

[Fudd]

Re: The answere to the umpiring problem.

All I want is consistency .
The holding the ball decision is the one that sh! ts me to tears the most.

Id like the umpires to participate in match conditions where they

1. Go for the ball
2. Get it as they are wrapped up in a tackle
3. Are then jump on and surrounded

...and then told they made no attempt to get rid of it.

They gotta be realistic!
We all know those that make no attempt to knock it out. Penalize 'em but FFS dont ping the guy who CANT get it out.

Had to laugh my ass off at the decision of holding the ball against jonothan brown last week when Nick Maxwell held the ball in behind browns back, whilst Brown clearly had his hands in the air showing he didnt have the ball and couldnt be 'holding it' and yet was penalised. one of the worst decisions i have ever seen.