The Farce that is the free kick differential number

[TiggerMan22]

Haven't seen the incident prior, or in context but to me that looked like Conca 'released' the ball - part of my biggest criticism over the HTB rule is that this ISN'T paid often enough.

The problem is the umpire is (in real time and from distance with other players in the way) trying to interpret how the ball came loose - did an Eagle touch it? Or did Conca release the ball and drop it? So it's the rule (and inconsistent application) rather than the umpire IMO.

Irrelevant. Did he have prior? No. Then its not holding the ball.

 

[liz]

My issue is more to do with what we get paid that other teams don't get pinged for. I feel like we are held to the rules more often than others.

In this case though, the free kick differential was 9-7 our way at a stage on Sunday. From thst point though, the free kicks were 14-1 West Coast's way.

My question is, were West Coast really that disciplined to our undiscipline that they only conceded 1 free kick to our 14? Not sure about that. I believe we were leading 9-7 when the scores were level.

I only watched the second half of your game on Sunday. (The Lions pumping Hawthorn proved to be too compelling to turn away from.) But at no stage in that second half did I get the impression, as a neutral supporter, that one team was being unduly favoured by the umpiring. Sometimes it is apparent that a team is getting a slightly raw deal, though it is rarely by as much as supporters of that team reckon in their post game commentaries. It is rare that I get the feeling that the umpiring might have influenced the result.

It's very hard to assess the fairness of umpiring in games involving your own side. It's human nature for most fans to think they've been hard done by because the human brain is selective in what it notices, processes and remembers. When you read a match day thread and find lots of neutral supporters suggesting your team has been hard done by, or favoured, you know it is probably the case.

But I also return to my original point. Raw free kick numbers mean nothing without some analysis of the differential. It's very possible to come ahead on the free kick count, or be about even, and still have been hard done by if there have been bloopers missed or incorrect frees given, especially close to goal.

 

[Coaster2012]

I honestly believe the WCE are the biggest duckers (penalty pullers as Roy and HG would say) followed by the Cats, Dogs and a certain #freekickteam based in Melbourne's eastern suburbs.

Yet 99% of the frees aren't for head high tackles. For the most part, ducking has kinda gone out of style.

 

[Franc de Borges]

I never said it was HTB. He hasn't got rid of it correctly. Shitting oneself and going to ground at an incoming Yeo is not correct disposal.

Did the umpire pay a throw? I'd love for them to ping actions like that but I very much doubt that that's what happened here.

It's not HTB and a completely wrong decision if that was paid, which I assume it was.

 

[1990crow]

View attachment 500870

This stat clearly shows how out of hand the umpiring is in WC home games. Absolute ride.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Do CD record them on the basis of

-Marking Content
-Rucking Contest
-Defensive Error (holding the man, too high, push in the back)
-Offensive Error (HTB, throw, deliberate)
?

I think if those numbers were more clear, it would make it a bit easier to understand.

Not sure about CD, but the umpiring department would surely have those stats. They should be released to the public in the interests of transparency.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Ah the umpiring board, where topical threads go to die...

 

[smasha]

This stat clearly shows how out of hand the umpiring is in WC home games. Absolute ride.

Thank you brother.

What do the Eagles fans say to the umpires to scare em into submission?

 

[bh90210fan]

A number thats far off being on track for 28-2 for a full game.

Even if the free kicks are there?

You sound like my junior cricket coach who would give you out lbw if you middled one through the covers just because he thought you’d batted long enough

 

[These 4 Walls]

Not sure about CD, but the umpiring department would surely have those stats. They should be released to the public in the interests of transparency.

I think it would actually help demystify the "Free kicks should be equal" conversation.

If you could break it down to the difference being Ruck Contests(RC) & that team also won the hit-outs convincingly, it makes it appear that it was more likely to be a fairly adjudicated match.

Richmond give away 5 more free kicks than WCE each week, though we may give away 3 more in RC's & 3 more in offensive errors from trying to take the game on. Plus it would also allow you to look at offensive errors compared to turnovers.

Richmond may not get a lot as we force people into kicking and look to capitalise on the intercept possession whilst holding onto it a bit too long and getting caught at times trying to avoid giving kicking to a clear intercept.

That would marry up with our style, to the eye at least.

Now you've mentioned it, it seems surprising they wouldn't release this information to help how they are viewed.

 

[Corkintheocean]

I think it would actually help demystify the "Free kicks should be equal" conversation.

If you could break it down to the difference being Ruck Contests(RC) & that team also won the hit-outs convincingly, it makes it appear that it was more likely to be a fairly adjudicated match.

Richmond give away 5 more free kicks than WCE each week, though we may give away 3 more in RC's & 3 more in offensive errors from trying to take the game on. Plus it would also allow you to look at offensive errors compared to turnovers.

Richmond may not get a lot as we force people into kicking and look to capitalise on the intercept possession whilst holding onto it a bit too long and getting caught at times trying to avoid giving kicking to a clear intercept.

That would marry up with our style, to the eye at least.

Now you've mentioned it, it seems surprising they wouldn't release this information to help how they are viewed.

Good post. It's far more logical to assume the discrepancy is based on game style as opposed to blatant bias.

 

[TiggerMan22]

You post them. Post up Concas illegal disposal that led to Junk time Jack's goal in the second quarter, too.

And heres the few that I found.


Clearly no prior. Being tackled as he grabbed the ball.



Both no prior.


Not a throw at all. Ball completely just split out.

Nice that this legit throw wasnt called. Good ol consistency eh?

Cotchy 50m was also pretty unlucky. Cant blame the ump for calling it, but Cotchy was just putting an arm around him and didnt mean to touch the ball.
https://streamable.com/b64rl

Also love that crack down on holds off the ball. AFL sticking to their word /s
https://streamable.com/tlwjw
Holding off the ball and then pushing him int he back into the contest. The classic 2 frees, no call.

Well there you go.

 

[TiggerMan22]

Even if the free kicks are there?

You sound like my junior cricket coach who would give you out lbw if you middled one through the covers just because he thought you’d batted long enough

The point is in a professional AFL game that just wouldnt happen.

 

[These 4 Walls]

Good post. It's far more logical to assume the discrepancy is based on game style as opposed to blatant bias.

To a degree, yes. I think that there is a measure of both, especially with home crowds.

Richmond do themselves no favours with the style of game.

However to think that gamestyle alone meant that there was a 14-1 outcome from a half (if what was previously said in this thread is accurate) would be as equally far-fetched as saying it was all officiating bias.

As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle (or maybe 70/30 leaning towards game style in this instance)

 

[Final Siren]

Richmond 2017-18

Year|Rd|Opp|For|Ag|Diff
\2017|1|Ca|12|25| -13
\2017|2|Co|21|25| -4
\2017|3|WC|21|26| -5
\2017|4|Br|20|28| -8
\2017|5|Me|23|21|+2
\2017|6|Ad|14|20| -6
\2017|7|WB|13|25| -12
\2017|8|Fr|16|17| -1
\2017|9|GWS|18|17|+1
\2017|10|Es|18|15|+3
\2017|11|NM|17|14|+3
\2017|13|Sy|23|18|+5
\2017|14|Ca|23|21|+2
\2017|15|PA|12|18| -6
\2017|16|St|15|18| -3
\2017|17|Br|17|22| -5
\2017|18|GWS|25|33| -8
\2017|19|GC|20|26| -6
\2017|20|Ha|16|18| -2
\2017|21|Ge|17|28| -11
\2017|22|Fr|21|14|+7
\2017|23|St|18|16|+2
\2017|QF|Ge|17|15|+2
\2017|PF|GWS|27|28| -1
\2017|GF|Ad|24|19|+5
\2018|1|Ca|22|20|+2
\2018|2|Ad|14|28| -14
\2018|3|Ha|16|24| -8
\2018|4|Br|27|26|+1
\2018|5|Me|20|22| -2
\2018|6|Co|16|27| -11
\2018|7|Fr|19|24| -5
\2018|8|NM|24|33| -9
\2018|9|WC|10|21| -11

So after losing a seventh consecutive count at Geelong in R21, Hardwick says his piece and Richmond subsequently receives a nice little run culminating in the GF which is viewed by all and sundry as a heavy bias in favour of Richmond.

Coincidence or genius? I reckon Dimma is saving up a nice little spray for an opportune time.

The dark side of self- and social perception: black uniforms and aggression in professional sports

That's really fascinating. Actually there are two amazing nuggets in there.

Clearly umpiring isn't perfectly objective when teams routinely get more free kicks at home than away, and the effect is magnified at grounds with overwhelmingly one-sided supporters.

We can't really expect it to be. But it means it's open to manipulation.

 

[Kwality]

Nice rant. Maybe your side gives away more frees than other teams. Maybe West Coast wins more frees than other teams.

Been that way since Adam lined up down back.

 

[DanWCE]

And heres the few that I found.


Clearly no prior. Being tackled as he grabbed the ball.



Both no prior.


Not a throw at all. Ball completely just split out.

Nice that this legit throw wasnt called. Good ol consistency eh?

Cotchy 50m was also pretty unlucky. Cant blame the ump for calling it, but Cotchy was just putting an arm around him and didnt mean to touch the ball.
https://streamable.com/b64rl

Also love that crack down on holds off the ball. AFL sticking to their word /s
https://streamable.com/tlwjw
Holding off the ball and then pushing him int he back into the contest. The classic 2 frees, no call.

Well there you go.

Being spun 360 degrees is sufficient opportunity so the first is correct. The one with LeCras I thought he got very lucky. You can't just drop the ball, no matter how much it isn't adjudicated. Same with the Conca one I referenced. This ball spilling out stuff is bullshit. Players feel contact and drop the ball and a rolling maul of throws ensues. That is a blight on the game.

The NN one is a free if the others are. You talk about prior opportunity and the ball spilling out then where was Nics prior? They let plenty of those go. I dont agree with it and hence I raised the Conca one as it stuck in my mind.

 

[Final Siren]

To a degree, yes. I think that there is a measure of both, especially with home crowds.

Richmond do themselves no favours with the style of game.

However to think that gamestyle alone meant that there was a 14-1 outcome from a half (if what was previously said in this thread is accurate) would be as equally far-fetched as saying it was all officiating bias.

As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle (or maybe 70/30 leaning towards game style in this instance)

If you assume that Richmond's -46 free kick differential for Rounds 1-8 was 100% due to game style, and West Coast's +22 free kick differential was likewise, then you'd expect the Eagles to receive 8.5 more free kicks than the Tigers just to continue the trend. They received 11 more free kicks so it's a little more but not unreasonably so.

 

[These 4 Walls]

If you assume that Richmond's -46 free kick differential for Rounds 1-8 was 100% due to game style, and West Coast's +22 free kick differential was likewise, then you'd expect the Eagles to receive 8.5 more free kicks than the Tigers just to continue the trend. They received 11 more free kicks so it's a little more but not unreasonably so.

Which is almost on the dot, 30% more more which is what I was trying to subtly point out but maybe too subtle.

Now we just need to get a stat that shows that WCE receive on average, 30% more free kicks at home than away and it will have all tidied itself up.

 

[TiggerMan22]

Being spun 360 degrees is sufficient opportunity so the first is correct. The one with LeCras I thought he got very lucky. You can't just drop the ball, no matter how much it isn't adjudicated. Same with the Conca one I referenced. This ball spilling out stuff is bullshit. Players feel contact and drop the ball and a rolling maul of throws ensues. That is a blight on the game.

The NN one is a free if the others are. You talk about prior opportunity and the ball spilling out then where was Nics prior? They let plenty of those go. I dont agree with it and hence I raised the Conca one as it stuck in my mind.

Thats not true at all. There was no point where he had an opportunity to dispose of the ball. If he has a chance and then is tackled and spun 360 its ball.

Dropping the ball is only called anymore if the player has had prior before. And really thats the way it should be. Do you really want a player to grab the ball get tackled and thrown to the ground and the ball spills out so he gets a free against? That strict of a call would just cause players to let their opoosition grab the ball and then tackling them.

Nic Nat threw the ball. Prior only related to holding the ball calls, not any free. You cant grab the ball and then just throw it instantly and say its ok because you didnt have prior.

 

[Final Siren]

Which is almost on the dot, 30% more more which is what I was trying to subtly point out but maybe too subtle.

Now we just need to get a stat that shows that WCE receive on average, 30% more free kicks at home than away and it will have all tidied itself up.

Heh, that one's already here.

 

[tony__montana]

Being spun 360 degrees is sufficient opportunity so the first is correct. The one with LeCras I thought he got very lucky. You can't just drop the ball, no matter how much it isn't adjudicated. Same with the Conca one I referenced. This ball spilling out stuff is bullshit. Players feel contact and drop the ball and a rolling maul of throws ensues. That is a blight on the game.

The NN one is a free if the others are. You talk about prior opportunity and the ball spilling out then where was Nics prior? They let plenty of those go. I dont agree with it and hence I raised the Conca one as it stuck in my mind.

Difference being NicNATs didn’t spill out, he literally threw it.

 

[Coasters7]

And heres the few that I found.


Clearly no prior. Being tackled as he grabbed the ball.



Both no prior.


Not a throw at all. Ball completely just split out.

Nice that this legit throw wasnt called. Good ol consistency eh?

Cotchy 50m was also pretty unlucky. Cant blame the ump for calling it, but Cotchy was just putting an arm around him and didnt mean to touch the ball.
https://streamable.com/b64rl

Also love that crack down on holds off the ball. AFL sticking to their word /s
https://streamable.com/tlwjw
Holding off the ball and then pushing him int he back into the contest. The classic 2 frees, no call.

Well there you go.

I think prior opportunity only applies when the ball doesn’t come out or if it’s knocked out by the opposition in the tackle. If you blatantly drop the ball while you’re being wrapped up that’s incorrect disposal and a free kick every day of the week, no matter how long you’ve had the ball for before that. Same as if you tried to take a bounce while being tackled.

Concas is probably a good example of prior opportunity working. Didn’t have prior and the ball spilled out from the tackler.

All of your examples are htb or incorrect disposal (including Nics one). They all either had prior or just let the ball go while they were being tackled.

 

[Coasters7]

Thats not true at all. There was no point where he had an opportunity to dispose of the ball. If he has a chance and then is tackled and spun 360 its ball.

Dropping the ball is only called anymore if the player has had prior before. And really thats the way it should be. Do you really want a player to grab the ball get tackled and thrown to the ground and the ball spills out so he gets a free against? That strict of a call would just cause players to let their opoosition grab the ball and then tackling them.

Nic Nat threw the ball. Prior only related to holding the ball calls, not any free. You cant grab the ball and then just throw it instantly and say its ok because you didnt have prior.

His chance to dispose of it was when he dropped it. If you don’t get your foot to it then bad luck. I reckon if he holds that in it’s a ball up. Dropping the ball in plain sight while being tackled has been and always should be a free kick against.

 

[These 4 Walls]

Heh, that one's already here.

Well we beat the line by 1 then, that's almost a moral victory.

All logical conversation aside, I do think that we have been slightly hard done by this year. Especially in regards to blocking on JR8 (his playing it up clearly doesn't help) & attention on Dusty at the stoppages. Moreso inline with 2-2.5 a game than anything radically season changing.

You have previously done some incredibly great work with stats, feel free to start categorising free kicks by type for absolutely no gain to yourself besides from my gratitude. (no, I am not sure where to get the data to plug into the model either, maybe the umpiring line coaches have their own API)