Umpires "Coaching" Players on the field

[coleman10]

Since the inception of "miking up" umpires, I have really been annoyed at the way the umpires shout out instructions to the players at stoppages. The other night at one stoppage, all I heard was "No holding, no holding, Steele, no holding". Obviously he was watching Steele Sidebottom try to tag soemone around the ball-up.
Now correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the umpires job to fairly adjudicate the game and make a decision if a player gives away a free kick? I don't think they should be barking instructions at players.
The players have been playing long enough at a decent level to uderstand the rules and how to play.
The umpire should shut his mouth, watch the game and award a free kick if and when an indiscretion is made.
I know the AFL want umpires to be "personalities", but the game was better when we didn't know their names, they didn't have a number, and they all wore the one colour.

 

[Cronos]

So you'd be happy watching a game if they blew a whistle and awarded a free every time they called something out?

I know that game would piss me off.

 

[luthor]

I agree with the OP.

The umpire's job is to adjudicate....not to "advise".

The other one that pisses me off is when they tell "Bob" or "Chris" or "Brett" that "it'll be a free next time"

A free is a free.....should be be one every time

Who are they to be picking and choosing who gets a second chance to break the rules?

 

[coleman10]

So you'd be happy watching a game if they blew a whistle and awarded a free every time they called something out?.

Why call anything out at all?
If someone is holding a player off the ball, why give them any kind of leeway? Protect the guy whose sole intention is the ball and penalise the twat who is infringing.
The players know the rules, so if they've infringed, BLOW THE DAMN WHISTLE!
This would ultimately result in a free-flowing contest arund the stoppage, because players would know if they held their opponent, they'd get penalised without warning and they'd simply STOP doing it.
It's not rocket surgery.

 

[borgsta2006]

I agree with the OP.

The umpire's job is to adjudicate....not to "advise".

The other one that pisses me off is when they tell "Bob" or "Chris" or "Brett" that "it'll be a free next time"

A free is a free.....should be be one every time

Who are they to be picking and choosing who gets a second chance to break the rules?

There's no picking and choosing, when the umpire does that he normally is warning the player to not cross the little line between fair play and a free kick.

Maybe you people want to see free kick counts rise by 50%+??? Because no warnings = more free kicks = more crowd displeasure = more Big Footy bullshit.

 

[borgsta2006]

It's not rocket surgery.

Funniest quote of all time!!!!

Didn't know inanimate objects required surgery

 

[Cronos]

Most spectators think the umpires are already trying to stand out and be seen, and that they should let the little things go - and now your solution is to pay more free kicks without warning.

No wonder everyone thinks they can't get it right.

 

[Bob_vic]

Umpires have always done this, even prior to the mics.

I guess a little positive encouragement is okay but if a free kick is there to be paid, I reckon just pay the free kick and the message is received loud and clear.

 

[Mingo]

Just another case of fans thinking the umpires can't do anything right. It's not really that big a deal, is it?

 

[jake_tha_peg]

Since the inception of "miking up" umpires, I have really been annoyed at the way the umpires shout out instructions to the players at stoppages. The other night at one stoppage, all I heard was "No holding, no holding, Steele, no holding". Obviously he was watching Steele Sidebottom try to tag soemone around the ball-up.
Now correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the umpires job to fairly adjudicate the game and make a decision if a player gives away a free kick? I don't think they should be barking instructions at players.
The players have been playing long enough at a decent level to uderstand the rules and how to play.
The umpire should shut his mouth, watch the game and award a free kick if and when an indiscretion is made.
I know the AFL want umpires to be "personalities", but the game was better when we didn't know their names, they didn't have a number, and they all wore the one colour.

What a goose. You would be the same idiot in the crowd screaming blue murder for all the tiggy touch wood frees paid if the umps did indeed follow your advice. I'm gonna type real slow just so you can understand. The umps warn the players who might be going close to giving a free but not quite ie blocking, holding etc etc. They do this so that the player gets a chance to stop their tactics but if they don't stop then they have no reason to cry foul to the ump (cos they were warned). This means the "soft" frees are not paid and the game flows better. Oh and btw - if we did a poll on how many players had indeed ever bothered to READ the rule book I am tipping it would only be about 50% (you could include coaches and officials as well).

Its better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

 

[pazza]

No harm in it...just ask Darren Goldspink.

 

[sherb]

I'm with the OP on this 100%.

The umpires are there to pay infringements once the rules are broken, not instruct players on how not to break them.

The players are professionals, they should know not to hold, etc without it being necessary for the umpires to tell them in advance.

It's like Test cricket umpires instructing fast bowlers not to bowl no-balls as they are coming in on their run-up.

 

[Beth]

I'm with the OP on this 100%.

The umpires are there to pay infringements once the rules are broken, not instruct players on how not to break them.

The players are professionals, they should know not to hold, etc without it being necessary for the umpires to tell them in advance.
It's like Test cricket umpires instructing fast bowlers not to bowl no-balls as they are coming in on their run-up.

If the rules committee/AFL wasn't changing the rules and/or the interpretation of current rules so inexplicably randomly and reactively week to week the players wouldn't require instruction.

 

[sherb]

If the rules committee/AFL wasn't changing the rules and/or the interpretation of current rules so inexplicably randomly and reactively week to week the players wouldn't require instruction.

Of course, that explains the "no holding" instructions the umpires regularly bark to the players.......

 

[whitmaggot]

the last 20 players i asked have they ever see a rule book the big answer no

 

[Syphoncom]

It's like Test cricket umpires instructing fast bowlers not to bowl no-balls as they are coming in on their run-up.

It would be,








If the line kept moving every 4 balls.

 

[Kick with the wind]

Most spectators think the umpires are already trying to stand out and be seen, and that they should let the little things go - and now your solution is to pay more free kicks without warning.

No wonder everyone thinks they can't get it right.

Quite frankly mate , your reaction to the logical is extremely current umpire like. The umpires of today are the worse crop I've ever seen. Don't have the guts to pay the right decision. Ask Barrass about Mayne blocking ,totally gutless not to pay that. Start a new umpiring association without Kennedy anywhere near it.

 

[Cronos]

Nothing like bringing an eight year old thread back from the dead... Clearly I was seeing the future of umpiring, if only I used my skills for something more worthwhile like lotto.