Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Umpires

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

DangerousD said:
These umpires are not stupid, it’s not their first match and there isn’t 50,000 screaming fans there to sway decisions. Why do you think there is inconsistencies there?

I think most inconsistencies can be explained away, umps miss/let go a few 50/50 holding the ball calls near our goal in one passage, the umps then have in their head, hmmm I probably should have paid that, goes down the other end, a similar situation unfolds, this time they pay it.

The balls moving, the game is flowing, the game is allowed to go on, I purely see this as a directive.

Its no wonder there is massive inconsistency in umpiring as the AFL sEm to change interpretations for several rules mid season, when was the last time you saw a protected area fee? I haven’t seen one for a while, but I still see players in the area, in a few weeks a few will be paid.

After the North game, we complained about Cripps treatment, next game I think he got 6 frees, why do the umps need to be reminded to apply the rules that are there? Genuine question.

This week on one of the footy shows, it showed Max Gawn being targeted 30 plus meters off the ball, an opposition standing in his way pumping him as he was trying to run to a contest, unless the rule has changed again, I didn’t think you could Shepard unless you were 3-5M away, one free kick paid. The panel all agreed, how do they not see that?

I swear in the first quarter Pitts and Nic Nat went for a ruck, they bodied each other off the line of the ball and Yeo grabbed the ball on the full without either of them touching it, it lead to a WC goal, I didn’t see or hear one Carlton player say anything or any commentator, I watched the replay and still saw him grab the ball before a ruck touched it or it bounced.
No either I have missed a rule change or I’m blind, if I saw correct how do 3 field umps, all the players and commentators not know, that’s an automatic free?

If we keep layering rules upon rules, telling umps to focus on ABC, then XYZ will continue to be missed.
Click to expand...

Rightio, so you’ve agreed with me.

So when they make decisions early in the game that is the point of reference for the rest of the game...the rules, the interpretation, the outcomes

Not at any point in the game is anyone from outside that group of umpires having anyone meddling in what is going on out on the ground.

Yet, there is still wild inconsistencies not just between the group as a whole but with individual umpires. If they’re honestly thinking I’ve missed a couple down the other end I need to make up for it later on then they should sack themselves and walk away from the game.

Starting with no. 22, he’s clearly got zero idea


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
If I could fix one thing about holding the ball rule it would be if the ball is jarred free or dropped in the tackle its always incorrect disposal and a free kick to the tackler.

3 outcomes besides play on from a correct disposal.
Incorrect disposal free kick to tackler (drop, jarred loose or thrown)
Ball held in tackle free kick with prior opportunity (eg sufficient time to dispose or ducked head)
Ball held in tackle without prior opportunity - Ball up
 
Last edited:
Gavstar said:
If I could fix one thing about holding the ball rule it would be if the ball is jarred free or dropped in the tackle its always incorrect disposal and a free kick to the tackler.

3 outcomes besides play on from a correct disposal.
Incorrect disposal free kick to tackler (drop, jarred loose or thrown)
Ball held in tackle free kick with prior opportunity (eg sufficient time to dispose or ducked head)
Ball held in tackle free kick without prior opportunity - Ball up
Click to expand...

It’s so simple a two year old could understand it


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Gavstar said:
If I could fix one thing about holding the ball rule it would be if the ball is jarred free or dropped in the tackle its always incorrect disposal and a free kick to the tackler.

3 outcomes besides play on from a correct disposal.
Incorrect disposal free kick to tackler (drop, jarred loose or thrown)
Ball held in tackle free kick with prior opportunity (eg sufficient time to dispose or ducked head)
Ball held in tackle free kick without prior opportunity - Ball up
Click to expand...
Does your first sentence mean it's a free even if they had no prior?
I would say, if the ball is not disposed of correctly via a kick or handball, and only if there was prior opportunity, then it's a free.
If it's knocked out from a tackle, but no prior, then play on.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

There was an absolute shocker with 3.20 to go in the last where Nic Nat took the ball out of the ruck (boundary throw in on the wing), felt the contact of a tackle coming and just dropped the ball.
When the rule was adjusted 3 years ago to allow the rucks to take possession, I was of the belief it was under the premise that they correctly dispose of it.. if there is not a handball or kick, it is a free against regardless of ‘prior opportunity or making a genuine attempt’..

The game was already done, but that one really annoyed me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The Shag said:
There was an absolute shocker with 3.20 to go in the last where Nic Nat took the ball out of the ruck (boundary throw in on the wing), felt the contact of a tackle coming and just dropped the ball.
When the rule was adjusted 3 years ago to allow the rucks to take possession, I was of the belief it was under the premise that they correctly dispose of it.. if there is not a handball or kick, it is a free against regardless of ‘prior opportunity or making a genuine attempt’..

The game was already done, but that one really annoyed me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The rule was revoked this season.

It used to be, if they take out of the ruck, they are deemed to have had prior opportunity. Now they are just like any other player who takes possession.
 
Don't have an issue with individual umpires as I genuinely believe that they see themselves as making the right call at the time.
The issue I have is with AFL HQ, the constant evolution of the rules is laughable and only serves to create areas of confusion - the sooner Steve Hocking is moved on the better.
The game is deteriorating rapidly under his watch.
 
Aphrodite said:
Ee9ysngU0AAZQnP.jpg
Click to expand...


Has umpired us in our last 4 games. If you count the Richmond game he has umpired half our games this year. only the Kangas games was a win. Umpired west coast in four of his last seven games.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
carlton_99 said:
Umpire #22 has umpired Carlton in the last four games we've played (against PA, NM, HAW and WC). That's an absolute joke.
Click to expand...
On one hand, I am and have been a huge advocate for disproportionate retribution from umpires for mouthing off, and Nathan Williamson is more or less the archetypal umpire for this viewpoint. He does not take any shit at all.

On the other, he's not a very good umpire at the best of times, and because the other umpires do not react this way to mouthing off or being told how to umpire - had the WC players have started making the HTB signal to him, he'd have flipped it the other way and told them not to be a smartarse - it comes across as him just being a prick.

The problem isn't him, so much as it's a lack of consistency between him and the other umpire yesterday. The other bloke was probably the better ump but was willing to be influenced by the WC players bitching at him near constantly for frees, but Williamson was a hardarse who you couldn't bitch to without him paying 50.
 
SurreyBlue said:
That's what I thought as I haven't been able to find anything.
I think we need to make umpires more accountable for their actions, ala players, coaches and even administrators.
I'm also certain that umpiring calls aren't published within the AFL industry, therefore how do we as an industry keep them accountable?

If I were in club land, I would be demanding that the AFL industry analysis completed every week is published to clubs for discussion. I would want to see detailed analysis from each game by each decision by each umpire. I don't believe that is too much to ask for, if as they say they, the umpiring administration analyse every decision made.
Click to expand...

No need to make them public, just like player's weekly reviews

We really need to stop blaming umpires, so direct your angst to the law makers
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Arr0w said:
No need to make them public, just like player's weekly reviews

We really need to stop blaming umpires, so direct your angst to the law makers
Click to expand...

Nope - I'll direct my anger at blatant cheating when it occurs.
Enough with them being protected species and them having a 'holier-than-thou' attitude or as I call it 'small man's syndrome'.
They need to be made accountable like all others in the public eye, as they are getting paid to do a impartial job.

ps. I haven't seen this answered - what was the 50meters against SPS for?
 
Jeremias said:
The other incident that hasn't been mentioned is Yeo taking the ball out of the ruck contest in the first quarter.

That has been against the rules for what, 3 years now?

Umpires have a bloody tough job but missing that sort of thing is simply inexcusable.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Another example of what I highlighted last week about memory/retention of rules. They know that ruckmen are supposed to nominate, but when a non-nominating player takes the ball away (without it bouncing first) they forget that's s'posed to be a free kick. How does that even happen?

To the folks questioning how professionalism will improve things, it's about the fact that umpiring becomes seen as a viable career path - therefore attracting higher quality candidates. It also means that the AFL implement and support things like academies where youngsters are educated about the nuances of umpiring from an early age. And most importantly it means that their weekly focus is on nothing but umpiring. They don't have to spread their cognitive load across multiple careers.
 
Last edited:

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

ESKIE said:
Click to expand...

“I don’t want to say it, because the AFL get a little bit grumpy...” Says it all.

Yesterday, SPS had one of the worst holding the balls called against him, complained a little bit because it was awful and he copped a 50 meter penalty for complaining. And the later on in the same game, one of the umpires actually asked the players what decision should be made in the heat of battle and only a few weeks back an umpire ended up turning a 50 metre penalty into 100 meters because, “ The Carlton player didn’t stop running backwards, so I didn’t call play on until he did”, - well, I really don’t think the AFL and it’s umpires have any reason to get grumpy.
 
Gee. Im reading alot about carlton and their non free kicks this morning. We are finally getting reconised as being shafted. And i firmly believe its got something to do with one umpire in particular. Number 22. Most other umpires are very consistant. He is not. Ever. I believe he should never umpire a carlton game again. 18 tackles inside our 50 for not one free kick yet eagles get 3 gimmys in front of goal with not even 50 50 decisions. Sps clearly got tackled with no time to rid the ball so ball up...
 
KnightsBlue said:
Gee. Im reading alot about carlton and their non free kicks this morning. We are finally getting reconised as being shafted. And i firmly believe its got something to do with one umpire in particular. Number 22. Most other umpires are very consistant. He is not. Ever. I believe he should never umpire a carlton game again. 18 tackles inside our 50 for not one free kick yet eagles get 3 gimmys in front of goal with not even 50 50 decisions. Sps clearly got tackled with no time to rid the ball so ball up...
Click to expand...
Easy...
 
teagueyubeauty said:
Rightio, so you’ve agreed with me.

So when they make decisions early in the game that is the point of reference for the rest of the game...the rules, the interpretation, the outcomes

Not at any point in the game is anyone from outside that group of umpires having anyone meddling in what is going on out on the ground.

Yet, there is still wild inconsistencies not just between the group as a whole but with individual umpires. If they’re honestly thinking I’ve missed a couple down the other end I need to make up for it later on then they should sack themselves and walk away from the game.

Starting with no. 22, he’s clearly got zero idea


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...

Partially agree with you, a little bit not so much. I agree on the inconsistencies game to game and quarter to quarter and round to round.

I don’t agree with your first paragraph though. If the decisions they made early were correct then yes that should be the standard set for the match, in regards to the SPS holding the ball call in the first, it was wrong, so there’s no way I want the umps holding an incorrect standard for the rest of the game.

When I say an ump might think to themselves I’ve missed a call there, I’m not saying, they need to make up for it, I’m saying they will have realised they missed a decision they should have paid and they will try not to make the same mistake again, this might lead to paying one that’s not there, but I think this is how people work.

Im not sure what you want to happen there, do umpires who make an incorrect call early need to continue to apply the laws wrong because that what happened at the start?

Im a big supporter of umps going full time, I think it’s garbage that they aren’t, all the umps need to train together, have de briefs together, analyse games together so that they are all on the same page, they need the same person delivering the message instead of playing a version of Chinese whispers, where each department is getting an interpretation from someone different.
 
carlton_99 said:
Rumour is umpire #22 was in the Eagle's room after the game singing the song...
Click to expand...
Copped a gatorade shower apparently, could have been worse, he could have been in the Richmond song and standing next to Nick Vlaustin
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom