Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Umpires

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Arr0w said:
We didn't lose because of the umpires, we were soundly beaten in every area of the game
Click to expand...
True, but there seemed to be frees paid to Geelong but similar frees not paid to us. So inconsistent. Not the reason for the loss, Geelong was too good, but still frustrating nonetheless
 
OldBlueFan said:
Like I've said repeatedly, and now for the last time. It's the end-game that concerns me. Taken to the logical conclusion, these "throws disguised as handballs" will inevitably lead to the disappearance of the true handball, thus diminishing the game.

And for what it's worth, the instructions given in that video explicitly state that the ball must be "punched from the platform hand, otherwise it's a throw". This is most definitely not happening in either the Butters or Gresham case. Therefore there's been a relaxation of the rule/interpretation since that video was made.
Click to expand...

That video isn't an instructional piece for AFL players

A platform hand comes at many angles and the ball can be held at any point and can move at any direction

A punch doesn't constitute a level of force

The rule/act doesn't need addressing like other rules do
 
Arr0w said:
That video isn't an instructional piece for AFL players

A platform hand comes at many angles and the ball can be held at any point and can move at any direction

A punch doesn't constitute a level of force

The rule/act doesn't need addressing like other rules do
Click to expand...
Be as obtuse as you like. I'm done with the conversation.

If folks are happy to see throws become a part of our game, that's their prerogative.
 
Arr0w said:
We lacked awareness, caught way too many times

Hardly put on any effective blocks, allowing the opposition easy access to the ball carrier

No gut running to open space, bombing long, made it easier to outnumber us

Giving away frees after disposals
Click to expand...

Add to this a consistent failure to wrap up the arms of the opponent, thus allowing the Cats to handball out of our tackles.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

BlueBelle said:
True, but there seemed to be frees paid to Geelong but similar frees not paid to us. So inconsistent. Not the reason for the loss, Geelong was too good, but still frustrating nonetheless
Click to expand...
Absolutely spot on, Geelong were better than us no question, but the standard of umpiring was awful.
When the game was on the line Geelong got 3-4 goals from very questionable decisions.

The biggest issue was inconsistency in the umpiring decisions particularly holding the ball, Docherty was on the receiving of some very poor decisions.
 
macky99 said:
Absolutely spot on, Geelong were better than us no question, but the standard of umpiring was awful.
When the game was on the line Geelong got 3-4 goals from very questionable decisions.

The biggest issue was inconsistency in the umpiring decisions particularly holding the ball, Docherty was on the receiving of some very poor decisions.
Click to expand...

This is what's most frustrating IMO. I get that they're human and it's not going to be perfect, but there have been so many examples over the year (not just Carlton games), and several last night where near identical situations have completely different results
 
Arr0w said:
I thought the umpiring was reflective of the way we played, selfish and undisciplined
Click to expand...
I called Williamson out last time and predicted pre-game he would have a bad influence and pointed out his multiple biased interpretations during. Yes umpiring in the end cant be pointed to as 'the difference' but it played a significant role and even Voss referred to it obliquely in his presser.

You cant gift Geelong 3-4 goals against the run of play and think it won't impact on the end result Doch's free against was an absolute disgrace - picking technical frees when they had no bearing on contests except to gift Geelong forward momentum is just bad umpiring as if they feel the need to impose themselves to justify their yellow shirts with special numbers on the back.

On the way the team played I think there was a fair amount of undisciplined behaviour - the around the contest set ups were abysmal gifting them easy exits and depriving our own teams ability to go forward after Walsh or Kennedy won the ball. Cripps and the coaches allowing Cripps to be double-teamed without tactical response after the coaches had seen the same tactics employed last week against Melbourne- just very ordinary. SOJ pushing blokes in the back - irrespective of whether they had teh ball or not is a just undisciplined crapola.

meh it was an expected loss from me - but doesn't make it taste any better.
 
JustaBattler said:
The stats say we weren't beaten in every aspect of the game.
Click to expand...
Agree. I actually didn't think our system was beaten by theirs. They were just a classier more experienced outfit. Their players were difficult to tackle and they made less errors by foot. Umpiring was very poor but that wasn't the main reason for the loss
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

wonders why he continually froths at the mouth......who looks at umpire names? talk about defeatist.....classic self-fulfilling prophecy..... odd
 
Last edited:
katmanblue said:
We just gave it back to them too easily and too often.

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...

They were 2-3 goals better on the night with their best team on deck - if Pittonet was playing their Bliclavs and Guthrie sandwich on Cripps wouldn't have worked and TDK could have stood as a CHF and taken shorter kicks - leaving Charlie and Harry unmolested in an open paddock behind. 1-2 players in our side will make all the difference- whilst Geelong have hit their peak.

I am not concerned as long as we get a fit Pitto and McGovern back in - with Williams hopefully 1-2 weeks away not to mention a fit Martin...

Carlton has cards it hasn't been able to play for months- the rest have all their cards on the table.
 
gbatman said:
Yeah those so called knocked out in the tackle ones, that's becoming a bit of a laugh.
Click to expand...
On the subject of that, the one that really gets me is the incorrect disposal when the opposition player's hand makes contact with the footy and knocks it clear.

Surely, that's a clear case of knocked clear in the tackle.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Ump 22 what is his issue with us?
We were beaten by a better team but i had a few vents during the game or too many bevies as i watched?
 
I
gbatman said:
I was talking about what the rules are, have been the whole time. You're saying they are throws, when they aren't, the rules would have to be changed for what you are seeing to be deemed a throw. You need to be saying that you think the rules should be changes so they are throws.

The guiding hand does determine largely where the ball goes if you handball correctly, you use it to aim.

I don't agree with there needing to be something in the rule book about how much or how little the guiding hand should contribute to the propulsion of the ball. It's not effecting the reason why we handball in the game at all. The last thing the rules of the game needs are more grey areas and rules left for the umpires to interpret. The current rule is black and white and is easy for the umpires to make a call, a change will bring about inconsistencies. What players are doing is not effecting the holding the ball rule which is the reason for the handball. The handball exists so that a player can be tackled and either dispose of the ball without being penalised or be unable to dispose of the ball legally and be penalise for a holding the ball. That's it, that is the purpose of the handball. It's not to make it more difficult to pass the ball or for it's aesthetics. As of this stage the handball is still maintaining it's purpose regardless of how players use it. I'm happy with that, it's doing it's job.

Reality is you aren't seeing throws, you're seeing, lets call them slick handballs and you don't like it. Regardless of how you would like the rules to be changed, until that happens, you're seeing handballs. You're not seeing throws, you're seeing handballs you don't like and believe the players should not be allowed to handball like that.

There is nothing in the rules about trajectory, it's still a handball if the ball is struck with a fist, unless of course the rule were to be change.

It's really simple, if there is a fist in there, which there is then it's a handball, that is all there has to be. I'm not keen on seeing the rule changed, we would be seeing a hell of a lot more umpiring mistakes, we ask our umpires to guess enough in this game and it just looks ugly when they guess wrong.

Changing the interpretation and bringing in a 'not enough fist' rule, that could get really interesting. IMO it opens the door to a real shitshow of umpiring calls.

To be honest, I like the over the head handball, keeps the ball alive, is a show of skill. I think you would find there is more fist in those handballs than there looks. As someone who uses that mauver in games from time to time, I can tell you when I do it and handball over my head, directly behind me, there is plenty of fist used and yes I am swinging the ball with my guiding arm and I can see how it looks a bit like I would be tossing it.
Click to expand...
It’s interesting.. like if a kick slightly grazes the boot it’s still a legal kick. But I would like to see a legal handball be one where at least the hand on the ball is beneath. Would eliminate the clear overhead throw hand passes we are seeing more of.
 
Anyone else remember how Joel Selwood had 200 more frees than anyone else in the AFL between 2010-2019? Geelong are pretty good at gaming the umpires.

It's so odd that the players themselves regularly take advantage of the umpires and people still argue that they don't affect the result.

They've always lacked consistency but the way they are told to enforce the rules isn't consistent unfortunately. Inconsistent officiating isn't fair officiating but the umpires aren't been held to professional/fair standards.
 
BM123 said:
Anyone else remember how Joel Selwood had 200 more frees than anyone else in the AFL between 2010-2019? Geelong are pretty good at gaming the umpires.

It's so odd that the players themselves regularly take advantage of the umpires and people still argue that they don't affect the result.

They've always lacked consistency but the way they are told to enforce the rules isn't consistent unfortunately. Inconsistent officiating isn't fair officiating but the umpires aren't been held to professional/fair standards.
Click to expand...

I found it amusing watching The First Crack last night and they highlighted all these incidents from Port players, Collingwood etc where players duck to game the rules and draw a free kick, yet the legend Selwood wasn't mentioned once and he is by far the biggest recidivist in the league. It's like doing a documentary on popular music and not mentioning The Beatles. The general respect Selwood has in the media means that he is not drawn into the discussion.

I am not getting into a debate on whether his tactics altered the result of the match. I reckon Carlton's midfield (Hewett was very good) more than matched it with Geelong's except for their tactic of nullifying Cripps. What I would have liked to have seen is if you take out Selwood's tactics - what would have happened then? Who would have fallen to the pressure? My recollection of the game is that at least 3 scoring chains (possibly 4) started with a Selwood free-kick.

There was one he got out of the midfield that resulted in a Geelong behind.
Then there was the one where a pack of players including Motlop contested for the ball. Motlop's arm brushed Selwood's upper arm - and he slung his head back like he had been hit in a safari car by a pack of rhinos. Then the one where Silvagni legitimately put body pressure on him - free kick downfield. He slung himself over the line as if he was playing for Barcelona.

Also, on another topic, De Koening was holding onto McKay's guernsey in that one where he just dropped that ball.

So if you add all that up it brings the differences between the teams closer & there could have been changes in momentum.

Geelong are a good team - and will start favourite for the flag. They deserve to start favourites. They are methodical and methodical gets it done a lot of the times...but it would be nice to see how they perform without the sugar on top. But life isn't like that, the most just don't always get it done, life is cruel & football is an encapsulation of that. Selwood would be mad to change tactics now. It works.
 
harmesy 37 said:
I found it amusing watching The First Crack last night and they highlighted all these incidents from Port players, Collingwood etc where players duck to game the rules and draw a free kick, yet the legend Selwood wasn't mentioned once and he is by far the biggest recidivist in the league. It's like doing a documentary on popular music and not mentioning The Beatles. The general respect Selwood has in the media means that he is not drawn into the discussion.
Click to expand...
This is why I was gob-smacked when everyone (even folks in here) became up in arms about Ginnivan's tactics; he's a pale imitation of the grand-master Selwood, yet we've barely heard a peep about him in over 15 years.
 
I don't think I've seen a carlton-geelong match for quite a while consequently I was pretty shocked to see selwood getting booed every time he got a kick (maybe not in moving play). This bloke has been booed his entire career. His entire career? It was something I struggled to place in the context of things.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Umpires

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top