Analysis Umpires

[thylacine60]

hey, guys? umpire the second half differently, ok? cheers............hilarious.........

 

[Arr0w]

A clear example of the umpires affecting the result of a game.

BS

 

[Arr0w]

Yes true, but without one, you probably don’t get the other, they make mistakes just like the players, their mistakes, just like the players, have consequences. A poor/incorrect decision in the dying seconds of a game, can directly change the outcome. The only difference with poor decisions earlier in games is, you have more time to rectify/respond.

If you are leading by 5 goals with minutes to go, no decision will impact a result

 

[thylacine60]

if umpires need to be directed to change interpretations mid-game, why are they umpiring the "wrong way" in the first place? because someone else told them to in a previous game? some of these men - not women in afl - have been plying their trade for decades.........you think they'd put up with being told to change their calls every second game? try again........

 

[Arr0w]

The day Fitzroy were absolutely screwed by the umpires.

As plain as day that that game was rigged.



Bill Deller, umpire's advisor, comment said almost with a laugh. Likewise the umpire.

Rigged? Sounds like fine cotton Wick

If a game was rigged it would have come out, beneficiaries exposed

 

[Gethelred]

If you are leading by 5 goals with minutes to go, no decision will impact a result

Except perhaps a decision to do a headcount...

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

I’m watching a Bulldogs v North game from 1998. Standard of umpiring and from the players is so much better...

 

[Abyss]

do you follow these ........raiders?

I sort of follow the team. Going back to the 'don lane' 1 game weekly broadcast, I had the chargers, vikings and raiders as second tier teams to increase my chances of seeing a team i liked on the day. (Well vcr recording). At that point Anaheim Rams and today the LA Rams.
Returning to AFL, I was living in qld and we could see the Lions at home as my best mate had a friend playing. Never came out of a game thinking there was consistent bias either way.
To say politics, expansion, betting, and AFL relationships are exclusive from influence would be ideal.
Case in point the bombers doping fiasco. If irregularities can show up in black and white areas, for example, cheating or not cheating/doping...
Theres really no way to quantify interpretive bias unless there is an independent review. And who has the time or money for that.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

um, told by who? does the senior ump have an earpiece in listening to gil's instruction's? who told the umpires?

They have coaches who would speak to them at each break.

 

[Earls Smother]

A clear example of the umpires affecting the result of a game.

I don't normally comment on Umpires, particularly when it comes to our games - you drive yourself mad.

Rub of the Green with Umpires is like the bounce of the ball, or accuracy at goal - it will always be one of those intangibles that you want either even, or in your favour.

Watching last night's game highlighted the difficulty Umpires have. Callum Brown was tackled (perfectly in my opinion) to the ground in the last quarter. Any one of 4 decisions could have been paid:

- no prior opportunity = ball up.
- fell on top of him = in the back.
- perfect tackle, locked one arm to his side, can't dispose of it properly = holding the ball.
- slung him to the ground with an arm/s pinned = dangerous tackle.

I reckon at least 90% of neutral onlookers would have paid the 3rd option. The umpire obscurely paid the 4th option. Goal to Pies, lead narrows, momentum builds. To say that this has no impact on the game is simply wrong. Thankfully it didn't influence the final result.

The picture of Leo Barry's great match-saving mark in the 2005 GF clearly shows Ashley Sampi being held out of the contest by Tadhg Kennelly. The decision or non-decision is clearly critical to the result of a Grand Final. Same with the Maynard block and Sheed goal in 2018.

Umpires don't cheat, but they are certainly a relevant factor in the result of close games.

 

[GapInIkonPark]

Thought the holding the ball decisions were much fairer last night in Essendon v Collingwood match than in our match on Thursday night v St Kilda.

Memo to umpires, if the player has no prior opportunity and is trying to break free from the tackle, it is not holding the ball.

Concentrate instead on players who take the ball and let themselves get tackled who make no attempt to get rid of it.

 

[footyfan1978]

Thought the holding the ball decisions were much fairer last night in Essendon v Collingwood match than in our match on Thursday night v St Kilda.

Memo to umpires, if the player has no prior opportunity and is trying to break free from the tackle, it is not holding the ball.

Concentrate instead on players who take the ball and let themselves get tackled who make no attempt to get rid of it.

Memo to football fans.
Concentrate on the ball, not attempted tackles.

 

[OnceWeWereKings]

I don't normally comment on Umpires, particularly when it comes to our games - you drive yourself mad.

Rub of the Green with Umpires is like the bounce of the ball, or accuracy at goal - it will always be one of those intangibles that you want either even, or in your favour.

Watching last night's game highlighted the difficulty Umpires have. Callum Brown was tackled (perfectly in my opinion) to the ground in the last quarter. Any one of 4 decisions could have been paid:

- no prior opportunity = ball up.
- fell on top of him = in the back.
- perfect tackle, locked one arm to his side, can't dispose of it properly = holding the ball.
- slung him to the ground with an arm/s pinned = dangerous tackle.

I reckon at least 90% of neutral onlookers would have paid the 3rd option. The umpire obscurely paid the 4th option. Goal to Pies, lead narrows, momentum builds. To say that this has no impact on the game is simply wrong. Thankfully it didn't influence the final result.

The picture of Leo Barry's great match-saving mark in the 2005 GF clearly shows Ashley Sampi being held out of the contest by Tadhg Kennelly. The decision or non-decision is clearly critical to the result of a Grand Final. Same with the Maynard block and Sheed goal in 2018.

Umpires don't cheat, but they are certainly a relevant factor in the result of close games.

Is the issue not that the umpires have to decide what is dangerous and what isn’t ?

Instead of paying the many infringements that can occur in the tackle, some of which you have mentioned, and some that you haven’t, high etc. they are now asked to form an individual interpretation of what is dangerous and what isn’t.

This is a change to the rules that wasn’t there previously. A rule change that increases complexity and therefore leads to the frustration of the common fan.

A rule that now makes it more difficult to adjudicate, in the split second they have, and a rule that now allows for more “interpretation”

Interpretation invites human inconsistencies, inconsistencies invite frustration.

Why have we imposed on umpires that they now need to interprete what is dangerous? It simply adds another level of complexity to the task and for what outcome?

if there is a dangerous tackle in a game then let the match committee assess the incident with time and resource and apply an applicable penalty.

Simplify, instead of complicate the umpires remit and the game will be better for it.

 

[GapInIkonPark]

Memo to football fans.
Concentrate on the ball, not attempted tackles.

Not when umps don’t pay holding the ball in our favour but do so against us.
Not when league urges umpires to tighten up on holding the ball and they do for our match but not in the next match.
Cost us a couple of goals on Thursday night in my opinion.

 

[Arr0w]

Video Request: The day Fitzroy were robbed.

Over the years I've seen many horrible displays of umpiring (too many this year, I'll leave that for the Brisbane board :mad:) but everytime it comes up in conversation, my old man compares it to the game against Adelaide in the early 90's where the game was practically stripped from us. I...

www.bigfooty.com

The day Fitzroy were absolutely screwed by the umpires.

As plain as day that that game was rigged.



Bill Deller, umpire's advisor, comment said almost with a laugh. Likewise the umpire.

Further on this, you do realise the free kick count was 39 to 38 right?

If the game was supposedly rigged, umpires did a really poor job of trying to get the Crows over the line

 

[Arr0w]

Is the issue not that the umpires have to decide what is dangerous and what isn’t ?

Instead of paying the many infringements that can occur in the tackle, some of which you have mentioned, and some that you haven’t, high etc. they are now asked to form an individual interpretation of what is dangerous and what isn’t.

This is a change to the rules that wasn’t there previously. A rule change that increases complexity and therefore leads to the frustration of the common fan.

A rule that now makes it more difficult to adjudicate, in the split second they have, and a rule that now allows for more “interpretation”

Interpretation invites human inconsistencies, inconsistencies invite frustration.

Why have we imposed on umpires that they now need to interprete what is dangerous? It simply adds another level of complexity to the task and for what outcome?

if there is a dangerous tackle in a game then let the match committee assess the incident with time and resource and apply an applicable penalty.

Simplify, instead of complicate the umpires remit and the game will be better for it.

So much this!!

I don't want a 1000 new rules and or amendments, but surely we can start to address those that have multiple possibilities

- Remove the hands in the back in the marking contest

- Holding the ball for a player that gets caught and disposes of it illegally, rather than "he made an attempt"

Etc, etc

 

[Stamos]

Further on this, you do realise the free kick count was 39 to 38 right?

If the game was supposedly rigged, umpires did a really poor job of trying to get the Crows over the line

You obviously haven't watched it

 

[Arr0w]

You obviously haven't watched it

That's all you have?

Yeah I watched it, a few times

Strange how people only remember a minute, an act, here or there, rather than the whole 2 hours

That's human nature though, trying to blame or justify the act of 1-2 people, umpires, rather than the actions of 40 odd players that have by far the greatest impact on a game/season

 

[Franc de Borges]

Thought the holding the ball decisions were much fairer last night in Essendon v Collingwood match than in our match on Thursday night v St Kilda.

Memo to umpires, if the player has no prior opportunity and is trying to break free from the tackle, it is not holding the ball.

Concentrate instead on players who take the ball and let themselves get tackled who make no attempt to get rid of it.

Essendon should’ve had two free kicks in the goal square just prior to the sealing goal by Shiel (one for a throw and one for a blatant holding the ball). Both were let go. The umpiring standards are appalling league-wide.

 

[Stamos]

That's all you have?

Yeah I watched it, a few times

Strange how people only remember a minute, an act, here or there, rather than the whole 2 hours

That's human nature though, trying to blame or justify the act of 1-2 people, umpires, rather than the actions of 40 odd players that have by far the greatest impact on a game/season

It was the umpire goals in the final minutes that changed the outcome of the game. Everything that happened before that was leading to an outcome, and the umpires changed it.

 

[Franc de Borges]

That's all you have?

Yeah I watched it, a few times

Strange how people only remember a minute, an act, here or there, rather than the whole 2 hours

That's human nature though, trying to blame or justify the act of 1-2 people, umpires, rather than the actions of 40 odd players that have by far the greatest impact on a game/season

So if a couple have been happily married for 25 years, then the husband snaps and murders his wife, it’s wrong to call him a murderer and blame him for ending the marriage? You’ve got to take the 25 year marriage in its entirety, and for most of it he was a great guy.

 

[Cripptonite]

Last week when there were two * players blocking Eddie on the mark > 90m penalty against Carlton. “New rule” apparently.

This week when Jack Martin blocked for Cripps to run around and shoot > stops play and brings the ball back.

Not to mention the other two ridiculous 50m penalties. One for encroachment last week where no one was nearby or the one against Harry when he was trying to chest mark with Ben Long running back.

Selwood successfully flopping in front of goal or Rhys Stanley reaching out to grab SPS during the ruck contest against the cats two weeks ago. Eddie not receiving a certain HTB in front of goal late against Melbourne.

It wasn’t the reason we lost against the saints but gee we have been copping the rough end of the stick from umpires for as long as I can remember. I could real off a long list but the ones mentioned are just a few examples from the last few weeks. Double standards but we are used to it sadly.

 

[Arr0w]

It was the umpire goals in the final minutes that changed the outcome of the game. Everything that happened before that was leading to an outcome, and the umpires changed it.

You really need to dig deeper mate

No player, anywhere, would have this view regarding any game

An example of this would be the decision against Betts in the Essendon game.

If Townsend kicked that goal, most would have blamed the outcome on the umpire, despite the decision being the correct one

The real truth would have been not capatilizing on our countless opportunities to put them away earlier

But as usual, it's someone else's fault

 

[Arr0w]

So if a couple have been happily married for 25 years, then the husband snaps and murders his wife, it’s wrong to call him a murderer and blame him for ending the marriage? You’ve got to take the 25 year marriage in its entirety, and for most of it he was a great guy.

Not sure that's an appropriate analogy

 

[Hunter 9]

Unfortunately if you like it or not umpires decisions often influence the results of games. Look how good West Coast, Collingwood and the Crows are going without their crowd influenced frees. Crows would still be getting thumped but not by the same margins. Umpiring AFL would have to be one of the hardest jobs. I actually think it has been a lot better this season without the crowd influence. Only went a little haywire this weekend because free kick Hawthorn got involved. Start winning by 4 goals and we wont be talking about them.