Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Umpires

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Not just our games - HTB has been the the worst officiated rule in the AFL for a few years

Along with incorrect disposal (throwing/shovelling the ball).
 
Along with incorrect disposal (throwing/shovelling the ball).
The grey area of "made a legitimate attempt to dispose of the ball", makes incorrect disposal too hard to officiate on a consistent basis.

The rules need tweaking to be rewritten ti remove these grey areas so it's easier to make consistent decisions.

Sometimes I watch the games and think I don't understand the rules anymore.
 
The grey area of "made a legitimate attempt to dispose of the ball", makes incorrect disposal too hard to officiate on a consistent basis.

The rules need tweaking to be rewritten ti remove these grey areas so it's easier to make consistent decisions.

Sometimes I watch the games and think I don't understand the rules anymore.

This ain't Rugby .. it's not hard.
 
The grey area of "made a legitimate attempt to dispose of the ball", makes incorrect disposal too hard to officiate on a consistent basis.

The rules need tweaking to be rewritten ti remove these grey areas so it's easier to make consistent decisions.

Sometimes I watch the games and think I don't understand the rules anymore.
'Made a legitmate attempt to dispose of the ball' is not a handball or a kick; it should be called incorrect disposal. For whatever reason, the AFL does not want to clean up incorrect disposal. I think it's because if they did that the amount of incorrect disposals called a game would skyrocket and stay high indefinitely, as you're now rewarding tacklers even more than you already are.

... which is why they need to start looking after the ball carrier much more than they are at present. Holding the man before having taken possession. Push in the back. High contact. Do these, and you've incentive to get the ball within congestion because the rules are protecting your right to take possession without impediment.
 
Not just our games - HTB has been the the worst officiated rule in the AFL for 150 years
but people keep complaining thinking somehow things will change............oh when, when will it stop raining in winter?
 
'Made a legitmate attempt to dispose of the ball' is not a handball or a kick; it should be called incorrect disposal. For whatever reason, the AFL does not want to clean up incorrect disposal. I think it's because if they did that the amount of incorrect disposals called a game would skyrocket and stay high indefinitely, as you're now rewarding tacklers even more than you already are.

... which is why they need to start looking after the ball carrier much more than they are at present. Holding the man before having taken possession. Push in the back. High contact. Do these, and you've incentive to get the ball within congestion because the rules are protecting your right to take possession without impediment.
This! In some respects, they have removed the desire to actually try to get the ball. The player who has the sole desire of getting ball must get priority and protection. Otherwise, we have a game of dwellers. Unattractive football.
 
'Made a legitmate attempt to dispose of the ball' is not a handball or a kick; it should be called incorrect disposal. For whatever reason, the AFL does not want to clean up incorrect disposal. I think it's because if they did that the amount of incorrect disposals called a game would skyrocket and stay high indefinitely, as you're now rewarding tacklers even more than you already are.

... which is why they need to start looking after the ball carrier much more than they are at present. Holding the man before having taken possession. Push in the back. High contact. Do these, and you've incentive to get the ball within congestion because the rules are protecting your right to take possession without impediment.

Im being totally serious, why would any of these be difficult? I feel ups are pretty strict with tacklers falling in to others backs, but at every stoppage in any game, I see players being tackled a split second before taking possession of the ball, why is it ignored?

The AFL want the game to open up, this would help with that. Makes no sense.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Im being totally serious, why would any of these be difficult? I feel ups are pretty strict with tacklers falling in to others backs, but at every stoppage in any game, I see players being tackled a split second before taking possession of the ball, why is it ignored?

The AFL want the game to open up, this would help with that. Makes no sense.
Media blowback, coupled with the perception that as far as free kicks are concerned less is more.

Look at how the HTB free has been modified over the last 10-15 years; once upon a time, if you got your disposal off, it didn't matter if you were dead in the water it couldn't be holding the ball because - as stated - you got your disposal off legally. Now, it's theatre; a player blindsighted, the tackler comes in and wraps him up, the audience knows what's going to happen a full two to five seconds in advance. Even if the player gets their kick or handpass off, it's called holding the ball. The AFL wants the theatre of it in that moment; that is how they want free kicks to 'look'.

Paying more in the back or holding frees - and, let's be frank, it wouldn't be a +10 frees per match here; we're looking at upwards of +30 per match if they called every free as far as that went - don't satisfy that demand for theatre, and there is the perception - propagated by the ex players in the media, and by a public who dislike umpires to begin with - that more frees equals a worse game. This as much as anything is why they're not paying the throws; more frees for no gain in the final product is bad.

And let's get things straight; umps are completely inconsistent with in the back. Used to be, you couldn't really tackle from behind without a perfect technique to roll them so you both hit the ground simultaneously; it was contact from the back, so it was a free. In the back was the strictest rule of all; it kept you from being blindsighted. Now, it's sparingly enforced; you need to land on them, you need to push them from your space. The intention of the rule was to give the ball carrier sight of the tackler, so they had a chance to avoid it; this, again, was dispensed with because the AFL loves the roar of the crowd and that thrill as it happens.

Think of the AFL like a circus organiser, seeking to update their performance every time based on what they think the crowd want.
 
**** me, the female umpire tonight (unfortunately I don't know her name) was terrible. Just weirdly wrong calls, like calls that are just patently wrong based on what can clearly be seen. Seems like she had preconceived ideas about what she wanted to call and called it. Stole two marks off Harry. Some weird non holding the balls. Just very very strange.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

It should have been a ball up.
It cost us a goal too.
I can't understand why one of the other umpires didn't call it.
Agree, that was on the other umpires. AFL need to address this. The way the game is played this days, with zoning and pinpoint passing, if a player is blocked from marking the ball, there are generally opposition players close by who can quickly outnumber and cause damage with the turnover.

Aside from that, the umpire needs to be given the opportunity to regroup and make sure they are in the right physical condition to continue. Credit to Eleni for bouncing up and continuing on unfazed though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Umpires

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top