Analysis Umpires

Remove this Banner Ad

I had a chat/rant with Jon Ralph in at work after the Geelong game about the congestion and the lack of free kicks for incorrect disposal/holding the ball.

I haven’t seen much from Ralphy on this front but there’s a few in the media now getting onto this with Slobbo mentioning it just about every time he writes a column.

I expect pretty soon there’s going to be a crackdown and a change on the umps interpretation, no doubt interpretation will change significantly and then slowly come back to probably what it is right now when the finals come around


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Just on Geelong... Cameron very clearly should have been taken off to be assessed properly for a significant head knock late in the game against Port. Even the commentators picked it up. He was clearly staggered. But he's their best player and the game was close.

Now he's got "delayed" concussion. Yeah right.

Again - nothing to see here from the AFL.
 
teddy-hopkins said:
Just on Geelong... Cameron very clearly should have been taken off to be assessed properly for a significant head knock late in the game against Port. Even the commentators picked it up. He was clearly staggered. But he's their best player and the game was close.

Now he's got "delayed" concussion. Yeah right.

Again - nothing to see here from the AFL.
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with umpires
 
SurreyBlue said:
Watch Geelong get a ride for the next month……what sh1ts me more, our club is always mentioned as getting the better calls. FMD
Click to expand...
Scott was out of line choosing a Carlton episode to illustrate some vague point the DH was trying to make The Club should be all over this to the AAFL- if they want to allow such commentary what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
 
skadoosh said:
Vossy in the presser said he will followup and request clarification on some things regarding umpiring.

Think the grabbing/holding of Charlie and Harry will be on the agenda.
Click to expand...
The 13 to 3 half time stat might need an explanation as well, and while we're at it when does "Stand" mean stand? Mac Andrew was bouncing around on the mark, no 50; Charlie and H both had balls knocked out of their hands and neither received a 50!!!!
 
skadoosh said:
Vossy in the presser said he will followup and request clarification on some things regarding umpiring.

Think the grabbing/holding of Charlie and Harry will be on the agenda.
Click to expand...
The sooking from Pies fans and Richo all off season has clearly got to them. Won't pay a damn thing for Charlie this year.
 
Incorrect disposal, holding the ball, holding the man, in the back, front on contact in marking contests, blocks, everything in ruck contests....

Can't narrow it down anymore on which Voss wants clarification on. None have been called for yonks and some might not even be rules anymore. Saw TDK held by the jersey, around the head and blocked and he got nothing called. You're literally 2 metres from a ruck contest ump...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bamboo Harvester said:
You reckon that was bad....in our VFL game earlier in the day it was 20 free kicks to 6 at half time!!!
Dodgy as all ****
Click to expand...
I didn’t see the 2s, but the thing with today is we were dominating, and the blatant free kicks were there and just ignored.
3 of their first 4 goals came because the maggots ignored blatant free kicks.
 
Spot on, questions need to be asked.

To summarise, the Blues were awarded:

-2 free kicks in the first 56 minutes of football (1 every 28 minutes, that's much less than 1 per quarter)
-9 free kicks in the remaining 24 minutes (1 every 2.6 minutes)

So the last 24 minutes saw us awarded free kicks at greater than 10 times the rate as the first 56 minutes.

(Possibly because the umpires were conscious of the discrepancy and started evening it up!)

I was at the game and it felt like the closest thing to genuine umpire integrity issues I've seen.

Get on it Vossy / Lloydy.
 
Last edited:
The free paid against Kennedy for bowling over Mac Andrew (paid shepherding) in the marking contest was Andrew running into Kennedy - not the other way around - was poor. He was penalised for holding his line / position. There were many other poor decisions but the ones where you see them pay it one way and then the exact same thing not paid 5 minutes later that are infuriating.
 
teddy-hopkins said:
The free paid against Kennedy for bowling over Mac Andrew (paid shepherding) in the marking contest was Andrew running into Kennedy - not the other way around - was poor. He was penalised for holding his line / position. There were many other poor decisions but the ones where you see them pay it one way and then the exact same thing not paid 5 minutes later that are infuriating.
Click to expand...
That was an extremely poor decision because Kennedy was in the position to take the mark and just because Mackay can jump higher does not mean that Kennedy does not have a play on the ball in order to mark it... The umpire absolutely invented that free kick because he envisioned Andrew flying for the spoil... And the umpire was barracking for the Andrew spoil in essence
 
Matt Owies.

This bloke gets taken high and in the back an awful, awful lot for a bloke who averages less than a single free kick a game.

Also, has anyone noticed a return to the 'hands in the back' interpretation of push in the back? It's okay to shove with your shoulder, to nudge or to hold position and lunge back - it's even okay to land full on a smaller player's back whilst holding their arms, ensuring that they taste sod head first - but it's a free the second you extend your hands?

If you're gonna do that, you should tell everyone first.

I've got more: could the AFL remember that kicking in danger is still a thing?

I saw one paid last night - Ess-Rich - and it wasn't even blatant. These days you have so many trying to tap or kick off the ground to clear congestion, you kind of need to ensure that someone doesn't take a full blooded kick at the ball while another player has their head down. It's ****ing dangerous, and it's something that is being allowed to continue purely because the AFL and umps forget it's a rule. If someone has their head and hands over a ball and you choose to kick it, it should be a free kick against you; they're going for possession, and you're not.

Finally, what's a block in the ruck look like? Is it running past the ball and holding your ground - what would genuinely, using a literal dictionary definition of the word 'blocking' be considered blocking the opposing ruckman's access to the ball - or is it placing a single hand on your opponent's chest and shoving with one hand with your eyes on the ball and your hand hitting the ball?

Ruck infringements have been shithouse for a while, but that one against TDK last night was the worst I've ever seen. He did not a single thing wrong there; he's not stronger than Goldstein so he kept his eyes on the ball, leaped and pushed with the same motion (knocking Goldstein off balance) and tapped the ball clean down to one of our players. If players are going to run past the ball and TDK will get penalised for jumping into them with a raised knee - as is the traditional means of dealing with someone getting in your way - what in utter **** is he supposed to do to get to the ball?

He can't push them to protect his own space. If he lets them run, they'll just get between him and the ball. If he leaps, he'll get a high contact free paid against him; if he raises his knee, he might face suspension.

He's the most athletic ruck in the comp, and he's not allowed to use his leap in a ruck contest?

Farcical.
 
Gethelred said:
Matt Owies.

This bloke gets taken high and in the back an awful, awful lot for a bloke who averages less than a single free kick a game.

Also, has anyone noticed a return to the 'hands in the back' interpretation of push in the back? It's okay to shove with your shoulder, to nudge or to hold position and lunge back - it's even okay to land full on a smaller player's back whilst holding their arms, ensuring that they taste sod head first - but it's a free the second you extend your hands?

If you're gonna do that, you should tell everyone first.

I've got more: could the AFL remember that kicking in danger is still a thing?

I saw one paid last night - Ess-Rich - and it wasn't even blatant. These days you have so many trying to tap or kick off the ground to clear congestion, you kind of need to ensure that someone doesn't take a full blooded kick at the ball while another player has their head down. It's ******* dangerous, and it's something that is being allowed to continue purely because the AFL and umps forget it's a rule. If someone has their head and hands over a ball and you choose to kick it, it should be a free kick against you; they're going for possession, and you're not.

Finally, what's a block in the ruck look like? Is it running past the ball and holding your ground - what would genuinely, using a literal dictionary definition of the word 'blocking' be considered blocking the opposing ruckman's access to the ball - or is it placing a single hand on your opponent's chest and shoving with one hand with your eyes on the ball and your hand hitting the ball?

Ruck infringements have been shithouse for a while, but that one against TDK last night was the worst I've ever seen. He did not a single thing wrong there; he's not stronger than Goldstein so he kept his eyes on the ball, leaped and pushed with the same motion (knocking Goldstein off balance) and tapped the ball clean down to one of our players. If players are going to run past the ball and TDK will get penalised for jumping into them with a raised knee - as is the traditional means of dealing with someone getting in your way - what in utter heck is he supposed to do to get to the ball?

He can't push them to protect his own space. If he lets them run, they'll just get between him and the ball. If he leaps, he'll get a high contact free paid against him; if he raises his knee, he might face suspension.

He's the most athletic ruck in the comp, and he's not allowed to use his leap in a ruck contest?

Farcical.
Click to expand...
Agree with you. Also Weitering gets held off the ball a lot too. Usually by a third tall or small to try to stop him getting to a contest.

Also "front on contact" against Williams but not on Andrews. Plenty of balls dropped in tackles and throws.

Mac Andrews walking the ball out when the closest Blue was 10-15m away.

Also, it was Witts. And a kick is a possession.

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Doesn’t anyone else find it fascinating that not one media person, not one has raised any of this? Just imagine if this occurred to Collingwood or a Scott, Hardwick, Clarkson, etc. coached team!
 
SurreyBlue said:
Doesn’t anyone else find it fascinating that not one media person, not one has raised any of this? Just imagine if this occurred to Collingwood or a Scott, Hardwick, Clarkson, etc. coached team!
Click to expand...
That’s not true, the media were all over it.


www.afl.com.au

Hardwick calls for umpiring change, Voss plans to 'follow up'

Suns coach Damien Hardwick has called for an adjustment from umpires to make the game safer
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au

www.theage.com.au

‘It is dangerous’: Hardwick and Voss tackle umpires

Damien Hardwick has called on the game’s decision-makers to do faster calls on holding-the-ball decisions.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au

www.foxsports.com.au

‘Very, very dangerous’: Voss, Hardwick call out issue AFL ‘has to get on top of’

‘Very, very dangerous’: Coaches call out issue AFL ‘has to get on top of’
www.foxsports.com.au www.foxsports.com.au
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top