Roast Umpires

[ajam87]

Hudson would be better focused manning the mark and focusing on the play.

Umpires dont change their mind !

What do you think about a 25 metre penalty ?

I'd prefer a 26.7 metre penalty

 

[yaco55]

Did you stuff too many tissues into your bra today
Seriously though I NEVER thought a football supporter would approve of that call.

Umpires make this call in every game - 50 metre penalties for backchat, disputing decisions, demonstrative behaviour etc etc etc.

 

[ajam87]

Umpires make this call in every game - 50 metre penalties for backchat, disputing decisions, demonstrative behaviour etc etc etc.

So why does that make it right?

 

[eth-dog]

I have a problem with the 50 metre penalty per se - Think it should be changed to 25m.

Have no problem with the Hudson 50 metre penalty - Why shouldn't you be penalised for shouting at an umpire.

I think a 50 metre penalty should be there, as should a lesser penalty (maybe 25)

 

[Kong]

Umpires dont change their mind !

So the only reason a player would ever vent frustration would be to persuade an umpire? No, of course not.

He was doing exactly that, venting his frustration at a contentious decision, and got penalised for it.

If he had've done it whilst looking at his direct opponent who just kicked a goal on him, nothing would be made of it. He wasn't trying to change anything out of his control, he wasn't even being abusive towards the opponent.

Yet because it's the precious men in white, he's penalised for it.

An absolutely pathetic decision.

 

[Dave]

Yet because it's the precious men in white, he's penalised for it.

He's penalised for it because that's how the AFL want it. Why? To set the tone for all competitions, especially the junior ones. Want to blame someone for it? Blame ugly parents who can't control themselves, not professionals who are doing as their employer directs.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Was the Mark Johnson "You can't call him a weak dog" decision correct yaco?

 

[Smyth94]

He's penalised for it because that's how the AFL want it. Why? To set the tone for all competitions, especially the junior ones. Want to blame someone for it? Blame ugly parents who can't control themselves, not professionals who are doing as their employer directs.

It's going too far no matter what the reasons are for these measures being brought in.

The umpire ultimately still has the choice to award the 50 by making a judgment call on what is and isn't "demonstrative" or abuse.

 

[Dave]

The umpire ultimately still has the choice to award the 50 by making a judgment call on what is and isn't "demonstrative" or abuse.

And if the Geisch & co have told them "That's demonstrative" they'll pay it every time. If they want to keep umpiring. Generally people who want to keep their jobs do what the boss says.

I agree that what happened was pretty soft, but when you see week in week out, as I & others do, what happens at junior footy you'll start to realise why they take the tack they do.

 

[yaco55]

Was the Mark Johnson "You can't call him a weak dog" decision correct yaco?

Absolutely not - Ridiculous decision.

That would have to be in the annals of the worst 50 metre penalties ever paid.

 

[yaco55]

I see a sense of contradiction.

Whomb is strong on some footy players being tools and Bogans at the footy - but you can be a tool/bogan towards an umpire and it is OK.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Absolutely not - Ridiculous decision.

That would have to be in the annals of the worst 50 metre penalties ever paid.

Can't see how that's any different to Hudson saying "What?". Both are questioning the decision without resorting to abuse, swearing etc.

 

[Smyth94]

And if the Geisch & co have told them "That's demonstrative" they'll pay it every time. If they want to keep umpiring. Generally people who want to keep their jobs do what the boss says.

I agree that what happened was pretty soft, but when you see week in week out, as I & others do, what happens at junior footy you'll start to realise why they take the tack they do.

Football is going to the dogs if decisions like that are being sanctioned by the AFL.

Just curious, you mentioned "ugly parents", what do they have to do with it? This scenario is a player/umpire interraction.

 

[Kong]

I see a sense of contradiction.

Whomb is strong on some footy players being tools and Bogans at the footy - but you can be a tool/bogan towards an umpire and it is OK.

Please explain.

 

[yaco55]

Can't see how that's any different to Hudson saying "What?". Both are questioning the decision without resorting to abuse, swearing etc.

You are clutching at straws.

Dont be ridiculous !

Johnson was abusing an opponent - calling him ' A Weak Dog' - this happens in every game - But I have yet to see another instance when a penalty has been called against the offending player.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

When did I ever say that the Johnson decision was correct?

 

[yaco55]

Please explain.

Check your posting history.

 

[yaco55]

When did I ever say that the Johnson decision was correct?

And i said it was an incorrect decision.

Dont see any relationship with the Hudson decision.

 

[yaco55]

Please explain.

You have made this assertion several times - And I happen to agree.

 

[Kong]

I see a sense of contradiction.

Whomb is strong on some footy players being tools and Bogans at the footy - but you can be a tool/bogan towards an umpire and it is OK.

Please explain.

Check your posting history.

You have made this assertion several times - And I happen to agree.

WHAT ASSERTION?

Please explain. Please. You need to speak in English for me to understand you, I'm afraid.

I'm "strong on" some footy players being bogans at the footy? - What the hell does that even mean?

Seriously dude. What are you talking about?

 

[Ben the Gooner]

And i said it was an incorrect decision.

Dont see any relationship with the Hudson decision.

See the post where I explain the relationship.

 

[Dave]

Football is going to the dogs if decisions like that are being sanctioned by the AFL.

Just curious, you mentioned "ugly parents", what do they have to do with it? This scenario is a player/umpire interraction.

What happens at AFL level has a knock on effect all the way to junior comps. If you think the AFL aren't concerned with that you're mistaken. Why else do you think they are so concerned with respect for umpires?

 

[Kong]

Punishing players for showing raw emotion, in a game where adrenaline is high, and one action can change a game, is ridiculous.

Especially when it wouldn't offend anybody with a bit of spine.

 

[Towno78]

Punishing players for showing raw emotion, in a game where adrenaline is high, and one action can change a game, is ridiculous.

Especially when it wouldn't offend anybody with a bit of spine.

Did wonder what that 50 was for... Pretty pathetic.

Thought the umpiring was fairly reasonable tonight, although it was pretty hard to judge with a Doggies supporter 3 rows back whingeing the Doggies didn't get a free kick at every single contest. What are there, like a thousand contests in a game?
Don't understand why these "supporters" go to games when they're too pre-occupied with umpires to even clap when their team kicks a goal.

 

[kfc1]

The call on Hudson was UNBELIEVABLE to give a 50 for yelling "what" is sickening.
How could that be viewed demonstrative, especially when the umpires 10 meters away, his not exactly screaming in his face.
For a players passion and emotion to be penalised in football, is just crazy. Have they really become that precious!

I DESPISE the changes in umpiring, to what we now see today. They have such power over the outcome in the game of today.
By paying the technicality it certainly makes it easy on the umpire to make the call, while at the same time removing the skill and ability to interpret the play and make the call in the spirit of the game.

excellent post, terrible terrible decision

massive umpiring changes needed at the end of the season!