Live Event Umpiring Essendon/Lions and Essendon/GWS game

[hcd199]

I only half-watched the game, but from what I saw there were definitely some very soft frees, inconsistency, poor umpiring all round. I think the McGrath HTB has to be incorrect (the rule penalises a player who "dives on top of or drags the football underneath their body", in other words someone who locks the ball beneath them, this isn't that and should've been a ball-up - no prior), but this is what will happen when the AFL bizarrely decides to crack down on the aspect of holding the ball that was actually fine (rather than dropping the ball with prior being called play on, which is still happening plenty).

Far worse was the free against Hurley for 'front on contact' that he never made - and I think that one is a clear example of a problem I've had with umpiring for a long time, that the umpires are coached so hard to look for certain specific details (in this case, "was he looking at the ball?") that they forget what the actual rule requires.

 

[Milux]

I watched the Mcgrath htb free again, in the light that some believe it was the right interpretation. If that is so (which I reject) Mcgrath has only 2 other options; move forward without reaching for the ball causing head high contact or stopping and waving his hands like a netball defender.

I think what done him in was dropping his knees to the ground. Thats my only reasonable explanation. If he didn't do that I'd say he was fine. That being said it was probably the worst call I have ever seen.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I just find it ironic that after the media gang tackles Clarko for suggesting he doesn't like the way the game is umpired, that a member of the media (Slobbo) starts sooking like a 3 year old about umpiring because his beloved Essendon cops a few frees against them. Pretty much what I expect from the media.

 

[iBeng]

Looking at the McGrath free kick...It looks to me like it falls into the "Took the tackler on" situation but with also the "no prior opportunity" situation. Arguably a line call at that point in time? Could have gone either way. If it happened at the other end of the field or in the middle would the reaction be the same, since where it happened resulted in a goal?

Do we need to have what some sports have and have live video refs that can overrule obvious things like this? Things like when Charlie had his arm clearly held by Gleeson I think it was, still managed to kick it but when he confronted the umpire about the holding they "Didnt see it"?

 

[OsteitisPubis22]

West coast received 15 free kicks all game tonight and Geelong 12, Brisbane received 17 at half time, 13 of them have been deemed incorrect decisions.
They completely ruined the game.
Tonights game was fantastic, and the umpires weren’t even noticed. Coincidence..... nah.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Inspecta Gadget]

David King said it was the right call

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/af...g/news-story/124d06a92b365a484135af52ea0f2e2a

If we ever needed more proof that David King is out of his depth as an analyst of our game, this is it

 

[Andronicus]

David King said it was the right call

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/af...g/news-story/124d06a92b365a484135af52ea0f2e2a

If we ever needed more proof that David King is out of his depth as an analyst of our game, this is it

Being endorsed by king would surely make the umpiring fraternity think "oh *!"

 

[HairyO]

I just find it ironic that after the media gang tackles Clarko for suggesting he doesn't like the way the game is umpired, that a member of the media (Slobbo) starts sooking like a 3 year old about umpiring because his beloved Essendon cops a few frees against them. Pretty much what I expect from the media.

Not really ironic.

AFL media are clueless flogs who jump from story to story as a pack because they dont underatand and dont care.

Viewer numbers and clicks are all that matters.

 

[sprockets]

17.6.5 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Diving on Top of the Football
A Free Kick shall be awarded against a Player who dives on top of or drags
the football underneath their body and fails to immediately knock clear
or Correctly Dispose of the football when Legally Tackled.

Rule needs to be changed. Once McGrath gets to his feet and is then tackled it should be a 'prior opportunity' free. IMO the diving on the ball was a separate issue and the tackle was well after he got back up. The AFL are suggesting that even if no-one's around you and you go to your knees to pick the ball up, run 8 metres and are tackled it's a 'dived on it' free. That's not in the spirit of the rule/game.

 

[nick1408]

I only half-watched the game, but from what I saw there were definitely some very soft frees, inconsistency, poor umpiring all round. I think the McGrath HTB has to be incorrect (the rule penalises a player who "dives on top of or drags the football underneath their body", in other words someone who locks the ball beneath them, this isn't that and should've been a ball-up - no prior), but this is what will happen when the AFL bizarrely decides to crack down on the aspect of holding the ball that was actually fine (rather than dropping the ball with prior being called play on, which is still happening plenty).

Far worse was the free against Hurley for 'front on contact' that he never made - and I think that one is a clear example of a problem I've had with umpiring for a long time, that the umpires are coached so hard to look for certain specific details (in this case, "was he looking at the ball?") that they forget what the actual rule requires.

I'm going to be in the minority here but I thought the McGrath call was correct but that's not why I am replying to you. I think the Hurley decision was just plain wrong. I can only hope that the umpire made the call in the wrong position (behind Hurley and unable to see thus he guessed). I'm not sure what the best answer is here - does the umpire call 'play on' because he can't see, thus allowing a possible infringement go unpunished? Does he guess like he did and get it wrong? What is the lesser of two evils? How many times does something like this happen (not anecdotal, actual numbers) and is it actually impacting the game?

There is also the option to allow the boundary umpires to make the call in these situations but that was trialed in the pre-season a few years ago and led to a hell of a lot more free kicks and the game slowing right down. Is that a bad thing? I guess it depends on how you want the game officiated.

It's a horrible look whenever the umpire gets one wrong and the AFL doesn't help themselves by not allowing the umpiring to be scrutinised. Personally, I'd love to see a weekly roundup of contentious decisions (both free kicks and play on decisions) explained on the AFL website with the umpires boss. Even if I don't agree at least I can hear it from the horses mouth what they are thinking and looking at.

Also, the notice clubs get regarding umpiring interpretations; is there any reason why it can't be put on the AFL website for everyone who is interested to look at? Cricket is willing to rank umpires up to 'Elite' maybe the AFL can start doing the same thing.

17.6.5 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Diving on Top of the Football
A Free Kick shall be awarded against a Player who dives on top of or drags
the football underneath their body and fails to immediately knock clear
or Correctly Dispose of the football when Legally Tackled.

Rule needs to be changed. Once McGrath gets to his feet and is then tackled it should be a 'prior opportunity' free. IMO the diving on the ball was a separate issue and the tackle was well after he got back up. The AFL are suggesting that even if no-one's around you and you go to your knees to pick the ball up, run 8 metres and are tackled it's a 'dived on it' free. That's not in the spirit of the rule/game.

Yeah, I think the explanation by the umpire on the night was poor. While I think the interpretation was correct the umpire needed to tell McGrath exactly why he was pinged. If the umpire made an incorrect call so be it but McGrath should have been told "You dragged it in. When you got to your feet that was deemed prior opportunity thus when you were tackled and didn't dispose of it correctly you are deem to be holding the ball."

I don't mind the new holding the ball interpretation but it comes back to what the AFL has lacked in all aspects for a long, long time - consistency. It's bloody hard to be consistent when the rest of the business isn't. It's bloody hard to be consistent when the laws of the game are so open to interpretation. It may be time to strip the rules back and try and make them as black and white as possible to allow both the umpires to be consistent and the public to know what to expect in most situations.

 

[HairyO]

17.6.5 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Diving on Top of the Football
A Free Kick shall be awarded against a Player who dives on top of or drags
the football underneath their body and fails to immediately knock clear
or Correctly Dispose of the football when Legally Tackled.

Rule needs to be changed. Once McGrath gets to his feet and is then tackled it should be a 'prior opportunity' free. IMO the diving on the ball was a separate issue and the tackle was well after he got back up. The AFL are suggesting that even if no-one's around you and you go to your knees to pick the ball up, run 8 metres and are tackled it's a 'dived on it' free. That's not in the spirit of the rule/game.

One of the interpretations the AFL had previously said was that if you dived on the ball you had to stand up.

McGrath did that.

I love having a crack at Essendon but the umpire here really should have balled it up.

 

[andon]

I saw live what happened in Sydney when Rampe shook and climbed the post.

Spirit of the game indeed

The game died a little that night.

There are rules for a reason, and equality of fixtures, balanced free kicks, and use of best venues fairly shared by all teams is vital to be a real competition.

The AFL is heading for demise unless its adresses the inequity between clubs, including lopsided free kick counts.

 

[NAB777]

Yeah, I think the explanation by the umpire on the night was poor. While I think the interpretation was correct the umpire needed to tell McGrath exactly why he was pinged.

The umpire's exact words were "Holding the ball; dived on it". Personally, I thought diving on it was when guys actually dived on the ball & were basically laying down - and then didn't make an effort to get rid of it. McGrath kind of slid in & stood up, which is exactly what I thought you should try to do if you are on your knees. Otherwise, the rule is basically 'no taking of possession of the ball when not on your feet".

The fact that he wasn't tackled straight away, and the ball then became a 50/50 wrestle between him & the Brisbane player...to me it was then 'in dispute'.

Anyhow.. I really don't blame people/umpires for being a bit confused these days.

 

[WindyHillZephyr]

I have had a gut full of the AFLaccredited media bypassing the issue. Here is a game so poorly umpired that one side had no chance of winning and their (AFL) website only has a video of Mitch Robinson throwing his mouth guard because he didn't get a free.

 

[iBeng]

So when a player takes the mark, and then a team mate runs up along side them for the handball, thats play on immediately...So with Hipwood where he was, the umpire SHOULD have called play on since he was in the area. Would that be a fair interpretation of the rule?

 

[sprockets]

...It may be time to strip the rules back and try and make them as black and white as possible to allow both the umpires to be consistent and the public to know what to expect in most situations.

Been saying that for a while now. They need to make the rules simpler, not more complicated. Don't add rules, remove them.

 

[Aishole]

No - not just after Clarkson whinged - it's been crap all year

It has been crap for 2-3 years, and degenerating before our very eyes.

5 days ago i watched 42 free kicks paid in the collingwood v West coast game. There was almost 15 in the first quarter alone. Blew the whistle at every moment.

Tonight, Collingwood ended on 9. Blatant free kicks were brushed over.

5 days apart, 2 different sets of interpretations of the rules.

It is disgusting. And i’m done with footy until it is fixed.

How do we even start change? It doesn’t seem to be top of the agenda in the media. It needs to be. A large media personality needs to be ruthless on it, so we see some action.

 

[Tiger Tim]

Clearly the Bombers are still being punished

 

[HairyO]

It has been crap for 2-3 years, and degenerating before our very eyes.

5 days ago i watched 42 free kicks paid in the collingwood v West coast game. There was almost 15 in the first quarter alone. Blew the whistle at every moment.

Tonight, Collingwood ended on 9. Blatant free kicks were brushed over.

5 days apart, 2 different sets of interpretations of the rules.

It is disgusting. And i’m done with footy until it is fixed.

How do we even start change? It doesn’t seem to be top of the agenda in the media. It needs to be. A large media personality needs to be ruthless on it, so we see some action.

Someone did try to fix things and the media and supporters lined up to pot shot him.

Heaps were Collingwood supporters too. Nothing to do with the massive free kick differential in their favour.

Then they lose the count and suddenly its a problem and the game is being ruined.

 

[nick1408]

Been saying that for a while now. They need to make the rules simpler, not more complicated. Don't add rules, remove them.

I'm pretty sure Rugby Union did this via the Stellenbosch Rules in 2008. Someone with more knowledge of Union may be able to explain further but the idea was born due to the Union rulebook being 190 pages long apparently.

In saying that, we need to be very careful of changing the rules due to what we are seeing this season. The changes to the ordinary rules are too extreme to lay the basis for change.

 

[Aishole]

Someone did try to fix things and the media and supporters lined up to pot shot him.

Heaps were Collingwood supporters too. Nothing to do with the massive free kick differential in their favour.

Then they lose the count and suddenly its a problem and the game is being ruined.

Im not sure if you’re referring to me, but, I wasn’t pointing out us losing the count this week as an example of us being hard done by, i was using it in comparison to what calls were being made 5 days apart. Totally different.

I have been talking about the umpiring for 2 years. It did not just start when we lost a free kick count. the free kick count doesn’t even tell the whole story.

I appreciate Clarkson putting the Holding the ball thing on the agenda. To me, it is absolutely ludicrous that it is is so frowned upon for football people to comment on umpiring to the media. The umpires should he held accountable for their performance, same as the players. It needs to be called for what it is, or there will be no real change.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

They need to make the rules simpler, not more complicated. Don't add rules, remove them.

Welcome to footy in the 1970s

Those of us who have been around longer than we care to remember have sat back and watched the degeneration of the game, both in the way it is played, and the way it is umpired. If we dare say anything, we are told the game has "never been better", and of course we know this is pure unadulterated rubbish.

The game is harder to watch and understand than ever before, and as such, it has never been more difficult to umpire. Add to the equation that there are now three umpires out there which adds to inconsistency of decisions. What's holding the ball in one person's eyes is not in another's.

Clean up the game, make the rules and the way the game is played less complicated, and you will see not only the game become more attractive, you will also see a natural improvement in umpiring. The game gets the umpiring it deserves.

 

[Wosh]

Thread title changed - Essendon/GWS game

 

[JT_the_Man]

Same s**t, different week.

Been happening all year.

 

[The Devils Advocate]

Pretty tired of this ******* s**t.