Autopsy AFL 2021 Round 10 - Crows v Demons Sat May 22nd 4:35pm EST (AO)

[ok.crows]

What does a 23-24 free kick count have to do with umpires throwing the whistle away in the final minute and not penalising the Crows for two blatant infringements?

1. the non-HTB decision against Keays which led directly to Walker's go-ahead goal from the next bit of play.
2. the non-Deliberate decision against Murray which prevented Melbourne from taking the potential game-winning shot from 15m out.

If that happened to Richmond, you would throw your television across the room.

Anyone who claims that umpires don't decide the outcome of football matches needs to watch a replay of today's game and concentrate on what occurred in the final minute. They literally decided the game with two incorrect 'play on' calls.

Why concentrate on the final minute? Why not look at the numerous times when Melbourne players were tackled and took an age to get rid of the ball, or the goals that Melbourne got from highly dubious frees to get up in the middle of the last quarter in the first place, or the goal that was awarded to Melbourne after being touched?

 

[JHF1870]

Its all good because they threw the whistle away for the other 3.9 quarters and let melbourne get away with plenty

Irrespective of the result, we do acknowledge that:

Sometimes:

You get a good rub of the green
You get a poor rub of the green
Both sides are equally advantaged and disadvantaged by umpiring

That's part and parcel with the game.

What we don't like:

Inconsistencies in umpiring. You're arguing that both sides had good and bad calls which by your own admission admit that the umpiring is inconsistent. The way I look at it is we want to remove the obvious poor decisions from our game (Howlers). Most people would accept a bad rub of the green over 50/50 decisions as a part of the game. Missing an obvious HTB 30 seconds after pinging another player for HTB is where we have a serious problem.

 

[CrowFan77]

I still think Spargo touched the ball last, but even if he hadn't there were less than 30s seconds left, so either:
- the kicker would have been kicking from in line with the goals and wouldn't have been allowed to play on, or
- the kicker would have played on and the siren would have sounded before they kicked it.
Either way, the Crows would still win the game at least 9 times out of 10.

 

[FyfeToAdelaide]

C'mon man. Doedee was two metres to Murray's immediate right (behind the tackler, Spargo). I doubt Murray even saw him. He belted the handpass into the ground & directly towards the boundary line 12 metres away. Clearly deliberate out of bounds. That was his sole intention and he should've been penalised.

This would've been penalised 100 times out of 100 at any other stage of the match. The umpire chickened out and called for a throw in because he didn't want to make a mistake and award a contentious free kick which would've decided the outcome. He was weak as piss and incorrect in his adjudication. He cost Melbourne at least 2 premiership points.

At least 2? Couldn't of kicked on the full due to a tough angle/pressure and not knowing when the siren would go and making the angle terrible? Or kicked a goal/point and crows scoring within 20 seconds? Plenty of possibilities.

 

[thedank]

I still think Spargo touched the ball last, but even if he hadn't there were less than 30s seconds left, so either:
- the kicker would have been kicking from in line with the goals and wouldn't have been allowed to play on, or
- the kicker would have played on and the siren would have sounded before they kicked it.
Either way, the Crows would still win the game at least 9 times out of 10.

I would think the Melbourne forwards are smart enough to know there's 30secs left and would get rolling quick enough to kick around the body, would be 95%+ to at least score a behind

 

[Deelighted]

Guess why you weren't frustrated by the umpiring early?

I would agree we had a good run in the first half, especially some of the high tackles that I thought were ducks.

There are so many umpiring mistakes per game that I think it would be taking away from the Crows (who were the better side) to say we were robbed etc. due to a couple of late calls. I'd be lying though if I didn't say it was frustrating to watch and speaks to the consistency of umpiring atm.

 

[dean33]

9

Uh oh

 

[thetank]

Really, really strange decision making by Melbourne in the final 30 seconds of the game.

You are 10 meters out from your goal, and down by a point. A rushed behind ties the game. I was very surprised that Max Gawn didn't just punch the ball through the goals from either the throw in, or the ball up.

Gawn has a low football IQ. Quite clear from his inability to win a higher hitout to advantage percentage than he does.

The punch over the line is the obvious play, and then heavily defend against the kickout.

Trying to goal in such a congested forwardline is folly. Better to guarantee at least 2 points (with still a chance for the win) than roll the dice on a 10-20% chance for 4 points.

 

[ok.crows]

Missing an obvious HTB 30 seconds after pinging another player for HTB is where we have a serious problem.

So why is this a serious problem when having a goal review after an appeal for "touched" clearly showed the ball was indeed touched yet the goal was still given not a serious problem?

What bout the serious problem of the Melbourne players ducking the whole game and getting rewarded with free kicks for doing so?

Why is one problem more serious than others? Is it just because it occurred in the last few seconds of the game and Melbourne supporters are bitching about it?

 

[WetCrow1991]

Numbers say otherwise, figured it was fair most of the game minus the last couple mins. Plenty of soft deliberate calls in favour of the crows

The only numbers that matter are 96-95. Free kick counts aren't an indicator of umpiring quality.

 

[CrowFan77]

I would think the Melbourne forwards are smart enough to know there's 30secs left and would get rolling quick enough to kick around the body, would be 95%+ to at least score a behind

Do they all time the game while they are playing? That's impressive.

 

[adey115]

As a neutral. The Ump decided he wanted to get out of the ground alive, so he lost the pea out of his whistle twice in the last sixty seconds.

The AFL hierarchy have utterly butchered the interpretation on the Holding the ball decision. I really don’t think it’s that hard to adjudicate. Yet we seem to have come up with an interpretation that is the least sensible to go with at the moment.

Last nights game Lions Vs Tigers, on two occasions players were in the process of being tackled, yet kicked it forward by 40 meters to their teams advantage. On both occasions the tackle effected the players ability to kick the ball straight. Yet when the ball went out of bounds, it was “insufficient attempt to keep the ball in play” and a free paid.

Compare those circumstances to what happened with 30 seconds to go. Less physical pressure at the time. A possession that gained no actual forward position for his team. Absolutely not wanting to give away a point. Handball. And in the umpires mind, it wasn’t an “insufficient attempt to keep the ball in play”. What, because he didn’t kick it?

Bizarre. The Ump needs to ask himself if he would have paid it if he kicked it that way. Or if he’d kicked it 20 meters forward and out of bounds. It was actually more than an insufficient attempt to keep the ball in play. It was the old school interpretation of deliberate.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

What does a 23-24 free kick count have to do with umpires throwing the whistle away in the final minute and not penalising the Crows for two blatant infringements?

1. the non-HTB decision against Keays which led directly to Walker's go-ahead goal from the next bit of play.
2. the non-Deliberate decision against Murray which prevented Melbourne from taking the potential game-winning shot from 15m out.

If that happened to Richmond, you would throw your television across the room.

Anyone who claims that umpires don't decide the outcome of football matches needs to watch a replay of today's game and concentrate on what occurred in the final minute. They literally decided the game with two incorrect 'play on' calls.

incorrect understanding of the Law of Large Numbers as applied to probabilistic events.

A large number of 50-50 decisions needed to be made by the umps throughout the game. Each one of them influenced the outcome. If they were made without bias, one would expect a 50-50 freekick count as the number of decisions become large.

That's what we got, 23-24 freekicks by the end.

Could not ask for a less biased umpiring job.

 

[CrowFan77]

Backing up my opinion that Spargo touched the ball before it went out:
Jackson - who was clearly unsighted - was the only Melbourne player who appeared for the free.
Obviously, the other 5 or 6 in camera view knew that Spargo touched it last.

 

[WetCrow1991]

Murray's handball wasn't deliberate because it was impacted by the bump/tackle of the Melbourne opponent.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

The only numbers that matter are 96-95. Free kick counts aren't an indicator of umpiring quality.

I dunno, I'd say 9-1 matters too

 

[CrowFan77]

Backing up my opinion that Spargo touched the ball before it went out:
Jackson - who was clearly unsighted - was the only Melbourne player who appeared for the free.
Obviously, the other 5 or 6 in camera view knew that Spargo touched it last.

*appealled*

 

[JHF1870]

So why is this a serious problem when having a goal review after an appeal for "touched" clearly showed the ball was indeed touched yet the goal was still given not a serious problem?

What bout the serious problem of the Melbourne players ducking the whole game and getting rewarded with free kicks for doing so?

Why is one problem more serious than others? Is it just because it occurred in the last few seconds of the game and Melbourne supporters are bitching about it?

Ducking is still an issue. Player last week slipped up and got a high tackle.
I'd be happy to leave touched up to the field umpires

Firstly the AFL has completely ****ed this up.

Here's what they should have done:

"We don't have adequate technology to utilize for touched balls during play, and we don't wish to slow the game down. The technology doesn't provide high quality definition to definitively make decisions in a timely fashion" SO............

The AFL either:

Invest in much better technology. Spend the money and get great results, OR,

Allow decisions to be made by field umpires and accept it as part of our game. 50/50 calls.

Instead, the AFL being half arsed like they always are do neither and continue to persist in using inadequate technology.

 

[thedank]

Do they all time the game while they are playing? That's impressive.

Message would've got out, I reckon the bench would've held up a sign and the kicker would've been screaming to know how much time was left, it was 30 seconds or so not 5. Enjoy the win

 

[WetCrow1991]

I dunno, I'd say 9-1 matters too

1st and 15th matter more, the respective positions of the teams prior to the game. Sad for Melbourne to lose like that to a rebuilding side. Melbourne are downhill skiers who can't get it done when it counts.

 

[Back One Out]

As a neutral. The Ump decided he wanted to get out of the ground alive, so he lost the pea out of his whistle twice in the last sixty seconds.

Yep

The AFL hierarchy have utterly butchered the interpretation on the Holding the ball decision. I really don’t think it’s that hard to adjudicate. Yet we seem to have come up with an interpretation that is the least sensible to go with at the moment.

I would love for one of the panel shows to show a replay of the Keays non-HTB decision side-by-side with the HTB decision awarded to Carlton's Liam Jones against Jacob Koschitzke in the 4th quarter of today's game at the MCG. (Kosi and Jones sprinted 40m onto a loose ball inside fifty... Kosi took possession & was taken to ground almost instantaneously and spilled the ball.)

It's just incredible the amount of leeway which some players get and how harshly some others are penalised depending on whether they are isolated from everyone else, or have a pack of players around them.

 

[ok.crows]

Backing up my opinion that Spargo touched the ball before it went out:
Jackson - who was clearly unsighted - was the only Melbourne player who appeared for the free.
Obviously, the other 5 or 6 in camera view knew that Spargo touched it last.

Last two minutes video on the AFL website, time mark 2:57 into the video, the ball that went out over the boundary line came off Spargo not Murray. Spargo goes to spoil Murray's handball and gets a fist to the ball and the ball goes out. Throw in ... I don't think Spargo meant to put the ball out deliberately.

 

[WetCrow1991]

There were 2 clear htb non calls in the Crows forward 50 earlier in the game, at least Keays disposed of the ball correctly unlike the Melbourne players. That's how the game goes, you focus on the one or two things near the end as if they any more important than the umpiring earlier.

Hell, the two incidents in the last 40 seconds were as much free kicks as Langdon's goal was touched.

 

[Sidthehat]

I still think Spargo touched the ball last, but even if he hadn't there were less than 30s seconds left, so either:
- the kicker would have been kicking from in line with the goals and wouldn't have been allowed to play on, or
- the kicker would have played on and the siren would have sounded before they kicked it.
Either way, the Crows would still win the game at least 9 times out of 10.

It doesnt look like though is possible from that angle, but the way he didnt appeal for the free made me think he might have done.

 

[Sidthehat]

Yep

I would love for one of the panel shows to show a replay of the Keays non-HTB decision side-by-side with the HTB decision awarded to Liam Jones against Koschitzke in the 4th quarter of today's game at the MCG. (Kozzy and Jones sprinted 40m onto a loose ball inside fifty and Kozzy took possession & was taken to ground almost instantaneously.)

It's just incredible the amount of leeway which some players get and how harshly some others are penalised depending on whether they are isolated from everyone else, or have a pack of players around them.

Think the Keays non-call was consistent with the way it was not paid throughout the game.