Roast And with four umpires.

[anchor man]

Sadly, Kane is no better than any of the BOYS that have run the game.
Her ever present supercilious smug smirk is hideaous..Her eyes tell me she is lying before she opens her mouth.She believes what she is saying as much as I believe in Santa.
I wat almost all games ,and see no reason or proof that four umpires is any better than three.I see umpires causing havoc as a player makes a change of direction only to see a Green m.... t in the way.Then having to change his maind as to where he is going.
I see umpires wait to blow their whistle. Wait until the other makes a decision.One occassion on the weekend, and umpire 50 metres away paid a 50 metre penalty, the officiating umpire had to over rule and stop the 50 being paid.
I have watched a lot of football over my years. Watched country foot being umpired, watched second tier competitions ,but I have to say that never have I see a worse standard of umpiring than what I watch every week now in the AFL.
A rule is a rule this week, next week it is a pie of sheeit sitting on the old rules pile.
Hand in the back, some times paid, chopping arms, sometimes paid, arma around a player, only paid when it is a forward getting looked after.
Rucks mauling and wrestling like two gorillas. Holding arms, scragging, arms wrapped around each other, See Forward mention.
Then we have the stupid, idiotic warning for the breaking of the 6/6./6 rule.PAY A BLOODY FREE KICK. They now that they will get awy with it, every time. They break the rule... PAY A BLOODY FREE FREAKING KICK.
Sadly, I see no way out of the major problem we have with the game.Three umpires will decrease the numbers on the ground,give the players more room, but sadly will not solve the bad decisions.
And speaking of bad decisions, where area the previous abundance of competent female umpires we had in the previous years!!
Plenty more of where that came from, but enough for now, I am puffed out.
FOUR FREAKING UMPIRES GRRRRRRRRRRR gimmee a brak.

 

[FreoGirl]

Sadly, Kane is no better than any of the BOYS that have run the game.
Her ever present supercilious smug smirk is hideaous..Her eyes tell me she is lying before she opens her mouth.She believes what she is saying as much as I believe in Santa.
I wat almost all games ,and see no reason or proof that four umpires is any better than three.I see umpires causing havoc as a player makes a change of direction only to see a Green m.... t in the way.Then having to change his maind as to where he is going.
I see umpires wait to blow their whistle. Wait until the other makes a decision.One occassion on the weekend, and umpire 50 metres away paid a 50 metre penalty, the officiating umpire had to over rule and stop the 50 being paid.
I have watched a lot of football over my years. Watched country foot being umpired, watched second tier competitions ,but I have to say that never have I see a worse standard of umpiring than what I watch every week now in the AFL.
A rule is a rule this week, next week it is a pie of sheeit sitting on the old rules pile.
Hand in the back, some times paid, chopping arms, sometimes paid, arma around a player, only paid when it is a forward getting looked after.
Rucks mauling and wrestling like two gorillas. Holding arms, scragging, arms wrapped around each other, See Forward mention.
Then we have the stupid, idiotic warning for the breaking of the 6/6./6 rule.PAY A BLOODY FREE KICK. They now that they will get awy with it, every time. They break the rule... PAY A BLOODY FREE FREAKING KICK.
Sadly, I see no way out of the major problem we have with the game.Three umpires will decrease the numbers on the ground,give the players more room, but sadly will not solve the bad decisions.
And speaking of bad decisions, where area the previous abundance of competent female umpires we had in the previous years!!
Plenty more of where that came from, but enough for now, I am puffed out.
FOUR FREAKING UMPIRES GRRRRRRRRRRR gimmee a brak.

I'm not a fan - I want to be, but she's not very good

 

[anchor man]

I'm not a fan - I want to be, but she's not very good

You got that right.

 

[FreoGirl]

You got that right.

As a female, I almost feel obligated to the sister hood to support female commentators, umpires, presidents, CEOs etc, but some also let the rest of us down. They aren't good roles models for our girls. When I was studying journalism at uni, one of the lecturers asked me if I would be interested in sports journalism. My response, "Who would want to be like Caroline Wilson?!?"

 

[Midnite65]

what a disgraceful year where so many results have been determined by poor umpiring decisions in the final moments

AFL concedes umpire error late in Roos v Magpies thriller

The AFL has given its verdict on the umpiring in Collingwood's narrow win over North Melbourne

www.afl.com.au

That is the worst explanation that she could have given, basically the Pies players assumed the call was going to be play on and thus the 50 wasn't paid as it was an attempt for the umpire to sort out all the confusion to reset the mark. It should be basically 50 as soon as they go about 10 metres over the mark. Kane needs to fix the game instead of sitting on glorified AA (All Australian) meetings.

 

[anchor man]

As a female, I almost feel obligated to the sister hood to support female commentators, umpires, presidents, CEOs etc, but some also let the rest of us down. They aren't good roles models for our girls. When I was studying journalism at uni, one of the lecturers asked me if I would be interested in sports journalism. My response, "Who would want to be like Caroline Wilson?!?"

Great retort.

 

[Retzlaff]

In order to improve governance, the AFL has announced that four Laura Kanes have been appointed to the leadership team

 

[Achin joints]

Margettes just on the radio saying that the umpires not paying a 50 against the pies was the right decision because they were going with the feel of the game.What the fukkk does that mean? What an absolute load of dog shitt ,either its a free or it bloody isnt.Umpires deciding that they are there to do anything other than officiate the game fairly should be sacked.There opinions on the feel of a game should should not change the bloody rules .They are there to officiate and that should be it ,their personalities and opinions should never be a factor

 

[Raz]

Sadly many fans scream for less free kicks one week and let the players sort it out . Next week the fans scream for more free kicks .

Personally I think we need to remove all “ interpretation “ from the games and just blow the whistle more often , it will slow the game down and make it less enjoyable for non afl people to enjoy . Too much stop and starting if not good to watch on TV which is where the majority of funds come from

But as people notice , nothing more frustrating than “interpretation” changing not only week to week but during same game with different umpires and even the same umpire .

 

[The Feeder Club]

Margettes just on the radio saying that the umpires not paying a 50 against the pies was the right decision because they were going with the feel of the game.What the fukkk does that mean? What an absolute load of dog shitt ,either its a free or it bloody isnt.Umpires deciding that they are there to do anything other than officiate the game fairly should be sacked.There opinions on the feel of a game should should not change the bloody rules .They are there to officiate and that should be it ,their personalities and opinions should never be a factor

I think he's done us all a big favour by being that honest, in fact I would go as far as saying this is one of the most important posts I have read if you are relaying what he said accurately.

What he's basically saying is what many have suspected for a long time, umpiring is there to support the narrative/fairytale of the day. It's not about the rules it's about the feel. Watching GWS get murdered by umpiring in the last few minutes of the prelim last year makes a lot more sense knowing this, and having these suspicions confirmed.

We're watching the ****ing WWF.

 

[anchor man]

Sadly many fans scream for less free kicks one week and let the players sort it out . Next week the fans scream for more free kicks .

Personally I think we need to remove all “ interpretation “ from the games and just blow the whistle more often , it will slow the game down and make it less enjoyable for non afl people to enjoy . Too much stop and starting if not good to watch on TV which is where the majority of funds come from

But as people notice , nothing more frustrating than “interpretation” changing not only week to week but during same game with different umpires and even the same umpire .

As you say, interpretation is huge. But when then, again, as you say changes from game to game, umpire to umpire, and including the difference by one umpire between first and last quarter, first minute, last minute, interpretation is a monster.
But even when they start to pay, 60/70 frees a game watch the players respond. They are far smarter than the footy public think they are.
Maybe too simplistic, but removing one umpire stops congestion, stops umpires being invloved in thd game by running pattens the players do.
Watch games, and watch how many times they are in the way when switches happen. Far too many times.

 

[Midnite65]

Margettes just on the radio saying that the umpires not paying a 50 against the pies was the right decision because they were going with the feel of the game.What the fukkk does that mean? What an absolute load of dog shitt ,either its a free or it bloody isnt.Umpires deciding that they are there to do anything other than officiate the game fairly should be sacked.There opinions on the feel of a game should should not change the bloody rules .They are there to officiate and that should be it ,their personalities and opinions should never be a factor

The feel of the game is making sure the Pies win. Margetts couldn't get it right when he umpired so why would he start now. Since when can you run over the mark by 10 metres because you are assuming they will play on. The whole stand rule is comical, only some umpires call it and so you now have creeping into the game this painful habit teams like the Pies are doing which is constantly shuffling backwards and never standing. Either have the stand rule all the time or get rid of it. And while I'm on it, why did they bring in the line in the centre for the rucks? I always thought it was for each ruckman to get an even run up and chance to compete for the ball but now you get players like Grundy who stand on the line and then go into the other ruckman to stop them jumping and guess what, play on.

 

[The Feeder Club]

The feel of the game is making sure the Pies win. Margetts couldn't get it right when he umpired so why would he start now. Since when can you run over the mark by 10 metres because you are assuming they will play on. The whole stand rule is comical, only some umpires call it and so you now have creeping into the game this painful habit teams like the Pies are doing which is constantly shuffling backwards and never standing. Either have the stand rule all the time or get rid of it. And while I'm on it, why did they bring in the line in the centre for the rucks? I always thought it was for each ruckman to get an even run up and chance to compete for the ball but now you get players like Grundy who stand on the line and then go into the other ruckman to stop them jumping and guess what, play on.

You're allowed to cross the line after the ball is bounced

 

[FreoMatt]

Margettes just on the radio saying that the umpires not paying a 50 against the pies was the right decision because they were going with the feel of the game.What the fukkk does that mean? What an absolute load of dog shitt ,either its a free or it bloody isnt.Umpires deciding that they are there to do anything other than officiate the game fairly should be sacked.There opinions on the feel of a game should should not change the bloody rules .They are there to officiate and that should be it ,their personalities and opinions should never be a factor

It’s like commentators congratulating the umpires for “putting away the whistle” in a close game in the last 5 minutes, almost acknowledging the umpires sensed the moment. I know they really mean that its good a poor umpiring decision didn’t decide the game, but they should just say “the umpires just paid what they saw”


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Nodgey]

How many times to we see players coming off under the blood rule yet there’s no free for high contact?!? But heaven forbid you touch someone on the shoulder after they’ve lowered their knees and leant into the tackler. It’s a bloody lottery these days.

And don’t get me started on tacklers lying straight on the back of the poor bastard at the bottom of the pack.

 

[Fat Nyfe]

Laura Kane is way out of her depth, no feel for the game, a terrible appointment.

But the 4 umpires thing is yet another example of the AFL creating unintended consequences by trying to fix something. It's the analogy of trying to plug holes in a boat by unplugging other holes so the boat sinks anyway. More umpires = more whistles, they blow the whistle to justify their jobs, but you're diluting the umpire 'talent' if you will, the fourth umpire would be the last picked on their umpiring ability, that's another 9 umpires across all games who aren't making the best decisions. And you could have 20 umps on the pitch, it still won't give them the talent or bravery to make the correct calls or non-calls in the last minute of a tense game, which is why controversial umpiring finishes have been so diabolically high this year.

And whatever happens Kane will put spin it as fine because she doesn't have a clue. AFL house is as incompetent as it ever has been right now.

 

[DocT]

Margettes just on the radio saying that the umpires not paying a 50 against the pies was the right decision because they were going with the feel of the game.What the fukkk does that mean? What an absolute load of dog shitt ,either its a free or it bloody isnt.Umpires deciding that they are there to do anything other than officiate the game fairly should be sacked.There opinions on the feel of a game should should not change the bloody rules .They are there to officiate and that should be it ,their personalities and opinions should never be a factor

What the fukkk does that mean?
I didn't hear Margettes but I'll have a crack at answering your question.
What I saw was a mark taken and then three things happen continuously/simultaneously: 1. the marker play on, 2. the umpire blow the whistle and 3. two players run on over the mark in pursuit. That all happened in less than 0.5 of a second. The player played on because time was precious and then rapidly changed his mind because he'd made a bad choice. In retrospect the uimpire erred because he didn't immediately call 'play-on', but it was a tough situation in fairness to the ump. If they had tried to fix things by giving a 50m it would have made everything much worse IMO.

 

[DocT]

Don't all these very strong, clear, divergent opinions just prove how difficult our game is to umpire?

 

[Midnite65]

You're allowed to cross the line after the ball is bounced

Why have a line then

 

[The Feeder Club]

Why have a line then

I assume to keep them apart before the bounce

 

[south beach]

Margettes just on the radio saying that the umpires not paying a 50 against the pies was the right decision because they were going with the feel of the game.What the fukkk does that mean? What an absolute load of dog shitt ,either its a free or it bloody isnt.Umpires deciding that they are there to do anything other than officiate the game fairly should be sacked.There opinions on the feel of a game should should not change the bloody rules .They are there to officiate and that should be it ,their personalities and opinions should never be a factor

No wonder maggots was such a dud made up his own rules

 

[Fat Nyfe]

Margettes just on the radio saying that the umpires not paying a 50 against the pies was the right decision because they were going with the feel of the game.What the fukkk does that mean? What an absolute load of dog shitt ,either its a free or it bloody isnt.Umpires deciding that they are there to do anything other than officiate the game fairly should be sacked.There opinions on the feel of a game should should not change the bloody rules .They are there to officiate and that should be it ,their personalities and opinions should never be a factor

Ah, explains why he rode with the Eagles at their home games for so long and in derbies. Didn't want to upset the vibe.

 

[AstonSouffle]

I think he's done us all a big favour by being that honest, in fact I would go as far as saying this is one of the most important posts I have read if you are relaying what he said accurately.

What he's basically saying is what many have suspected for a long time, umpiring is there to support the narrative/fairytale of the day. It's not about the rules it's about the feel. Watching GWS get murdered by umpiring in the last few minutes of the prelim last year makes a lot more sense knowing this, and having these suspicions confirmed.

We're watching the ****ing WWF.

What he's essentially said translated is that he wouldn't want to be an umpire who inserts themselves into the game and call technical free kick to gift the other team a win - from that perspective I can understand, but end of the day it was quite a clear 50 missed.

My personal favourite I'm seen is a Year 11 Juniors game between Melville and I forgot who, a team was 5 points up, where one player dragged the ball in and was pinged for holding the ball, and then the siren went... the kicks goes through and they lose by a point. Lots of boos and players staring down umpire after with bubbling aggression as they all walk back to the rooms. So I caught myself thinking multiple times... did the umpire really need to pay that free kick no matter how correct it was? Now obviously the answer is yes because it was correct, but still didn't stop me thinking that it felt over the top in the context of the game, so do understand what he's saying to a point.

But end of the day umpires need to train themselves to not get swept up in the emotion and pressure of the game, i.e. if the game is tight... don't ball it up any quicker than you already were, don't stop calling what you called in the 1st in the last etc. and got to say they're horrendously bad at this. I still think the way to go is more umpires but they're all fat retired chill dudes, so the bar becomes much lower fitness wise and we focus more on the mental aspect that's required from them.

 

[The Feeder Club]

What he's essentially said translated is that he wouldn't want to be an umpire who inserts themselves into the game and call technical free kick to gift the other team a win - from that perspective I can understand, but end of the day it was quite a clear 50 missed.

My personal favourite I'm seen is a Year 11 Juniors game between Melville and I forgot who, a team was 5 points up, where one player dragged the ball in and was pinged for holding the ball, and then the siren went... the kicks goes through and they lose by a point. Lots of boos and players staring down umpire after with bubbling aggression as they all walk back to the rooms. So I caught myself thinking multiple times... did the umpire really need to pay that free kick no matter how correct it was? Now obviously the answer is yes because it was correct, but still didn't stop me thinking that it felt over the top in the context of the game, so do understand what he's saying to a point.

But end of the day umpires need to train themselves to not get swept up in the emotion and pressure of the game, i.e. if the game is tight... don't ball it up any quicker than you already were, don't stop calling what you called in the 1st in the last etc. and got to say they're horrendously bad at this. I still think the way to go is more umpires but they're all fat retired chill dudes, so the bar becomes much lower fitness wise and we focus more on the mental aspect that's required from them.

An umpire deciding not to pay a free kick that's clearly there is still inserting themselves into the game I think.

I agree with everything you're saying here except needing more umpires. I think we just need umpires that are already out there to pay more free kicks. Umpire to the rules. It's umpiring to the feel that is causing most people angst

 

[anchor man]

An umpire deciding not to pay a free kick that's clearly there is still inserting themselves into the game I think.

I agree with everything you're saying here except needing more umpires. I think we just need umpires that are already out there to pay more free kicks. Umpire to the rules. It's umpiring to the feel that is causing most people angst

Take one out, please, please please, do not add another.
Back to three, make more CORRECT decions. Don't leave it to the umpire 50 metres away. See it, call it.
Four umpires has led to laziness and loss of concentration.
Four umpires are clogging up, and have always, tbe areas where the play is going to happen. Watch how many times a game a player with the ball goes to switch, only to have an umpire be in his direct line of where he want to go.