Lodging a complaint with the AFL

[Dylan12]

Umpires = Terrible, they almost cost West Coast the game against freo.

Yep, that Gaff holding the ball decision with about 90 seconds to go was just wrong. He has 3-4 guys sitting on top of him, both arms outstretched to show the ump he is not in possession and yet still pays holding the ball.

The poor state of umpiring is sytematically destroying the game for me. I am just lost on what is holding the ball decision now. Guys get tackled, drop the ball and no decision is paid yet guys get pinged soon as they take possession, no prior opportunity or chance to dispose of the ball, tackled and get the decision against them, not to mention ball players trying to get the ball off the deck.

And the new interpretation of the advantage rule is just plain wrong...enough said.

 

[luthor]

Umpires = Terrible, they almost cost West Coast the game against freo.

Well they certainly "imposed" themselves on the game, especially in the last frenetic 5 minutes

There were some "interesting" decisions alright and yes, the Coasters probably got the worst of it....especially the "technical" ones that the Umps seem so keen to produce with great drama and theatre....almost like rabbits out of a hat.

Anyway, irrespective of our individual club loyalties, the HTB rule has got completely out of control.

The current "interpretations" are a total and utter farce.

On one hand we have players being pinged because "YOU"VE GOT TO MAKE A GENUINE ATTEMPT!!!!!"...irrespective of whether prior opportunity or ANY opportunity for that matter, actually existed. (ala the Black and Patfull atrocities)

On the other hand, it seems OK to throw,palm, paddle or drop the pill cold as long as you "make a genuine attempt".

As far as I'm concerned this "genuine attempt" rubbish is just code for.....

"Well, we don't give a rat's arse whether you dispose of the ball legally or not....just get rid of it because we want to minimize stoppages"

Sadly, the game is poorer for it because in parts it's starting to resemble Rugby Union ruck and maul rather than Australian Rules Football.

 

[chopperduck]

Advantage rule needs to go and will go. Another example of the afl changing rules for no reason. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Holding the ball needs a serious revamp. I agree with Dylan, it's gone beyond interpretation, it's just flat out confusing. Players going in after the ball need to be given more slack, and those dropping the ball pinged. This won't happen as the afl wants the continuous play, but for gods sake at least crack down on illegal disposal.

 

[Dylan12]

Advantage rule needs to go and will go. Another example of the afl changing rules for no reason. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The other thing with the advantage rule chopper is the umpires complete lack of feel for the game at particular moments. I understand what the AFL were trying to do with allowing the players to make their own call, but what is being lost, irrespective of whether the umpire or player makes the call, is that 'advatage' is actually given to the side who is being rewarded. If after a second or two it is apparent that the rewarded side does not have advantage, bring the ball back as per prior seasons. Common sense has to play a part that when all players clearly stop that it is unfair to play advantage, of course in reason.

The instance where Goose was paid a free for his tackle on Petrie, ball spilled loose, Staker picks it up, dishes off to Hawksley who is pinged all in the space of a split second is clearly NOT advantage.

 

[Chasing the Dream]

Correct me if I'm wrong but that 'idiot" is Umpire Pannell.

Is it just me, or does he remind anyone else of Jimeon???

Pannell's decisions are not that funny though...

Come to think of it, Jimeon's jokes aren't that funny either

 

[Jorgo]

Great vid GG! Sums it up pretty well I feel. Would hate to see how bad the Geelong game looks in a similar manner! Friggin' unbelievable and almost to the point where you have to force yourself to watch footy

Ruining the game.

 

[Crimso]

Well they certainly "imposed" themselves on the game, especially in the last frenetic 5 minutes

There were some "interesting" decisions alright and yes, the Coasters probably got the worst of it....especially the "technical" ones that the Umps seem so keen to produce with great drama and theatre....almost like rabbits out of a hat.

Anyway, irrespective of our individual club loyalties, the HTB rule has got completely out of control.

The current "interpretations" are a total and utter farce.

On one hand we have players being pinged because "YOU"VE GOT TO MAKE A GENUINE ATTEMPT!!!!!"...irrespective of whether prior opportunity or ANY opportunity for that matter, actually existed. (ala the Black and Patfull atrocities)

On the other hand, it seems OK to throw,palm, paddle or drop the pill cold as long as you "make a genuine attempt".

As far as I'm concerned this "genuine attempt" rubbish is just code for.....

"Well, we don't give a rat's arse whether you dispose of the ball legally or not....just get rid of it because we want to minimize stoppages"

Sadly, the game is poorer for it because in parts it's starting to resemble Rugby Union ruck and maul rather than Australian Rules Football.

So if a player makes a "genuine attempt" and the ball is still held i / to him, shouldn't the person actually holding the ball in be the one penalised?

 

[Chasing the Dream]

So if a player makes a "genuine attempt" and the ball is still held i / to him, shouldn't the person actually holding the ball in be the one penalised?

This is a great example of where the AFL, who write the laws, then do not follow them.

I apologise for getting technical and maybe a little long, however, I do unfortuunately have a background in umpiring and get frustrated at the 'interpretations' that are displayed by the umpiring department.

Here is the law surrounding the exact situation that Crimso has brought up.

15.2.6 Football Held to the Body of a Player

The field Umpire shall bounce the football when a Player, in the
act of applying a Correct Tackle, holds the football to the body
of the Player being Tackled or the football is otherwise pinned
to the ground, unless the Player being Tackled has
had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of the football,
in which case Law 15.2.3 (a) shall apply.

To clarify, Law 15.2.3 basically says a free for incorrect disposal should be paid.

So as you can see, there is nothing in the rules that says you need to make a genuine attempt at anything. 15.2.6 does say that is they have had no prior opportunity, a ball up should be called. Simon Black, did not dive on the ball (15.2.5) which would have been fair enough to penalise under the laws as written, he also had no prior opportunity, and the ball was pinned to him. Easy decision - BALL UP.

Further to that, the umpire shuld have blown his whistle, run in grabbed the ball and tossed it in the air as quickly as possible to avoid letting the scrap heap around the ball get even bigger.

On one occassion on Saturday, there was a passage of play where there were three ball ups in a row. Players that were more than 50 metres away gently made their way to the ball and as such the scrap got bigger and bigger until you guessed it.... a cr@p free was paid.

Pretty simple to me, why do they make it so hard???

In 2011, the AFL has prepared a 88 page rules of the game document, however it is what is not in this document that causes us so many headaches. If they umpired the game to what is said in the rules, it would be easy, mistake would always happen due to positioning (don't get me started on this one), but they would be isolated.

 

[whatboutbob]

Nice post CtD.

I also can't fathom how Black was pinged:

15.2.5 diving on top of the football
Where a Player is in possession of the football by reason of
diving on top of or dragging the football underneath their body,
the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player
if they do not immediately knock the football clear or Correctly
Dispose of the football when Correctly Tackled

Black was fairly clearly ridden into the ground by two players, rather than diving on top of it or dragging it underneath his body.

 

[Crimso]

This is a great example of where the AFL, who write the laws, then do not follow them.

I apologise for getting technical and maybe a little long, however, I do unfortuunately have a background in umpiring and get frustrated at the 'interpretations' that are displayed by the umpiring department.

Here is the law surrounding the exact situation that Crimso has brought up.

15.2.6 Football Held to the Body of a Player

The field Umpire shall bounce the football when a Player, in the
act of applying a Correct Tackle, holds the football to the body
of the Player being Tackled or the football is otherwise pinned
to the ground, unless the Player being Tackled has
had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of the football,
in which case Law 15.2.3 (a) shall apply.

To clarify, Law 15.2.3 basically says a free for incorrect disposal should be paid.

So as you can see, there is nothing in the rules that says you need to make a genuine attempt at anything. 15.2.6 does say that is they have had no prior opportunity, a ball up should be called. Simon Black, did not dive on the ball (15.2.5) which would have been fair enough to penalise under the laws as written, he also had no prior opportunity, and the ball was pinned to him. Easy decision - BALL UP.

Further to that, the umpire shuld have blown his whistle, run in grabbed the ball and tossed it in the air as quickly as possible to avoid letting the scrap heap around the ball get even bigger.

On one occassion on Saturday, there was a passage of play where there were three ball ups in a row. Players that were more than 50 metres away gently made their way to the ball and as such the scrap got bigger and bigger until you guessed it.... a cr@p free was paid.

Pretty simple to me, why do they make it so hard???

In 2011, the AFL has prepared a 88 page rules of the game document, however it is what is not in this document that causes us so many headaches. If they umpired the game to what is said in the rules, it would be easy, mistake would always happen due to positioning (don't get me started on this one), but they would be isolated.

Best explanation I've seen yet, but.....this will give me, and others, even more reason to get even more shity with some of these "decisions" that are paid as a free when it should be a ball up to restart play!

 

[luthor]

So as you can see, there is nothing in the rules that says you need to make a genuine attempt at anything. 15.2.6 does say that is they have had no prior opportunity, a ball up should be called.

Which illustrates the point I was making when I brought up this "genuine attempt" caper.

What gives the umpires (or maybe more to the point, the Umpiring Department) the right to add their own "interpretations" to the written rules of the game???

I long for a situation where a player gets pinged for "not making a genuine attempt" and the captain of his team pulls a rule book out of the back pocket of his shorts(with Rule 15.2.6 marked with highlighter pen) and demands the ump show him where it says anything about "genuine attempts"

OK, that will never happen.................. but isn't it time the umps were called out on this bullshit

 

[Jorgo]

SuperFooty/Channel 7 Fan Survey

Fans gave AFL umpires a stamp of approval.

Asked to rate the standard of umpiring, 42.8 per cent described it as good or excellent - up 10 per cent on last year - while only 15.2 per cent said it was poor, down from 19.8 per cent.

Disgusted

 

[thedaz47]

To diverge momentarily, I was penalised on the weekend because my opponent took a bounce while being tackled and 'didn't have the ball'. Can Vossy enquire into the standard of umpiring here in AFL Capricornia for me too?

 

[Grimreepah]

If the Black and Patfull incidents are free kicks, then they may as well make it that any time you get tackled with the ball it's a penalty. At least it would be consistent.

 

[blynd_freddie]

Which illustrates the point I was making when I brought up this "genuine attempt" caper.

What gives the umpires (or maybe more to the point, the Umpiring Department) the right to add their own "interpretations" to the written rules of the game???

I long for a situation where a player gets pinged for "not making a genuine attempt" and the captain of his team pulls a rule book out of the back pocket of his shorts(with Rule 15.2.6 marked with highlighter pen) and demands the ump show him where it says anything about "genuine attempts"

OK, that will never happen.................. but isn't it time the umps were called out on this bullshit

I’m with you brother…

Out with the ‘John 3:16’ and in with the ‘Genuine Attempt? 15.2.6’ signs

 

[Mayestro]

On OWAAT last night Luke Darcy mentioned he'd contacted the Geish about the Black decision, who'd indicated that it was an incorrect call. No mention of the Patfull decision.

They did however have vision of Harvey's throw of the ball whilst being tackled, with a number of other similar examples, where players are almost throwing the ball away when tackled to take advantage of the 'knocked out in the tackle' rule.

 

[jackess]

Gieschan says the Black and Patfull HTB decisions were wrong on What's Your Decision. Would've liked for him to say that the umps completely ruined the match.

Also he said the advantage decision was wrong but no surprise there.

 

[Mooch]

Gieschan says the Black and Patfull HTB decisions were wrong on What's Your Decision. Would've liked for him to say that the umps completely ruined the match.

Also he said the advantage decision was wrong but no surprise there.

Nice to get some vindication that we actually do understand the game and those North idiots who suggested Black was caught fair and square know nothing

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/119515/default.aspx

Doesn't give us any points on the board but it is good to hear nonetheless.

 

[Last of the Roys]

Nice to get some vindication that we actually do understand the game and those North idiots who suggested Black was caught fair and square know nothing

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/119515/default.aspx

Doesn't give us any points on the board but it is good to hear nonetheless.

Yeah it was nice to hear the Giesch isn't completely stupid.

 

[Jorgo]

Yeah it was nice to hear the Giesch isn't completely corrupt.

efa

 

[Quigley]

Yeah it was nice to hear the Giesch isn't completely stupid.

I think you are probably reading too much into one small statement. I am not willing to concede this just yet. We have too much evidence to the contrary from previous comments throughout the year.

 

[whatboutbob]

I think you are probably reading too much into one small statement. I am not willing to concede this just yet. We have too much evidence to the contrary from previous comments throughout the year.

Yep. Actions speak louder than words.

Pannell clearly doesn't understand the HTB 'interpretation'. Let's see if the Giesch gives him another run at the Lions next week to see if he's got things straight yet.

 

[Tairy Greene]

Oh lord, I must be a glutton for punishment as I went to the Game Analyser on the AFL website to look at the controversial decisions, and here I am jumping around losing my nut at the Bastinac advantage decision. Makes me laugh now at how bad a call it was.

 

[paulige]

Oh lord, I must be a glutton for punishment as I went to the Game Analyser on the AFL website to look at the controversial decisions, and here I am jumping around losing my nut at the Bastinac advantage decision. Makes me laugh now at how bad a call it was.

After the armchair ride they had all day, after several gifted-goals, it is really amazing that when Redden cops one over the shoulder about a minute in on that link, they're all up in arms about it.

 

[Tairy Greene]

After the armchair ride they had all day, after several gifted-goals, it is really amazing that when Redden cops one over the shoulder about a minute in on that link, they're all up in arms about it.

Yeah, it was funny listening to the howls of protest from the crowd on that one.