Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Football Thread XVI

[ant555]

Or they add harley reid and parish and storm 2024

I am not sure Parish fits their midfield type. They have been very much anti small size midfielders even though they drafted Clarke and got Bruhn. The majority of their mids are 185cm plus with some size.

 

[Call Me Cake]

Puts the shaky Blues win over Geelong into perspective.

 

[jannissary]

I am guessing no comment on consistency. Ie when mcgovern did the same in the same game?

nah nothing really, not shocked though as i can't recall a time when they've ever expected consistency

 

[Nifft]

I am not sure Parish fits their midfield type. They have been very much anti small size midfielders even though they drafted Clarke and got Bruhn. The majority of their mids are 185cm plus with some size.

That means they're unbalanced and need a shorter guy to get the perfect midfield mix.

 

[ant555]

I know the dissent rule can seem a bit petty but the players just have to suck it up and show some discipline. Rugby League only the captain is allowed to question the Ref. Union no one can . The issue is with grass roots footy and the lack of umpires. Sure only 6% surveyed leave the game because of dissent but it is the flow on. Under 14 kids hear the AFL players doing it so they do it and then it evolves into every decision being question by multiple players and then the spectator get involved and it flows on. It is the big picture. There is nothing worse than having clubs needing to provide umpires to have a reserves game or a junior game and these guys having never umpired are worse than the average umpires you get at the lower division level. One year I had a few of the under 18 players I coached take up umpiring juniors on a Sunday morning for a bit of cash and fitness but most gave it away before the end of the season and none umpired again after 1 year. Reason was no money was worth the abuse they got from the odd player , coaches and parents.
So while it may seem heavy handed at the top level and an over reaction it has to be done as a standard needs to be set. Kids and parents need to see it is not okay to continually question umpires who are only there so they can get a game.

 

[Lore]

I know the dissent rule can seem a bit petty but the players just have to suck it up and show some discipline. Rugby League only the captain is allowed to question the Ref. Union no one can . The issue is with grass roots footy and the lack of umpires. Sure only 6% surveyed leave the game because of dissent but it is the flow on. Under 14 kids hear the AFL players doing it so they do it and then it evolves into every decision being question by multiple players and then the spectator get involved and it flows on. It is the big picture. There is nothing worse than having clubs needing to provide umpires to have a reserves game or a junior game and these guys having never umpired are worse than the average umpires you get at the lower division level. One year I had a few of the under 18 players I coached take up umpiring juniors on a Sunday morning for a bit of cash and fitness but most gave it away before the end of the season and none umpired again after 1 year. Reason was no money was worth the abuse they got from the odd player , coaches and parents.
So while it may seem heavy handed at the top level and an over reaction it has to be done as a standard needs to be set. Kids and parents need to see it is not okay to continually question umpires who are only there so they can get a game.

It’s not just the ones that leave umpiring, it’s all the rest that never even think of picking up a whistle. The pay and the lifestyle are probably factors too of course

 

[BrunoV]

Can someone please explain to me how were getting more umpires by allowing players to challenge them as long as a decision hasn't been made?

I can just hear it now. The deafening silence of the ****wits at local footy who make a sport out of hammering umpires. They've nothing left to do.

 

[BomberFan355]

The problem as usual, is the consistency. They paid that one which I thought was pretty minor, then let other worse ones go.

 

[faible]

I can just hear it now. The deafening silence of the *******s at local footy who make a sport out of hammering umpires. They've nothing left to do.

Sounds delightful to me

 

[Pweter]

Basketball players and coaches react and question umpires, the difference being the umpire has the power to award a tech foul if it's deemed over the top, 2 techs and you're out of the game. I don't mind the idea, it keeps the level of dissent at minor levels, being human and shocked/not understanding something is tolerated, and is punished if it goes too far.

The issue we'd have is trying to keep tabs on who has or hasn't received a tech given there's 44 (46) players involved and no active scoring bench to help the umps. I guess the umps are wired so the off field umpire could keep tabs and advise if someone has 1 or 2 techs, the players would certainly know if they have 1 and would pull their head in to ensure a 2nd isn't awarded. They could carry over for a week or 2 to ensure players don't make habits of getting 1 pe week

It won't happen but was a thought bubble. I certainly agree that something needs to be done to ensure the umpiring fraternity maintains numbers to sustain the sport. No umpires, no game, which I think is a concept lost on many.

ant555 in league or union would Coniglio get disciplined for what he did? He wasn't actively questioning the umpire, it was more a reaction to the decision. Not having a crack at your reference, I just don't watch nearly enough of either sport to know.

 

[Beerfish]

The problem as usual, is the consistency. They paid that one which I thought was pretty minor, then let other worse ones go.

As the article I read said, they're people not machines so you're never going to get consistency. The easiest way is for the players to pull their heads in.

 

[dank420_]

I wonder what Collina would think of these soft umpires

 

[boncer34]

I'd have paid a double 50.

 

[ant555]

Basketball players and coaches react and question umpires, the difference being the umpire has the power to award a tech foul if it's deemed over the top, 2 techs and you're out of the game. I don't mind the idea, it keeps the level of dissent at minor levels, being human and shocked/not understanding something is tolerated, and is punished if it goes too far.

The issue we'd have is trying to keep tabs on who has or hasn't received a tech given there's 44 (46) players involved and no active scoring bench to help the umps. I guess the umps are wired so the off field umpire could keep tabs and advise if someone has 1 or 2 techs, the players would certainly know if they have 1 and would pull their head in to ensure a 2nd isn't awarded. They could carry over for a week or 2 to ensure players don't make habits of getting 1 pe week

It won't happen but was a thought bubble. I certainly agree that something needs to be done to ensure the umpiring fraternity maintains numbers to sustain the sport. No umpires, no game, which I think is a concept lost on many.

ant555 in league or union would Coniglio get disciplined for what he did? He wasn't actively questioning the umpire, it was more a reaction to the decision. Not having a crack at your reference, I just don't watch nearly enough of either sport to know.

Penalty for back chat . If it continues the ref will send someone to the sin bin.

 

[boncer34]

Penalty for back chat . If it continues the ref will send someone to the sin bin.

Having just seen that GWS backchat even that would've been let slide by most Union and League refs.

 

[citizen-erased]

Penalty for back chat . If it continues the ref will send someone to the sin bin.

i dont mind the idea of a sin bin for AFL

two fold - i think it lands the penalty square on the player vs. a 50/free against, which i think brings the ump into focus.
And secondly, gets the player off the field to calm down.

 

[boncer34]

i dont mind the idea of a sin bin for AFL

two fold - i think it lands the penalty square on the player vs. a 50/free against, which i think brings the ump into focus.
And secondly, gets the player off the field to calm down.

You don't think a send off would put the umpire into focus?

 

[Maddogm]

i dont mind the idea of a sin bin for AFL

two fold - i think it lands the penalty square on the player vs. a 50/free against, which i think brings the ump into focus.
And secondly, gets the player off the field to calm down.

 

[citizen-erased]

You don't think a send off would put the umpire into focus?

i think it shifts the dial
not majorly, but significant enough over time. Initially fans will focus on the umps, but eventually you'll see it become more a focus on the player.

Mason is a good case in point. After the first he was still boiling over, and gave away the second. He was also well off his game all night. Off the ground and whether that's the team down to 17 for 5m or he's just out of the rotations for 10-15, it both gives the coaches time to calm him down, and penalises the team without necessarily giving away a goal

i will cede though - there needs to be consistency. it can't be up to an umpire to decide if the line has been crossed. That's ridiculous.
Should be fairly clean cut - i'd go so far that players shouldn't be signalling to umps for frees, be it HTB, deliberate/insufficient for OOB, etc.
Look at the ump, yep.
Questions on calls should be left for the club to clarify post-game.

I can't square away that Cogs gets called and Higgins or Gov didn't.
That line needs removing.

 

[brain taylor]

god i love that movie

 

[boncer34]

i think it shifts the dial
not majorly, but significant enough over time. Initially fans will focus on the umps, but eventually you'll see it become more a focus on the player.

Mason is a good case in point. After the first he was still boiling over, and gave away the second. He was also well off his game all night. Off the ground and whether that's the team down to 17 for 5m or he's just out of the rotations for 10-15, it both gives the coaches time to calm him down, and penalises the team without necessarily giving away a goal

i will cede though - there needs to be consistency. it can't be up to an umpire to decide if the line has been crossed. That's ridiculous.
Should be fairly clean cut - i'd go so far that players shouldn't be signalling to umps for frees, be it HTB, deliberate/insufficient for OOB, etc.
Look at the ump, yep.
Questions on calls should be left for the club to clarify post-game.

I can't square away that Cogs gets called and Higgins or Gov didn't.
That line needs removing.

You need to watch more sports with a send off rule.

It'll 100% put the focus on the "precious little maggot" who sent him off.

 

[citizen-erased]

You need to watch more sports with a send off rule.

It'll 100% put the focus on the "precious little maggot" who sent him off.

i watch a lot of football. i think where they get it wrong is its purely on the foul act. they rarely red the player in the ref's face. Buffon losing his shit v. Real in the CL is the last i remember.

i also don't think AFL works with a send off rule. But a sin bin does.
rugby does an alright job of this imo. Limit contact between official and captain/VC. I also think having the decision at the ground put up would also help

Richardson is right - the ultimate goal here is players shouldn't be questioning calls. its what we want to get away from
If the ump wants to tell the player why the call was made, i think they should.
If the team want to ask what happened, let the captain do it when there's a break in play, or the club seeks clarity post-game

It should be as easy as stfu and let the umpires call the game.
But it needs to be black and white on dissent. Something i think is missing from Cogs v Gov in the same game.

 

['51 Bewick]

You need to watch more sports with a send off rule.

It'll 100% put the focus on the "precious little maggot" who sent him off.

You obviously don't watch Ice-Hockey. The cameras follow the player all the way to the sin bin with very little reference to the ref by the commentators.

 

[citizen-erased]

It’s not just the ones that leave umpiring, it’s all the rest that never even think of picking up a whistle. The pay and the lifestyle are probably factors too of course

I dont quite get how a billion dollar industry struggles to find cash for FT AFL umps. If not just the field umps who have the harder 360 degree job.
Boundary and goal i get being part time.

Clearer rules would help
Richardson's "grey area" dissent explanation does not.
I get that some are hard and we seem to adjust to hullabaloo (ducking, feigned handball stand interpretation) etc.
The game needs a good 2-3 years of stable rules without changes imo. Just to get to a baseline where umpires can start from and players can entrench into their mindset.

 

[citizen-erased]

You obviously don't watch Ice-Hockey. The cameras follow the player all the way to the sin bin with very little reference to the ref by the commentators.

Hockey and Rugby are where i come from on this.
Hockey in particular is relevant to AFL in that things are flying all over the place.

Rugby im just impressed with the level of respect for officials that is forced on the players. NFL similarly. Unfortunately we can't have start stop plays (please AFL, we can't!) for an explanation on the field to be broadcast. But the trickle down you want is stop the players questioning, then ideally you have the fans get over calls faster.

i get frustrated. the wife often comments on how many times i make comment on umps.
yet i tend not to stew on them anymore. Lifetime of Swans v Dons games has taught me life is too short to fight battles that can't be won