Game Day Port IDDQDelaide vs Pwnedthorn

[Steve Dore]

Not sure if this has been raised but was this game televised in China? Im guessing that since 40,000 footy loving people at the ground had no idea what the hell was going on regarding the umpiring, how could people new to the game in China possibly understand what was going on?

I made the comment last night that if the people watching in China are trying to understand the rules they have no hope as the work experience umpires last night didn't even understand the rules.

 

[Magus]

What was that free against Neade
on Hodge all about? Hodge rushed into him, made front on contact and Neade got pinged for...?

 

[Alyx]

What was that free against Neade
on Hodge all about? Hodge rushed into him, made front on contact and Neade got pinged for...?

"Holding".

 

[Pappagallo]

What was that free against Neade
on Hodge all about? Hodge rushed into him, made front on contact and Neade got pinged for...?

It was called holding the man, but seriously who cares what label they put on it.

The officiating was atrocious last night. Seriously ever umpire needs to be told to go out there and pretend that they're officiating the Grand Final every week. Put the f@#king whistle away unless it's a clear infringement and just let the play happen. Don't be the f@#kin play!

58 free kicks. Joke.

 

[_VXV]

I made the comment last night that if the people watching in China are trying to understand the rules they have no hope as the work experience umpires last night didn't even understand the rules.

This has been the trickiest thing I've found when trying to explain our game to people from other countries. Normally it's with people who have a background in round ball where judgements are largely black & white, not open to umps "interpretation".
Maybe it's time to trial a card system during nab to cut out the remonstrating which imo is being used as a delaying tactic to allow movement.

 

[Far Kern]

Yeah, their coach came out during the week and told the whole footy world that we're soft and have achieved nothing. They definitely respect us.

If you believe that is what Clarko was saying you are wrong. Clarko pre game and Hodge at the end bloody well laid it out. We jump them and make them play poorly. They respect us. But don't let me get in the way of the mass persecution complex that goes on around here.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

If he was in our team he'd be suspended for life for the constant sniping he does.

The Byron Picket rule

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[mic59]

We really need our guys to practice with Steve Summerton. Kicks under pressure that are gobbled up by backs I can live with but we had the ball free too often and bombed it instead of placing it to a player. One in the last quarter I saw, we had the ball in space on the chappell grand with Wingard ahead of the Hawk defender. It was bombed over his head to the taller Hawk defender who had no problem clearing it. Wingard should have been able to get a bag last night, the delivery to him was terrible.
It has been said before but I am sure Hinkley and the players listen to the crowd. When they have the ball and are criss-crossing to a free player they generally look OK. Alright there may be the occasional brain fade like the mark to Redpath when the ball was kicked across goal, but in the greater scheme of things that is no worse than any other goal. But players get the ball, can see there is nothing ahead of them and bomb it there anyway knowing it will come back. One in the third quarter from Krakouer was ridiculous, and was repeated in the last quarter by a player I can't recall. Krakouer took the ball, had plenty of space and nothing in front of him but instead of calling for a lead, waiting for someone to run into space or simply running around till something happened he bombed it forward, it eventually roled out and the Hawks were paid the deliberate out.
The one in the last quarter didn't go out but there was no-one there to pick it up than a Hawks player.

 

[Portology]

This has been the trickiest thing I've found when trying to explain our game to people from other countries. Normally it's with people who have a background in round ball where judgements are largely black & white, not open to umps "interpretation".

A card system for remonstration would take out one bad aspect of AFL player culture.

Great idea for that one instance. And a dangerous precedent for a sport so difficult to umpire in real-time. How about the idea of a "card at the end of the quarter" system though? A near real-time mini MRP driven by in-game video review. Deservedly losing a player for say a quarter or a half depending on the act would tend to change behaviour real quick. Use for the most egregious of acts and leave the 50-50 cases to Monday.

I've really struggled to explain the hugely interpretive aspect of AFL umpiring to non footy folks, typically round ball Europeans.

Forwards/defenders "holding" each other.

HTB obviously.

Ruck contests.

"Incidental" contact in a marking contest vs the stricter policing of "accidental" high contact in a contest at ground level.

Chopping the arms (not a biggie if policed only in extreme cases).

Even the actual mark itself.

Plus the new kid on the block, "deliberate".

They get the idea of week to week more or less flowing games, the ref "putting the whistle away", or not, because they can relate to that. They get individual bad decisions, even game killers like a bad penalty, but the relatively constant stream of little in-game injustices out of poor umpiring decisions surprise them in AFL.

I mean soccer is infamous for the cynicism of some player tactics, (diving, faking) but the refereeing itself is usually consistent, correct or quite obviously wrong (offside, penalties) rather than an interpretive dance.

That way 100,000 hooligans don't need to be debating a decision they can just get on with hooligan-ing.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Magus]

It was called holding the man, but seriously who cares what label they put on it.

The officiating was atrocious last night. Seriously ever umpire needs to be told to go out there and pretend that they're officiating the Grand Final every week. Put the f@#king whistle away unless it's a clear infringement and just let the play happen. Don't be the f@#kin play!

58 free kicks. Joke.

We have rules and "interpretations of rules," whatever that is supposed to mean.

 

[MrMeaner]

I think I've said it before, the problem with rules needing so much interpretation is that it leaves so much for the individual umpires. In that case, having more umpires on the field ends up making the problem worse, not better.

 

[Portology]

We have rules and "interpretations of rules," whatever that is supposed to mean.

any text requires interpretation. now add limited time to decide. both of these things together == "interpretation"

 

[Doctor Feel]

lol how does anyone expect a card system when the umpires can't adjudicate anything right?

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

lol how does anyone expect a card system when the umpires can't adjudicate anything right?

Imagine Stevic, Bald Campaigner & that Jimeoin lookalike twat in charge of carding blokes

 

[Portology]

I think I've said it before, the problem with rules needing so much interpretation is that it leaves so much for the individual umpires. In that case, having more umpires on the field ends up making the problem worse, not better.

normal courts have one judge, but the high court has a full bench complexity of rules matters as much as scope for interpretation.

technocrats and bureaucrats tend to assume that more technocrats/bureaucrats leads to a better outcome. so you want umpires to comment on in-the-moment umpiring issues, not on the purpose of the rules, not on the game itself, and not on how much resource is required to enforce the rules.

going back to 1-2 on field umpires would require simplification of rules, or some sort of out of the box technological force multiplication that changes the possibilities - eg live video review of behind-the-play incidents and of controversial decisions - and post-incident penalties like the end-of-quarter card type idea.

rules like laws can be written better but they're still just symbols on paper, not the thing itself.

If there is any internal monitoring of umpiring 'quality' within the AFL, it is so opaque and one-way as to seem non-existent certainly to fans. I get the impression coaches can provide feedback to the umpiring director but there isn't much going either way. Fear of looking like a whiner, thus generating a prejudice, a focus on things "we can control" rather than externalities, and on the other side a culture of only grudgingly admitting errors. If I was a coach I'd want to know if the umpires regard our team as co-operative or "unsociable" on field. Or if we pull out a particular pattern of FA from actual data, whether that matches the umpires impressions. If I was an umpire I wouldn't want to provide any sort of qualitative assessment ... because its all interpretation, and subject to re-interpretation.

 

[Doctor Feel]

Imagine Stevic, Bald Campaigner & that Jimeoin lookalike twat in charge of carding blokes

"Do you wanna come shoot some pool on Saturday night m8? Nah I can't, i'm gonna be at the Umpiring on Saturday night."

 

[Portology]

lol how does anyone expect a card system when the umpires can't adjudicate anything right?

yes.

so don't let any of the on field umps operate it.

 

[Portology]

"Do you wanna come shoot some pool on Saturday night m8? Nah I can't, i'm gonna be at the Umpiring on Saturday night."

Haha yeah it's like "let's go to the stoning".

 

[PAFC66]

I've just booked some flights for the Kangas game, hopefully we can turn it around and win next week

North should win by 10 goals. **** that shit.

 

[PAFC66]

I think the point was that we did. It's obvious that Hawthorn respect us.

No point getting on the front foot for 5 minutes if you can't do it the whole game

 

[MrMeaner]

normal courts have one judge, but the high court has a full bench complexity of rules matters as much as scope for interpretation.

Don't I know it. Trying to work out a rule from some of the High Court's decisions is ridiculous. Even in a 7-0 case, you can have seven different reasons for a result.

 

[philreich]

The game itself has become ridiculously over-officiated...the game should be free flowing but has become farcical like that 3rd qtr - noone knew what was going on half the time

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

They say the best umpires are the ones that aren't noticed. Well those clowns last night were easy to notice - in fact they dominated the game from start to first finish.

 

[philreich]

Wish ken just gave up on finals
Will be 3 games out of it if the Eagles get up

Effectively 4 games, because West Coast's percentage is so much better than ours.

 

[LFC2010]

North should win by 10 goals. **** that shit.

and probably get a 3-1 free kick count cause we're the most dirtiest team in the AFL by a mile.

 

[stewie griffen]

Have a close look at Mitchell in the marking contest that resulted in Ebert taking no further part in the game.



View attachment 264093

Well well well

I wonder if we'll hear about it

Lol. No chance