Review Round 24, 2024 - Brisbane Lions vs. Essendon

[Happy_Neale]

I think you’re talking around each other a bit.

Gadzorks is talking about vitriolic abuse and umpire blaming. You’re talking about criticising umpires.

Umpires shouldn’t be a protected species and should be open to criticism and consequence for poor performance like any other job. But some of the stuff that is screamed at them every week at the footy is way over the line.

I think if we were building footy culture from the ground up again, we might want there to be a bit less of what goes on each weekend in terms of what is directed at the umpires. I don’t know how you fix it now.

Paying them full time seems like a good start to maybe help attract umpires to the profession and raise the standards.

Umpires have traditionally not wanted to be full time

 

[The Flying Belgian]

I find the criticism of umpires just an absolute waste of time. You think a public roasting will improve performance? It's much more likely to introduce more inconsistency into the game. If you want more open criticism, just take a peek at rugby league pressers, where coaches regularly whinge about refereeing decisions think think cost them a game. Has the standard improved in that game over the years? Nope.

They are only human and are prone to the same judgement errors as any of the players. Anyone who thinks it's easy clearly has never given it a try.

How umpires are coached to enforce the rules is a different story.

 

[dlanod]

Again in the Essendon game Joe should also have received a mark and at least one free kick but did not. In his case, again only imho, he has only himself to blame through constant staging, whinging etc. His reputation is well established.

Though an umpire who is biased against making correct calls because of a player's previous actions needs to have a good look at their umpiring credentials IMO.

 

[Bucking Beads]

I can't work out what we've been doing the last 3 weeks. We tried to just job over the line in all 3 games and it cost us a top 4 spot. Be a very interesting watch in the finals.

 

[Gadzorks]

I can't work out what we've been doing the last 3 weeks. We tried to just job over the line in all 3 games and it cost us a top 4 spot. Be a very interesting watch in the finals.

I just posted about this in the coaching thread. We are just fatigued. Week off and we are back.

The effects of sleep extension on the athletic performance of collegiate basketball players - PubMed

Improvements in specific measures of basketball performance after sleep extension indicate that optimal sleep is likely beneficial in reaching peak athletic performance.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[McIvor]

Hard not to get excited by what Logan could do after another pre-season or two; 18 goals in his first season to date is pretty impressive to.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Hard not to get excited by what Logan could do after another pre-season or two; 18 goals in his first season to date is pretty impressive to.

He's missed some easy shots on goal too. He will only improve once he fixes his set shot goal kicking. I'd suggest he watches some footage o Nick Larkey or a similar type to get some improvement.

 

[McIvor]

I find the criticism of umpires just an absolute waste of time. You think a public roasting will improve performance? It's much more likely to introduce more inconsistency into the game. If you want more open criticism, just take a peek at rugby league pressers, where coaches regularly whinge about refereeing decisions think think cost them a game. Has the standard improved in that game over the years? Nope.

They are only human and are prone to the same judgement errors as any of the players. Anyone who thinks it's easy clearly has never given it a try.

How umpires are coached to enforce the rules is a different story.

But many are errors, they are flat out biases.

How can umps continuously not pay blatant frees to Joe and Charlie yet opponents only barely touch Curnow and it’s a free every time?

Or why isn’t Daicos or Pendlebury rarely pinged for HTB yet others in say Rayners or other no name players position cops harsh HTB and you could go on and on. I argue most aren’t errors but rather straight up misplaced biases or perceptions these idiots have that is bordering on cheating or they always go into games with preconceived perceptions about certain players and further, are impacted by crowds because they’re intimidated and wilt under the pressure. Zac Bailey down at Geelong a couple of years ago. That wasn’t an error and again just a weak bias that you don’t even see at local footy.

 

[Section 5]

Frees for and against after the last H & A game.

Lions frees for: 424 ranking 6th behind the Suns 450 rank 1
Lions frees against: 372 ranking the 2nd lowest behind the Bomber with 343.

 

[martinson]

My personal view is that the umpiring for the most part has been fine in the majority of our games this year.

Sure I think Charlie and Joe get mistreated on occasions in comparison to other gun forwards.

The major problems seem to have occurred with the introduction of 4 umpires.

First of all the talent pool has been drained and more importantly it's self evidently impossible to get enough consistency with 4 of them each having their own little predelictions and biases.

I don't know why we need 4 . Seems like overkill. With cameras across the field these days it's hard to get away with anything in the court of public opinion and one of the reasons why 4 was brought in was to pick up behind the play transgressions. How often does that happen in realty ? We've got total of 10 umpires out on the ground at any one time. The goal umpires are being made redundant with the vision used every time there's even a remote chance of doubt,

Just a quibble of mine. The goal umpires are used to create theatre imo but ffs why are they instructed to stand right on the goaline next to the post when the ball is coming in on an angle. Mostly they're just in the way and unlikely to be able to see what happened as effectively as if they stood a couple of metres back. Or took more space to the side and back basically in line with the kick coming in. When they get involved with the play and too close to the action they've just got no idea and look up like startled gazelle's every time.

 

[dlanod]

The major problems seem to have occurred with the introduction of 4 umpires.

First of all the talent pool has been drained and more importantly it's self evidently impossible to get enough consistency with 4 of them each having their own little predelictions and biases.

I don't know why we need 4 . Seems like overkill. With cameras across the field these days it's hard to get away with anything in the court of public opinion and one of the reasons why 4 was brought in was to pick up behind the play transgressions. How often does that happen in realty ? We've got total of 10 umpires out on the ground at any one time. The goal umpires are being made redundant with the vision used every time there's even a remote chance of doubt,

I was an advocate of four because around the contest it was very common for an umpire to be unsighted and either miss calls or straight out guess incorrectly as to whether there was an infringement.

And then they brought it four and now they proceed to set up in such a way that they address none of the above, with three spread out across the ground and the fourth closer to the contest - but given how much the preference is to play down the wings, the fourth is on the same side as the other three.

So I have an opinion as to why we need four and yet also the implementation of it addresses none of my issues.

 

[beatnik]

There's a world of difference been incompetence to bias and on to corruption which is what you're implying.

There is indeed…there’s a strong correlation between incentive and occurrence and we’ve seen a massive growth in AFL betting so the risk has grown proportionately

We’ve seen it in basketball, soccer and cricket…why would the AFL be somehow immune? Plus the AFL take it seriously so it’s reasonable to suggest taking steps (like increasing umpire pay) to reduce the risk

 

[McIvor]

Seeing that Dunkley set shot again, I'm not sure that's mental.

 

[Nathan Barley]

Seeing that Dunkley set shot again, I'm not sure that's mental.

No. Dunkley has a terrible kicking technique, set shot or in play

 

[martinson]

I was an advocate of four because around the contest it was very common for an umpire to be unsighted and either miss calls or straight out guess incorrectly as to whether there was an infringement.

And then they brought it four and now they proceed to set up in such a way that they address none of the above, with three spread out across the ground and the fourth closer to the contest - but given how much the preference is to play down the wings, the fourth is on the same side as the other three.

So I have an opinion as to why we need four and yet also the implementation of it addresses none of my issues.

I can really see your point but with 2 umpires around the contest they're going to disagree often enough when they're both looking at almost the same thing.

To strive for perfection in umpiring is a moonshoot impossibility. In game as random and flatout complicated to umpire as AFL everyone needs to accept that the simpler we make things for the umps the more likely we are to get a fairer and more consistent outcome.

So my personal view is that we have too many umps and then overburden them with interpretations and adjustments to the rule book that seem to confuse rather than illuminate.

But you could talk about it forever ,there's no perfect answer ,perhaps not even a practical one.

 

[dlanod]

I can really see your point but with 2 umpires around the contest they're going to disagree often enough when they're both looking at almost the same thing.

To strive for perfection in umpiring is a moonshoot impossibility. In game as random and flatout complicated to umpire as AFL everyone needs to accept that the simpler we make things for the umps the more likely we are to get a fairer and more consistent outcome.

So my personal view is that we have too many umps and then overburden them with interpretations and adjustments to the rule book that seem to confuse rather than illuminate.

But you could talk about it forever ,there's no perfect answer ,perhaps not even a practical one.

If they disagree it just takes one to blow the whistle.

But that counters the clear directive to "let them play" rather than adhere to existing rules so we just end up with multiple umpires swallowing the whistle.

 

[MSB ROYS]

My concern is that they quickly call for a bounce most times. However, they occasionally they let it run longer in the same circumstances and give a HTB free. To me, this could be open to manipulation - either consciousnessly or more likely unconsciously.

 

[buttermuffs]

My concern is that they quickly call for a bounce most times. However, they occasionally they let it run longer in the same circumstances and give a HTB free. To me, this could be open to manipulation - either consciousnessly or more likely unconsciously.

They call it quickly now when the ball is wrapped up fully in the tackle, to avoid the tackler going a step further and taking them to ground and risking a concussion. It was a good change brought in because tackled players were taking advantage of tacklers not taking them to ground and wrestling their arms free and getting an advantageous disposal out. It happened quite a bit in the game we played against Hawthorn, the week before they adjusted the interpretation.

When they let it run longer it’s because the tackled player often has an opportunity to attempt to get rid of it because the tackle isn’t as good. They could have an arm free with the ball or only be wrapped up around the waist. In this situation they are going to give the tackled player a bit more time to attempt a disposal, because it’s HTB if they don’t.

The Rayner HTB in the last is a good example, he was given extra time because his arm with the ball was free and he didn’t do anything. The Saints player five minutes later was also given time on the boundary because his arm with the ball was free. He made no attempt after a while and the umpire called play on when he dropped it eventually after doing nothing to try and get rid of it. Perfect example of a missed call.

Like you said some situations can look almost identical regardless. Sometimes they are mistakes, and sometimes we miss something the ump picked up. It’s a challenge because the interpretation changed mid season so no doubt when an umpire is a bit fatigued they may revert to old habits.

 

[Dalions]

They call it quickly now when the ball is wrapped up fully in the tackle, to avoid the tackler going a step further and taking them to ground and risking a concussion. It was a good change brought in because tackled players were taking advantage of tacklers not taking them to ground and wrestling their arms free and getting an advantageous disposal out. It happened quite a bit in the game we played against Hawthorn, the week before they adjusted the interpretation.

When they let it run longer it’s because the tackled player often has an opportunity to attempt to get rid of it because the tackle isn’t as good. They could have an arm free with the ball or only be wrapped up around the waist. In this situation they are going to give the tackled player a bit more time to attempt a disposal, because it’s HTB if they don’t.

The Rayner HTB in the last is a good example, he was given extra time because his arm with the ball was free and he didn’t do anything. The Saints player five minutes later was also given time on the boundary because his arm with the ball was free. He made no attempt after a while and the umpire called play on when he dropped it eventually after doing nothing to try and get rid of it. Perfect example of a missed call.

Like you said some situations can look almost identical regardless. Sometimes they are mistakes, and sometimes we miss something the ump picked up. It’s a challenge because the interpretation changed mid season so no doubt when an umpire is a bit fatigued they may revert to old habits.

From where I sit at the Gabba I had a direct line to the umpire behind Rayner and he was basically motioning for a holding the ball call as soon as Rayner got the ball.
I thought it was a terrible call.

 

[McIvor]

From where I sit at the Gabba I had a direct line to the umpire behind Rayner and he was basically motioning for a holding the ball call as soon as Rayner got the ball.
I thought it was a terrible call.

Not to mention a Bombers player was caught about five minutes later and had more time to do something and the ump paid nothing. The Essendon one was more HTB than Rayners.

 

[Elixuh]

The thing that will haunt me from this game is that they forced Joe to be chaired off after the game, against his will #freejoe

 

[dlanod]

The thing that will haunt me from this game is that they forced Joe to be chaired off after the game, against his will #freejoe

View attachment 2092865

Joe was trying to get off the field first, but he kicked in behind.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Update to this: Man Utd now level at 1-1 and but had a goal to take the lead correctly ruled out because a shot that was going in anyway inadvertently hit an offside player on the goal line.View attachment 2090320

Let me guess, after the goal was overturned, all the cameras panned to the player in question. Let's, for argument's sake, call him Joe. Joe grinned a bit sheepishly, absent-mindedly twirled his moustache, stuck his tongue out in mild exasperation, and ambled off to set up for the free kick against.

 

[Tom14]

Let me guess, after the goal was overturned, all the cameras panned to the player in question. Let's, for argument's sake, call him Joe. Joe grinned a bit sheepishly, absent-mindedly twirled his moustache, stuck his tongue out in mild exasperation, and jogged off to set up for the free kick against.

Joe-shua Zirkzee was looking very sheepish, almost as if he wanted to go sit on the fence for a bit.

 

[braddsey]

The thing that will haunt me from this game is that they forced Joe to be chaired off after the game, against his will #freejoe

View attachment 2092865

I got vertigo just watching that.