Autopsy Round 5, 2022: Hawks skin the Cats

[Brishawk]

The decisions made. Pretty much no ump ever looks up at the big screen, they just get on with the game. And they definitely can’t change any decision based on a tv replay.

Players also need to get on with it. Just focus on winning the ball at the next play. Sometimes the umps decision goes against us, sometimes it goes our way. It’s just the way AFL is.

The only thing the players should focus on is what they can control.

Certain players or teams might get lucky with the umps. But I can’t see what gesturing to an umpire is going to do about it. Apart from give up a 50.

The main reason players would want to signal to the umpire that he got it wrong is to influence the next decision. You want the umpire thinking about flopping when Hawkins is next in a marking contest so that they actually see it. Shane Warne used to train umpires to see what he wanted them to see. ‘Ooh had that stayed a little lower he was out’ etc. how many times does a player who ducked and won a controversial free kick not gotten one the next time? Umpires realise after they missed one and look for the duck next time.

 

[Yardie]

The main reason players would want to signal to the umpire that he got it wrong is to influence the next decision. You want the umpire thinking about flopping when Hawkins is next in a marking contest so that they actually see it. Shane Warne used to train umpires to see what he wanted them to see. ‘Ooh had that stayed a little lower he was out’ etc. how many times does a player who ducked and won a controversial free kick not gotten one the next time? Umpires realise after they missed one and look for the duck next time.

All you need to do now is talk to your team and not the umpires.

"Hey everyone, umps are paying frees for ducking....."

 

[H00t]

If I'm a player I wouldn't question the decision. I'd now just ask the umpire that going forward that it will be paid for all.

You can always ask the question. And they won’t punish you for that. It’s arm theatrics they will punish.

Umps endeavour for consistency, but they just won’t catch everything.

 

[Yardie]

You can always ask the question. And they won’t punish you for that. It’s arm theatrics they will punish.

Umps endeavour for consistency, but they just won’t catch everything.

I'm not sure that will be the case going forward.

 

[H00t]

The main reason players would want to signal to the umpire that he got it wrong is to influence the next decision. You want the umpire thinking about flopping when Hawkins is next in a marking contest so that they actually see it. Shane Warne used to train umpires to see what he wanted them to see. ‘Ooh had that stayed a little lower he was out’ etc. how many times does a player who ducked and won a controversial free kick not gotten one the next time? Umpires realise after they missed one and look for the duck next time.

Nothing wrong with a quiet conversation with the umps. But that’s not what’s being stamped down on here.

I’m sure umps realise they miss stuff all the time. They would also have chats at breaks discussing their own performance.

And politely pointing out a mistake can help you in the future. But from the outside it looks like players are getting way too hung up on umpire decisions.

Not getting a free or two is nothing compared to being focussed on the job at hand.

 

[H00t]

I'm not sure that will be the case going forward.

I’ve not seen a 50 paid yet for a politely asked question. In fact I’ve heard umps engage with players over the ump mics. Umps would much prefer that.

The 50’s that have been paid have been for arms going out.

It’s like the stand rule. Teams adjust. I’m more annoyed at our players giving a 50 away when they know umps are looking for it.

 

[OnTheRocks]

You better not sigh too loudly.

Imagine if TamePunk was playing AFLW

 

[MinerBoy]

Part of the issue is, umpires never reverse a decision even when they're blatantly wrong. I don't mind them making the wrong call in the moment, it's not an easy job and they can't see everything. If, however, they look at the replay, see it's wrong and still stick with it, then that's just puts players and fans more offside. I don't see an issue whatsoever with Mitchell and Gunston going "Hey, look at this, maybe you need to revise the call". Penalizing them 50m is the wrong solution and only makes umpires more hated. How can you possibly show them more respect when they act beyond reproach? Respect is earned, not demanded.

Once a decision is made then it's made. No point actually expecting them to concede even if it is blatantly wrong.

However a simple "guys the decision won't be changed" should be enough, or even "if it's wrong we'll get feedback in the review". In reality they don't need to elaborate at all - but as long as the players query was delivered respectfully then it should just be a matter of all players and umpires just getting on with it from there. If the players then abuse or continue to remonstrate then sure, fire away with your 50s, but a simple query isn't disrespect and I can't be convinced otherwise.

 

[PT Bar None]

What a joke.

The league's always been soft on cheats is my possibly unpopular opinion.

They could stamp shit like this out overnight if they went with one of their trademark over-reactions.

But instead, we have:

• the rapid increase of throwing
• the shrug
• players driving forward when tackled
• the "saga" before WADA got involved, and what happened before *
• throwing the head back
• shooting stars

So many of those are very easily solved. But no - effectively no deterrent is what we get. Like someone else posted - I watch and will always love the Hawks, but the league has broken me

 

[Sixpence]

Once a decision is made then it's made. No point actually expecting them to concede even if it is blatantly wrong.

However a simple "guys the decision won't be changed" should be enough, or even "if it's wrong we'll get feedback in the review". In reality they don't need to elaborate at all - but as long as the players query was delivered respectfully then it should just be a matter of all players and umpires just getting on with it from there. If the players then abuse or continue to remonstrate then sure, fire away with your 50s, but a simple query isn't disrespect and I can't be convinced otherwise.

Like I said, part of the problem is that it's never conceded and the only reason for that is arrogance. Not specifically the umpire but the AFL who never wants to admit it's wrong. Like it did with the Hawkins decision. It's a corrupt government that tries to run the game with an iron fist, which only serves to create a greater divide between players/fans and the umpires. The fans' respect for umpires is at an all time low and the AFL is wholly to blame for it. Scrap this dissent crap, stop the ever changing rules and interpretations, make it easier for the umpires to adjudicate and the respect will come naturally. They are trying to treat the symptoms and not the cause.

Thought things would get better seeing the back of Hocking, but Brad Scott has made it significantly worse. Can't ****ing trust a Scott brother.

 

[burner1]

They’ve now said zero tolerance (which seems to surprise everyone 5 games in - classic afl). Which only works if they ruthlessly enforce. Basically play to whistle and no reaction to decisions. So will they stick to it? Probably not. Which is why will remain a mess.

 

[Yardie]

I’ve not seen a 50 paid yet for a politely asked question. In fact I’ve heard umps engage with players over the ump mics. Umps would much prefer that.

The 50’s that have been paid have been for arms going out.

It’s like the stand rule. Teams adjust. I’m more annoyed at our players giving a 50 away when they know umps are looking for it.

It'll start with the players not throwing there arms out but remonstrating verbally. That will then become do not question the umpire. AFL on a real slippery slope here.

 

[TheFourPillars]

Right so I am still in the after glow of that win on Monday.

I know there is been a lot of controversy regarding the umpires but like I said to my eldest at the ground when she was losing it and I have always maintained they do not decide the game. Control what you can control and we did.

A lot has been already said in this thread about our performance. Jai had a great game and Mitchell pretty much pulled us over the line. Our defence was really good again lead by Sicily with help from Frost and Scrimshaw. Good to see Impey getting back into the swing of things still working his way back to full fitness.

For me the thing that stood out was the last qtr and a lot of you bemoaning our leaders but they all stood up and contributed in the last. Mitchell had his best qtr. JOM did a job on their main defender and had some critical plays. Gunston and Breust with some real class in front of goal. It was quite funny because before the Gunston goal as the ball went inside 50 someone in our area yelled out where are you Gunny. He then proceeded to snap an absolutely pearler to which I exclaimed there he is. Our leaders stood up while Geelong's didn't. It was a refreshing change. They led from the front and led us to a great victory The odds were against us losing Ned after the first qtr but we never gave up and prevailed.

Looking forward to next week. This season has been nothing short of exciting as a Hawthorn supporter. Days like St Kilda loss will happen but then you have the days where you have the Geelong and Pt Adelaide win. What will this team dish up next week can't wait

 

[WWSD]

Right so I am still in the after glow of that win on Monday.

I know there is been a lot of controversy regarding the umpires but like I said to my eldest at the ground when she was losing it and I have always maintained they do not decide the game. Control what you can control and we did.

A lot has been already said in this thread about our performance. Jai had a great game and Mitchell pretty much pulled us over the line. Our defence was really good again lead by Sicily with help from Frost and Scrimshaw. Good to see Impey getting back into the swing of things still working his way back to full fitness.

For me the thing that stood out was the last qtr and a lot of you bemoaning our leaders but they all stood up and contributed in the last. Mitchell had his best qtr. JOM did a job on their main defender and had some critical plays. Gunston and Breust with some real class in front of goal. It was quite funny because before the Gunston goal as the ball went inside 50 someone in our area yelled out where are you Gunny. He then proceeded to snap an absolutely pearler to which I exclaimed there he is. Our leaders stood up while Geelong's didn't. It was a refreshing change. They led from the front and led us to a great victory The odds were against us losing Ned after the first qtr but we never gave up and prevailed.

Looking forward to next week. This season has been nothing short of exciting as a Hawthorn supporter. Days like St Kilda loss will happen but then you have the days where you have the Geelong and Pt Adelaide win. What will this team dish up next week can't wait

Which young player would you have next in line to debut?

 

[cryptor]

Teams should be afforded 1 or 2 opportunities per game to contest an umpiring decision that they don't lose if the decision is overturned. But they still have to do it respectfully. It then gets reviewed by the ARC like a score review.

The AFL accepts that the goal umpires can get it wrong and their officiating job is many times easier than that of the field umpires. If scoring decisions are worthy of taking the time to review then surely at the very least field umpiring decisions that result in a scoring opportunity are also worthy of reviewing.

I think it would also help somewhat with the players feelings of frustration. Currently they can do everything right and a poor umpiring decision can cost them dearly and there is zero recourse. If they have that one opportunity to contest a decision for review then at least it gives them some sense of control. And if they waste their contest on a decision that wasn't wrong and then can't contest in the future, that's at least still something that was within the realms of their control.

 

[Brishawk]

Nothing wrong with a quiet conversation with the umps. But that’s not what’s being stamped down on here.

I’m sure umps realise they miss stuff all the time. They would also have chats at breaks discussing their own performance.

And politely pointing out a mistake can help you in the future. But from the outside it looks like players are getting way too hung up on umpire decisions.

Not getting a free or two is nothing compared to being focussed on the job at hand.

Tom Mitchell pointed at a screen. I posted before, 70-93% of communication is non-verbal. Even if he doesn’t point, you could watch a silent video of him taking and have a fair idea of what his emotional state is compared to the umpire. The concept is nonsense.

 

[eldorado]

Teams should be afforded 1 or 2 opportunities per game to contest an umpiring decision that they don't lose if the decision is overturned. But they still have to do it respectfully. It then gets reviewed by the ARC like a score review.

I think this would only work with in two scenarios...

1. as we already have, with quantifiable line calls, that can be corrected on replay. e.g the ball either crossed the line, or it didn't. ...it touched the hand, or it didn't...The on-field umpire has made an objectively quantifiable error, which can be corrected by reliable technology. (irony intended regarding 'reliable technology')

2. the umpire declares himself 'unsighted', and refers the decision to video technology

I don't think it would be helpful to refer an umpire's subjective interpretation, made within an instant from close range, to another subjective umpire, who then undermines the field umpires authority by declaring his interpretation 'wrong'

 

[Leather Poisoning]

The main reason players would want to signal to the umpire that he got it wrong is to influence the next decision. You want the umpire thinking about flopping when Hawkins is next in a marking contest so that they actually see it. Shane Warne used to train umpires to see what he wanted them to see. ‘Ooh had that stayed a little lower he was out’ etc. how many times does a player who ducked and won a controversial free kick not gotten one the next time? Umpires realise after they missed one and look for the duck next time.

This is exactly what Geelong do.

All through their successful era, every single ****ing stoppage they all swing their arms like ****ing high powered windmills and cry for HTB or a throw. They do it every time the ball goes out of bounds once the deliberate rule changed.
Becuase it worked - every team started to do it. You can't just let the other mob influence the officiators without having your say too.
It's absolutely the most cheat-oriented way to play the game and it's proliferated.

Players have become so umpire-oriented and sooky that it makes me cringe. The ducking (yes, players from all teams) was bad enough. But the constant pleading like it's bloody test cricket is absolutely embarrassing.

So the AFL is cocking it up by enforcing a hard line, sporadically, so most people will get frustrated and we'll eventually have an easing of the rules where it doesn't really matter.

 

[CobberRodgers]

You can always ask the question. And they won’t punish you for that. It’s arm theatrics they will punish.

Umps endeavour for consistency, but they just won’t catch everything.

I wish this was true. I don’t think it is though.

 

[Sixpence]

I think this would only work with in two scenarios...

1. as we already have, with quantifiable line calls, that can be corrected on replay. e.g the ball either crossed the line, or it didn't. ...it touched the hand, or it didn't...The on-field umpire has made an objectively quantifiable error, which can be corrected by reliable technology. (irony intended regarding 'reliable technology')

2. the umpire declares himself 'unsighted', and refers the decision to video technology

I don't think it would be helpful to refer an umpire's subjective interpretation, made within an instant from close range, to another subjective umpire, who then undermines the field umpires authority by declaring his interpretation 'wrong'

They do this already in the NBA and it works reasonably well. I believe the calling ref watches the footage with another and then decides one way or another. This could happen here, ARC umpire shows footage on the big screen and in a discussion with the calling ump, can make a decision together or give the calling ump a final say.

 

[TheFourPillars]

Which young player would you have next in line to debut?

Kinda hard this week mate with Box Hill having the bye. Lynch would be a certainty to come in you would think. We still have Day and Wingard and Bramble to come back in.

 

[Randy Campbell]

A natural human response is to question things you don't understand. If it's done respectfully it shouldn't be an issue. If part of that is having a surprised look (including your arms becoming horizontal) should a team be penalised so heavily?

Players careers can hang in the balance on a single decision paid at the wrong time. Who are the AFL to tell their most important employee not to show genuine human emotion in a high pressure moment?

Rugby Union players have never been able to answer back.

Give people an inch and they will take a mile.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Rugby Union players have never been able to answer back.

Give people an inch and they will take a mile.

This isn't rugby union. It's a 360 degree game played at high intensity for 2 hours with WAY too many rules in place that are literally down to an umpires interpretation. Expecting players not to react to sudden decisions in the heat of the moment is absurd.

As long as it isn't demonstrative towards an umpire or undermines their role it should be permitted. By that, I mean looking surprised with their arms out, politely asking for clarification or talking to themselves while looking at the replay on the big screen. Those are natural human reactions that don't impact or disrespect an umpire in any way.

 

[BlueWaterHawk]

I'm still waiting for our friend from last week to bemoan the fact that everyone is praising Sicily when Frost is so good.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[Randy Campbell]

This isn't rugby union. It's a 360 degree game played at high intensity for 2 hours with WAY too many rules in place that are literally down to an umpires interpretation. Expecting players not to react to sudden decisions in the heat of the moment is absurd.

As long as it isn't demonstrative towards an umpire or undermines their role it should be permitted. By that, I mean looking surprised with their arms out, politely asking for clarification or talking to themselves while looking at the replay on the big screen. Those are natural human reactions that don't impact or disrespect an umpire in any way.

They are not natural human reactions.
They are habits.