State of umpiring

[amaz199]

This game is ****ed.

 

[Passmore]

Honestly I can accept shit decisions. It’s frustrating but that’s sport. But the explanation that Kane gave is so utterly incorrect and ridiculous that it’s now turned into a far bigger deal. She should come out today and say you know what I was wrong yesterday. We have looked back and yes that was an incorrect decision and should have been paid. We are sorry we caused more confusion around the issue yesterday. It’s still shit but at least it’s acknowledging they ****ed up.

Yep, mistakes happen. Own it, we're all grown ups, and move on.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

 

[Passmore]

Felt like when I was watching it that the self perceived ‘smartest in the room’ was giving the not so smartest explanation

She looked like a prep teacher talking to a room of 5yos.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

 

[muttley45]

I'm sure they did the same thing without penalty earlier in the game too

 

[The acurate one]

While I'm no expert in all things umpiring, I do though think having Tassiemania joining the comp won't assist the standard. As I assume the AFL will have to find at least four more umpires.

And the wider AFL 40 more players, crikey!

 

[Tiberius]

She looked like a prep teacher talking to a room of 5yos.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

It looked almost like she knew that everyone in the room expected her justification to be total bs and company spin, and so somehow determined to come up with an even more outlandish and ridiculous explananation than anyone present thought possible, just to prove that she wasn't predictable.

 

[speedy]

The AFL where just happy that there was one horrendously incorrect decision so that way they could just ignore the other 4 or 5.

 

[ferball]

So with the words of LK, I wonder what will happen moving forward if a team does what Collingwood did (and were allowed to do).

Are they also allowed to self-officiate and is the rule book also a guide only?

Or do the umpires come down harder on those infringements?

Either way, she's painted herself in a lose-lose position and surely becomes untenable.

This would have been an AFL decision. The AFL itself should be untenable.

 

[Nate7]

This would have been an AFL decision. The AFL itself should be untenable.

You're right, everything gets ticked off by AFL HQ, the MRO shite included.

 

[kangafruity]

Normally you see a meme with the 4 idiots and stating they were the extra players in the team that wins or that helped them win but havent see one this week. We should name and shame the maggots who got this so wrong and should continue to do so until something is done. Clearly they are protected despite making a mockery of the game we once loved.
Whoever thought it would be a good idea to have 4 of them out there should be jailed

 

[ferball]

You're right, everything gets ticked off by AFL HQ, the MRO shite included.

if it wasn't her it'd be whoever else is prepared to do that job. Its a shithouse organisation.

 

[Horizons_00]

Laura is getting absolutely torched in the media

 

[Uncle_Leo]

Here is how it should have been addressed

"In regards to the non 50, that should have been paid a 50, there was a lot going on at the time, this was a mistake we have addressed with the umpire in question, in regards to the touched goal by Cripps, the game should have been stopped so the review could have taken longer to look into this, we will ensure moving forward this happens"

It doesn't change the result but it takes ownership of two blatant errors

What was offered up instead was excuses and a "look the other way" reason. Simply unacceptable. We all make mistakes, own it and improve from it.

 

[Merlin007]

Laura has done what no-one thought possible - unanimity of view on the north BF board.

Outstanding

 

[Forever North]

It looked almost like she knew that everyone in the room expected her justification to be total bs and company spin, and so somehow determined to come up with an even more outlandish and ridiculous explananation than anyone present thought possible, just to prove that she wasn't predictable.

Yeah it was next level damage control, spin, controlling the narrative etc. Embarrassing stuff from a billion dollar industry. May have worked back in the 90’s but nowadays it’s just juvenile. Grow up AFL.

 

[The Big O]

If you were 2 points up with a minute to go and the opposition kicks a point, can you just repeatedly handball instead of kicking it in? Umpire gives you another go and just repeat until the siren goes.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Merlin007]

If you were 2 points up with a minute to go and the opposition kicks a point, can you just repeatedly handball instead of kicking it in? Umpire gives you another go and just repeat until the siren goes.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

Don't bother with hand balling, just chuck it over your shoulder - there's a new verb for it, "to Quaynor"

 

[Twinkletoes]

If you were 2 points up with a minute to go and the opposition kicks a point, can you just repeatedly handball instead of kicking it in? Umpire gives you another go and just repeat until the siren goes.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

Another mind boggling moment. Moore handballs out from fullback post a behind and rather than penalise him the ump tells him to go again because “you have to kick it after a point!”

 

[big_e]

Another mind boggling moment. Moore handballs out from fullback post a behind and rather than penalise him the ump tells him to go again because “you have to kick it after a point!”

As mentioned in the other thread, correct decision!

Believe it or not, that's the correct decision

17. 17.1 PROCEDURE AFTER A BEHIND HAS BEEN SCORED BRINGING THE FOOTBALL BACK INTO PLAY
Unless Law 16.4 applies, after a goal Umpire has signalled a Behind:
(a) any player of the Defending Team may elect to Kick the football from within the Goal Square or play on by exiting the Goal Square within a reasonable time;
(b) if the Player has not elected to Kick the football or exit the Goal Square within a reasonable time, a field Umpire will call ‘Play On’;
(c) a Player may not handball the football from within the Goal Square unless the field Umpire has called ‘Play On’ pursuant to Law 17.1(b);
(d) The Mark shall be set at 15 metres from the centre of the Kick-Off Line towards the centre of the Playing Surface, as shown in Diagram 3.
17.2 FOOTBALL BROUGHT INTO PLAY INCORRECTLY
Where the field Umpire is of the opinion that a Player has not brought the football back into play in accordance with Law 17.1, the field Umpire shall reset the play.

I didn't know that rule, tbh - someone posted it on Twitter.

 

[DuckYeah]

If you were 2 points up with a minute to go and the opposition kicks a point, can you just repeatedly handball instead of kicking it in? Umpire gives you another go and just repeat until the siren goes.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

****ing forgot about that one! Howler, needed to be balled up

 

[Horace]

Sitting on the opposite side of the ground, it was pretty hard to see what was happening in those dying seconds when Bailey Scott

8

Bailey Scott

Age

24

Ht

186cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.6

3star

K

5.8

2star

HB

4.9

4star

M

3.1

3star

T

1.5

3star

MG

155.6

2star

D

8.0

2star

K

5.0

2star

HB

3.0

2star

M

2.5

3star

T

1.8

3star

MG

114.8

2star

D

11.8

3star

K

6.0

3star

HB

5.8

4star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.2

3star

MG

171.6

3star

took the mark. When I heard Laura Kane's explanation yesterday, I thought, wow that sounds very dubious. She said the umpire took too long to blow the whistle, stating it came 2 seconds later than it should have, so play on was the right call. What rubbish?

The 2 seconds statement alone is wrong. I've only just watched the footage and there is no way 2 seconds elapsed between the mark being taken and the whistle. She just made stuff up and that is disgraceful.

It is every day of the week, even on a day of rest, it was a clear 50 metre penalty and not play on.

I may have missed it, but apart from our devastation, what about the unfair impact this has had on the top 8?

If we had won the game, instead of sitting third on the ladder now, they would instead be 7th on percentage, with all of *essendon, GWS, Geelong and port adelaide, moving up one spot.

It is incontrovertible, that on the assumption we should have won that game, the whole make up of the final 8 is now compromised. Those four clubs, who sit directly below the Pies, should each lodge a complaint with the AFL about this injustice. Naturally, of course they won't.

 

[DuckYeah]

just admit wrong calls so we can have a moral victory of 36 points. ****wits.

Give the Kangas some ammunition to fight back against these campaigners at work. Dont say “it was the wrong but right outcome” makes no sense. **** me, I dont want to sound misogynistic but Mrs Duck does that shit to me all the time :stern look

 

[tazaa]

Even if he did it’s irrelevant unless the ump has called play on.
Whistle.mark.pies players encroach. 50 should be paid.
There’s no other way to interpret it.

Kane and the afl are attempting to gaslight us and it’s ****ed.

This is it.
How many times has a player marked the footy and then gone off his line and the man on the mark moves off with him.
Ump hasnt called "play on" and bang, 50. What does everyone usually say? "BUT HE PLAYED ON!"
And what does the ump reply? "BUT I DIDN'T CALL PLAY ON".
End of discussion. This has been the rule for decades.
I was fine with the loss based on the umpire bias on Sunday, but in the days since the game I am actually getting angrier.
The AFL is a basketcase.

 

[ferball]

I just started watching the replay. Some shocking calls/non calls in the first quarter.

 

[tazaa]

So many warning signs on the day.

Leigh Fisher walking out to officiate. I cannot stand him and each time he officiates our games there are errors and controversies. It’s too obvious now. Wtf did we do to cop this worm for our games?

The post above showing the call to advantage on a North Melbourne free-kick. Just ask yourself, wtf is going through your mind here, that as a professionally employed AFL umpire, you allow the advantage to the wrong team for so long? This isnt right. You'd do a health check or welfare check on such a blunder.
Did the ump have a stroke?

This is embarrassing for the AFL.
Then when they didn't bother to stop play and properly review Crisp goal that was touched by Bailey, well then the writing was on the wall.

The longer this goes on and you have to ask, how do you not start to question match fixing? We've arrived there.

 

[ZACK WILD]

I think it's time the AFL drug test the umpires.