-
LIVE: Sydney Swans vs GWS Giants - 3:20PM Sat - 1st QF
Squiggle tips Swans at 63% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
-
LIVE: Brisbane Lions vs Carlton - 7:30PM Sat - 1st EF
Squiggle tips Lions at 73% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 2 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
State of umpiring
- Thread starter CarnTheKANGAS
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Everyone knows it. It was on full show in the last.
I really can’t wait until this side is good enough where pretenders like Carlton can’t get back into the game regardless of the assistance they receive from the maggots like Rayzor.
Little turd was playing to the crowd in usual fashion.
I think the crowd noise plays a HUGE role in umpiring decisions, particularly late in games.
I think that gets highlighted interstate where late in games, the home team invariably gets the rub of the green late in a game.
The Pies a couple of weeks ago. Blues today. The noise their fans made late in the game has to have an impact on the younger, less competent umpires IMO - they genuinely shlt the bed.
Being so bad for so long has had 2 major outcomes:
1. We are continually copping the dregs of the umpiring world because we are rarely on prime time/FTA TV, and
2. We are struggling to get fans to our games - 50,000 members apparently - and yet how many were there today - 5,000??? At our home ground mind you.
My gut feel is if our supporters rocked up to games in decent numbers and made same noise, we might find we get umpired a bit better.
But this is the problem of being so bad for so long. Fans lose interest. They find better things to do than getting their heart broken every weekend.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - all that matters is winning games of footy on the weekend. Everything else is just fluff.
I think that gets highlighted interstate where late in games, the home team invariably gets the rub of the green late in a game.
The Pies a couple of weeks ago. Blues today. The noise their fans made late in the game has to have an impact on the younger, less competent umpires IMO - they genuinely shlt the bed.
Being so bad for so long has had 2 major outcomes:
1. We are continually copping the dregs of the umpiring world because we are rarely on prime time/FTA TV, and
2. We are struggling to get fans to our games - 50,000 members apparently - and yet how many were there today - 5,000??? At our home ground mind you.
My gut feel is if our supporters rocked up to games in decent numbers and made same noise, we might find we get umpired a bit better.
But this is the problem of being so bad for so long. Fans lose interest. They find better things to do than getting their heart broken every weekend.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - all that matters is winning games of footy on the weekend. Everything else is just fluff.
Last edited:
Uncle_Leo
Premium Gold
It was Carlton’s home game, not a replacement match, at 4:40 on a Sunday.
I went but I can understand why plenty didn’t.
Throw in sitting amongst Carlton fans who whinge for every free all game and why would you bother?
You wouldn’t pay to go. If you got some free tickets, you’d have to weigh it up.
Has anyone mentioned razor ray throwing the ball up at center bounces? It really disadvantaged X in that 3rd quarter in particular. It allowed de Koning to jump over X and reversed our center square dominance from the first half.
Only Forwards
Just you wait and see
The entire AFl is a house of cards and if you admit that there is bias in the system and moved to get rid of it the entire system would come tumbling down.
A league with impartiality would require you to change fixturing (who plays who), scheduling (when they play), drafting, free agency, umpiring, match review the list would go on and on.
There is no desire to do any of that. There also isn’t the leadership or competence either.
Last edited:
To support your team
- Sep 11, 2014
- 11,580
- 22,412
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Laura and Dill Pickle = "the umpiring has never been this good"
tazaa
Brownlow Medallist
There are Carlton supporters who genuinely believe that he doesn't get looked after.
Just amazing levels of delusion.
I'm still pi$$ed about the G.F. game 2 years ago.
Cam latching onto a ball and running towards goal. Wietering tackles him high and every single person at the ground saw it, even the umpire 10 metres away.
Weitering apologised and the umpire accepted it and called for a ball up ! You can see Cam roll his eyes and imagine what he wants to say !
Cam latching onto a ball and running towards goal. Wietering tackles him high and every single person at the ground saw it, even the umpire 10 metres away.
Weitering apologised and the umpire accepted it and called for a ball up ! You can see Cam roll his eyes and imagine what he wants to say !
Umpires make mistakes. They're human. I was a field umpire for 3 years at local level in the 2015, 16 and 17 seasons. I gave it away not because I hated it. Internal politics at the umpiring group I was at started affecting training and my teenage son was being bullied as well and management did nothing. Yet I had a good amount of experience of what it was like.
In terms of being human and making mistakes, sometimes you just get it wrong and don't know why. It's usually experience and coaching that prevents that. My very first game as a field umpire was a reserves game. I never got to do a seniors game - just U18s and reserves - that politics thing I mentioned got in the way. In the 2nd quarter of my first game I saw a blatantly obvious scoop and for some reason I'll never know, didn't pay the throw. It was a deer in the headlights moment. An opposition player nearby said "how could you miss that??" and he was right. I have absolutely no idea why I didn't blow the whistle.
Two years later, a few more mistakes, behind me, and I was paying those and the rest, including what I thought was a very good 50m penalty and control of a volatile situation, which avoided a melee between two teams who hated each other. I was proud of myself for that. I got good feedback from one of my coaches who happened to be there about something I still didn't get right, in that I moved straight into marking out the 50 and didn't stay with the incident. It was all good, but I needed that feedback.
Is this what is happening in the AFL? Are they giving these guys feedback? Are they paying them enough as well? Higher pay might create better umpires.
Umpires make mistakes, but they should be minimal at the highest level.
Let's look at some of the perceived "mistakes", and see that they are down to rule ambiguity rather than human error and thus can be fixed.
The Bailey Scott non-50 against Collingwood cost us the game.
The non HTB from that Paul Curtis tackle in our F50, followed by a very harsh 50m penalty mere seconds later cost us any chance we had of beating Carlton.
Umpires make mistakes. But they should NOT be making game changing mistakes at AFL level. They are perceived to be making mistakes because the rules are ambiguous.
There needs to be better coaching, yes, but primarily there needs to be clear, unambiguous rule changes that give umpires a better change of getting things right much more often than they are now.
Four umpires have made things WORSE. I believe TWO umpires would be better. When I was umpiring, I much preferred that. Then it is YOUR game when it's in your half, and the other umpire's when it goes past centre. In this situation, there is sometimes a problem when an umpire can't see if a player handballed or not. Yet there is someone who can. The boundary umpire. Boundaries are not dummies. They need to be empowered to make these decisions. Just for ones where the field umpire is blindsided. However, we have had three umpires for a long time, and I will concede ground on that.
Four umpires, however, has been a bad move by the AFL.
When you have four umpires, there are jurisdiction and control issues. You have less experienced umpires being thrown to the wolves. And then we get what we have now: the worst umpiring has been in many years.
We need to simplify things, and fix some obvious problems, chiefly being:
1. Throwing instead of handballing. This happens dozens of times in a game. There needs to be clarification on what a handball is: it needs to be a sweeping motion by the fist across the open hand holding the ball. It can't be a handball when there are two hands above the head and it's a flicking motion where the fist does NOT sweep through the ball. It has to be a CLEAR sweeping motion, or it's a throw. I realise this is still a bit grey, but sure it's better than the basketball passes we're seeing now on a regular basis.
2. Holding the ball needs to be fixed. It ruins the game. A player who takes a single step with the ball, or tries to fend off, or dives on it, or drags it in, should be pinged for HTB. It's not happening consistently. Curnow in the last quarter was a clear example. Another example was whoever that Carlton player was (O Hollands?) in the last quarter who took 3 steps and failed to kick it when tackled by Curtis. And to be fair, Cunnington in the final against Richmond in 2015 should have been paid. Those are examples. Getting a toe to the ball or "maybe" a handball, should also be pinged. If it is not an effective kick (let's say it has to travel 15m) or the handball doesn't go 5m or to a teammate or even an opposition player, then it should not be a legal disposal and the decision should be HTB. Banging it on the boot with one hand while the other is being held and dribbling a kick away should not be allowed and it should be HTB.
3. Deliberate out of bounds needs to be scrapped. If a player kicks, handballs or punches the ball and it goes out of play (unless it is a spoil from a marking contest) then it should be a free kick to the other team. Not necessarily the "lasso" free kick we see in AFLW, but similar. Smothers, or rebounds, or trying to pick up the ball should not be paid deliberate. Walking the ball out or not making an attempt to keep it in (i.e. allowing the ball to cross the line, escorting it over) should be insufficent intent). This is another grey area that needs rework.
4. 50m penalties should never be given if players can't hear, or if there is doubt. That means the Bailey Scott one against Collingwood is NOT 50, but neither is the one paid against LDU yesterday in the Carlton game. A 50m penalty should ONLY be paid if the player kicks the ball away in anger or frustration or takes too long to give it back when the free kick is obvious. If they give it to the wrong opposition player, or an umpire, it should NOT be 50. That negates the "too long" problem. They hand it to the umpire, or the nearest opposition player as soon as possible, or it's 50m. The players should not have to mindread the umpire if they did not hear who the free kick is being paid to. Putting the ball on the ground near where the free kick was paid should also NOT be 50m. That is a dumb interpretation that has never been corrected.
These four changes will remove the ambiguity in umpiring and will remove some of the subjective calls we see. In this case, the two non-free kicks to us against Calrlton would have been paid to us, because the umpire(s) are now not guessing, and things are clear in their minds and in the minds of the fans. The 50m would also have not been paid against LDU.
And, for god's sake, get rid of the 4th umpire. Three I can live with, but four is too many.
In terms of being human and making mistakes, sometimes you just get it wrong and don't know why. It's usually experience and coaching that prevents that. My very first game as a field umpire was a reserves game. I never got to do a seniors game - just U18s and reserves - that politics thing I mentioned got in the way. In the 2nd quarter of my first game I saw a blatantly obvious scoop and for some reason I'll never know, didn't pay the throw. It was a deer in the headlights moment. An opposition player nearby said "how could you miss that??" and he was right. I have absolutely no idea why I didn't blow the whistle.
Two years later, a few more mistakes, behind me, and I was paying those and the rest, including what I thought was a very good 50m penalty and control of a volatile situation, which avoided a melee between two teams who hated each other. I was proud of myself for that. I got good feedback from one of my coaches who happened to be there about something I still didn't get right, in that I moved straight into marking out the 50 and didn't stay with the incident. It was all good, but I needed that feedback.
Is this what is happening in the AFL? Are they giving these guys feedback? Are they paying them enough as well? Higher pay might create better umpires.
Umpires make mistakes, but they should be minimal at the highest level.
Let's look at some of the perceived "mistakes", and see that they are down to rule ambiguity rather than human error and thus can be fixed.
The Bailey Scott non-50 against Collingwood cost us the game.
The non HTB from that Paul Curtis tackle in our F50, followed by a very harsh 50m penalty mere seconds later cost us any chance we had of beating Carlton.
Umpires make mistakes. But they should NOT be making game changing mistakes at AFL level. They are perceived to be making mistakes because the rules are ambiguous.
There needs to be better coaching, yes, but primarily there needs to be clear, unambiguous rule changes that give umpires a better change of getting things right much more often than they are now.
Four umpires have made things WORSE. I believe TWO umpires would be better. When I was umpiring, I much preferred that. Then it is YOUR game when it's in your half, and the other umpire's when it goes past centre. In this situation, there is sometimes a problem when an umpire can't see if a player handballed or not. Yet there is someone who can. The boundary umpire. Boundaries are not dummies. They need to be empowered to make these decisions. Just for ones where the field umpire is blindsided. However, we have had three umpires for a long time, and I will concede ground on that.
Four umpires, however, has been a bad move by the AFL.
When you have four umpires, there are jurisdiction and control issues. You have less experienced umpires being thrown to the wolves. And then we get what we have now: the worst umpiring has been in many years.
We need to simplify things, and fix some obvious problems, chiefly being:
1. Throwing instead of handballing. This happens dozens of times in a game. There needs to be clarification on what a handball is: it needs to be a sweeping motion by the fist across the open hand holding the ball. It can't be a handball when there are two hands above the head and it's a flicking motion where the fist does NOT sweep through the ball. It has to be a CLEAR sweeping motion, or it's a throw. I realise this is still a bit grey, but sure it's better than the basketball passes we're seeing now on a regular basis.
2. Holding the ball needs to be fixed. It ruins the game. A player who takes a single step with the ball, or tries to fend off, or dives on it, or drags it in, should be pinged for HTB. It's not happening consistently. Curnow in the last quarter was a clear example. Another example was whoever that Carlton player was (O Hollands?) in the last quarter who took 3 steps and failed to kick it when tackled by Curtis. And to be fair, Cunnington in the final against Richmond in 2015 should have been paid. Those are examples. Getting a toe to the ball or "maybe" a handball, should also be pinged. If it is not an effective kick (let's say it has to travel 15m) or the handball doesn't go 5m or to a teammate or even an opposition player, then it should not be a legal disposal and the decision should be HTB. Banging it on the boot with one hand while the other is being held and dribbling a kick away should not be allowed and it should be HTB.
3. Deliberate out of bounds needs to be scrapped. If a player kicks, handballs or punches the ball and it goes out of play (unless it is a spoil from a marking contest) then it should be a free kick to the other team. Not necessarily the "lasso" free kick we see in AFLW, but similar. Smothers, or rebounds, or trying to pick up the ball should not be paid deliberate. Walking the ball out or not making an attempt to keep it in (i.e. allowing the ball to cross the line, escorting it over) should be insufficent intent). This is another grey area that needs rework.
4. 50m penalties should never be given if players can't hear, or if there is doubt. That means the Bailey Scott one against Collingwood is NOT 50, but neither is the one paid against LDU yesterday in the Carlton game. A 50m penalty should ONLY be paid if the player kicks the ball away in anger or frustration or takes too long to give it back when the free kick is obvious. If they give it to the wrong opposition player, or an umpire, it should NOT be 50. That negates the "too long" problem. They hand it to the umpire, or the nearest opposition player as soon as possible, or it's 50m. The players should not have to mindread the umpire if they did not hear who the free kick is being paid to. Putting the ball on the ground near where the free kick was paid should also NOT be 50m. That is a dumb interpretation that has never been corrected.
These four changes will remove the ambiguity in umpiring and will remove some of the subjective calls we see. In this case, the two non-free kicks to us against Calrlton would have been paid to us, because the umpire(s) are now not guessing, and things are clear in their minds and in the minds of the fans. The 50m would also have not been paid against LDU.
And, for god's sake, get rid of the 4th umpire. Three I can live with, but four is too many.
Last edited:
Agree with everything except the second part of point 2. My concern would be that it would heavily disadvantage the player making the play and those who are strong and attempt to fight through a tackle even if they are immediately tackled.
It definitely needs to be simpler. Any time a player steps or dives on the ball should automatically be a free kick unless player disposes of it legally (and yes even a toe or a handball). A player who gets immediately tackled and then the ball is pinned in should not be a free kick. Therefore it should not have been a free against Powell but the Logue on Curnow and the Curtis tackle definitely should have been.
Re point 3, I think your interpretation is exactly the same as current AFLW rules. Would be good to introduce as part of preseason games.
ferball
desperately terminally-contrarian
North Melbourne - 2024 Hugh Greenwood Player Sponsor
Veteran
North Melbourne - 2023 Ailish Considine and Bella Eddy Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2023 Aaron Hall and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
10k Posts
30k Posts
North Melbourne - 2022 Aaron Hall and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2022 Kaitlyn Ashmore and Aileen Gilroy Player Sponsor
- Jul 24, 2015
- 45,976
- 95,612
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Players handball by punching the ball with a short little jab that is not the sweeping action we're used to these days. Not all the time but often enough. Sheeze is fantastic at it.
- Aug 17, 2009
- 6,271
- 7,262
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
I agree with a lot of what you say, especially about 4 umpires, but disagree with some of it. I also think the AFL needs to make a better effort to educate people on the rules. There are the "Laws of Australian Football", they are not difficult to explain or translate into simpler terms.
1. Do we need to re-define a handball? The rules say: "the act of holding the football in one hand and disposing of it by hitting it with the clenched fist of the other hand." I agree there has to be some motion of the fist striking the ball, but I feel like demanding a sweeping motion only complicates matters.
I feel like the issue with throwing the ball is not being spotted and let go, but players exploiting situations where the umpire is blindsided.
2. Nah, I don't want a game where a disposal has to be a certain distance to avoid HTB. It was Kennedy in the Curtis example, and it was just a howler. It's HTB every day of the week because Kennedy was in the act of kicking before the tackle came, ergo he was "balanced and steady" (one of the four definitions of prior opportunity). He didn't get a foot to it, should have been HTB. He gets a foot to it, it is play on.
3. Yeah, pretty much agreed.
4. I like your rule change. The one yesterday was not against LDU, he infringed for the free kick. It was Tucker who handpassed at pretty much the same time as the umpire blew his whistle for the third time. He was always going to lose patience at that point, but if the rule was tweaked he would feel more emboldened to "have a feel for the game" as the commentators always say.
Above and beyond everything that has already been said about the umpiring, my feel on this is that umpires are scared to pay any free kick to us that may impact a result in our favor - particularly against the bigger teams.
Yet they have no issue paying the other way.
How many frees last night to Carlton directly resulted in goals, and especially when the game was on the line?
Compared to the non-decisions to us in the forward line.
The non 50 against Collingwood that would have resulted in a goal that puts us back in front.
The media response has been admittedly good - particularly in the Collingwood non 50 example - but just imagine the level of blowback the AFL would get if it was Collingwood or Carlton on the receiving end.
Just my take, could be just a conspiracy theory, but as some have mentioned crowd pressure is a real thing and this just follows on from that.
Yet they have no issue paying the other way.
How many frees last night to Carlton directly resulted in goals, and especially when the game was on the line?
Compared to the non-decisions to us in the forward line.
The non 50 against Collingwood that would have resulted in a goal that puts us back in front.
The media response has been admittedly good - particularly in the Collingwood non 50 example - but just imagine the level of blowback the AFL would get if it was Collingwood or Carlton on the receiving end.
Just my take, could be just a conspiracy theory, but as some have mentioned crowd pressure is a real thing and this just follows on from that.
- Sep 5, 2014
- 156
- 698
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
- Other Teams
- NMFC
Not North related, but topic related. Blakey gets tunneled so hard he could open up a toll road, and the umpire who was right there can't even do the correct signal for play on. Instead this campaigner does the same "I dunno" hand signals my 5 year old daughter does. Fker needs his uniform burned, never to return.
Did anyone else also see when the umpire again signaled the wrong way for a free kick last night?
Was either 2nd or 3rd qtr, signaled a Nth free and then gave it to Carlton.
Gave me horrible flashbacks to the one against GC a few weeks back where the ump paid advantage to them for our free kick!
Was either 2nd or 3rd qtr, signaled a Nth free and then gave it to Carlton.
Gave me horrible flashbacks to the one against GC a few weeks back where the ump paid advantage to them for our free kick!
In isolation, the 50m after LDU's HTB, was harsh, but technically not incorrect, presumably, the argument would be that it was an obvious HTB, so it was time wasting for us to continue our play, therefore 50m.
But given the non-call HTB in our forward line moments before, why would you expect our players to stop, the umpires had just demonstrated that there is no such thing as an "obvious HTB"? They're so arrogant to be so inconsistent in how they judge the rules, but then penalise us for the confusion they create!
I suppose the counter argument from the AFL/umpires would be, if you had seen any of this game or any of Carlton's other games this year, the obvious assumption should always be be, if you hear a whistle, assume "free kick Carlton"
But given the non-call HTB in our forward line moments before, why would you expect our players to stop, the umpires had just demonstrated that there is no such thing as an "obvious HTB"? They're so arrogant to be so inconsistent in how they judge the rules, but then penalise us for the confusion they create!
I suppose the counter argument from the AFL/umpires would be, if you had seen any of this game or any of Carlton's other games this year, the obvious assumption should always be be, if you hear a whistle, assume "free kick Carlton"
It’s a sign clear as day that if there is doubt - pretty much any doubt - which way a call goes, then it it’s a 50-50 and play on.
The umps and other automatons like Healy would say that due to the whistle being blown and the call being given, then that is a free.In isolation, the 50m after LDU's HTB, was harsh, but technically not incorrect, presumably, the argument would be that it was an obvious HTB, so it was time wasting for us to continue our play, therefore 50m.
But given the non-call HTB in our forward line moments before, why would you expect our players to stop, the umpires had just demonstrated that there is no such thing as an "obvious HTB"? They're so arrogant to be so inconsistent in how they judge the rules, but then penalise us for the confusion they create!
I suppose the counter argument from the AFL/umpires would be, if you had seen any of this game or any of Carlton's other games this year, the obvious assumption should always be be, if you hear a whistle, assume "free kick Carlton"
The problem with that is that in three weeks, there have been multiple calls where an obvious free is called, only for it be awarded to the non-obvious team, or calls overruled or reversed, or advantages called back by players, or the 5th umpire being called in.
In conclusion, the context and history is something that players and fans cannot forget because the standard of rules changes dramatically in games and the form of umpire calls in game develops (rightly or wrongly) in an organic manner. The players at the end of the day are screwed.
- Sep 1, 2015
- 571
- 1,792
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
The umpiring is just bad across the board. Having four people with four different views is a recipe for disaster. The LDU free was correct but it isn't paid very often.
The only rule that the umpires have mastered is the ruckman putting their hands up at ruck contests.
The only rule that the umpires have mastered is the ruckman putting their hands up at ruck contests.
Yes, we got stiffed because not enough members turned up.
Unfortunately, the three memberships in our house couldn't make it.
We had a kids' birthday party to go to.
And we live 3,500km away.
Similar threads
- Locked
