The Bounce is Dead - An Umpires Perspective

[Dennis]

Firstly, my credentials.

I have umpired over 200 VFA / VFL senior matches, numerous AFL reserves games (back when they existed) and now loiter in the SFL enjoying a run on a Saturday afternoon to stay fit.

I was active in the system through the introduction of the 3 umpire system (to show my age) and when you never left training unless you could bounce the ball 8 from 10 within the old centre circle.

Bouncing the ball was a skill and a matter of pride for umpires. However, I fear with the introduction of the "recalled bounce rule", that the ancient art of pigskin slamming will die a quick death.

The purpose of the bounce is to restart play after a stoppage. It is not meant to be fair and equitable, and was is in fact designed to be a random event, one that forces play on and does not mimick the basketball jump ball scenario.

However, we have lost our way with the bounce and expect that it should be fair, create a ruck contest and look pretty. The reality is that a contest will happen, irrespective of whether the ruckman can reach the bounce or not.

The problem now is that a recalled bounce is an ugly event. The umpire looks like a dill, the players have wasted effort and need to reset, the fans get shitty and the commentators have a field day.

If you are after the perfect restart of play, then ban the bounce. No one will complain. You will have "fair" restarts, no embarressed umpires and all will flow.

There is no purpose to the "recalled bounce" that adds to the game. Either we accept taht the bounce is not meant to be fair and creates random results, or we kill it off.

I suspect the latter will prevail, and quickly

 

[Strawbs]

Hope you're right. I would love to see the ruck contest become independent of bouncing anomalies. Less pressure on the umpires, less angst from the supporters. Fairer all round.

 

[Juza]

Bounce is traditional.
Umpires look forward to it.
Leave it in...

Srsly, Wouldn't you rather a bounce re-called?
Theirs no pressure on the umpire... He blocks out the crowd, media etc and just does what he has to do.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

I'd extend out the rules to say it can only be recalled if it lands (or would have) outside the circle, AND one teams' players (regardless of position) is unable to reach the ball - ie the one a few years back that boucned at right angles to Hayes(?).

I do have a question about the ABC game this weekend.

In the 1st and 3rd quarters, the umpires were on the far side of the contest. In the 2nd and 4th they were on the near side. Almost universally, the ball bounced to the centre, or right of centre (dominant right hand?) from where they bounced it.

This resulted in the ball being over/behind the Box Hill ruckman for maybe 50% of the contests.

I've noticed consistent 'misbounces' by umpires before, but never umpires swapping sides - resulting in that mis-bounce advantaging the same side all game.

Are there rules on where umpires should stand for the bounce?

 

[ManInWhite]

Simon - generally I try and stand with the sun behind me.

Juza - not all umpires look forward to it. I was a staunch supporter of keeping it as bouncing was always one of my strengths. Then I came to realise my back was going to last a lot longer by not having to do it. Monday to Friday we get OH&S rammed down our throats at work about bending the knees and not the back - then on a Saturday we go out and do the opposite. I reckon it's only a matter of time that insurance providers will step in and promote banning the bounce.

Preservative - hope you're enjoying my old stomping ground in SFL.

 

[Bob_vic]

Ever thought that some umpires are using "bad" technique and some aren't...

Just like anything, the best techinque is the one that works the best and also doesn't cause any pain, because it utilises the natural flow or "mechanics" of the body.

There shouldn't be a need to be bending the back in an artificial way, resulting in stress to the body.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

Firstly, my credentials.

I have umpired over 200 VFA / VFL senior matches, numerous AFL reserves games (back when they existed) and now loiter in the SFL enjoying a run on a Saturday afternoon to stay fit.

I was active in the system through the introduction of the 3 umpire system (to show my age) and when you never left training unless you could bounce the ball 8 from 10 within the old centre circle.

Bouncing the ball was a skill and a matter of pride for umpires. However, I fear with the introduction of the "recalled bounce rule", that the ancient art of pigskin slamming will die a quick death.

The purpose of the bounce is to restart play after a stoppage. It is not meant to be fair and equitable, and was is in fact designed to be a random event, one that forces play on and does not mimick the basketball jump ball scenario.

However, we have lost our way with the bounce and expect that it should be fair, create a ruck contest and look pretty. The reality is that a contest will happen, irrespective of whether the ruckman can reach the bounce or not.

The problem now is that a recalled bounce is an ugly event. The umpire looks like a dill, the players have wasted effort and need to reset, the fans get shitty and the commentators have a field day.

If you are after the perfect restart of play, then ban the bounce. No one will complain. You will have "fair" restarts, no embarressed umpires and all will flow.

There is no purpose to the "recalled bounce" that adds to the game. Either we accept taht the bounce is not meant to be fair and creates random results, or we kill it off.

I suspect the latter will prevail, and quickly

Great post. I think it is a real shame that supporters (and players alike) do not appreciate that the purpose of the bounce, and one of the great things about the bounce, is that it provides a random element. The bounce traditionally involved players having to improvise a little if it went a skew. Also, bad bounces tended to even out. In a sense recalling the bounce is a bit of contradiction, and it keeps only the ritual or spectacle.

 

[Blommy]

The rules are trying to kill it, much to my disgust...

However, if we had a better centre square rule (no player allowed enter the square until the ball is touched by a ruckman). Then we wouldn't have to worry about the recall rule and players having to get back to position... The controlling ump would call play on as soon as the ball is touched or recall as soon as the ball goes waaaayyyyyy outta sight!

The funny thing is the mention of OH&S and the impact of bouncing... I see the OP had clocked up a few hundred games, I have done several hundred games and I know that ManInWhite is the same. Most of the top AFL guys clock up 300+ games, some even doing 400+ at that level plus all of the games at lower levels before and after this period...

Compared to the players, I think we do more than alright as far as injuries are concerned even with the bounce, which with a half decent technique can get you through about thousand games in a lifetime without too much pain, which I think is doing alright...

 

[Strawbs]

Great post. I think it is a real shame that supporters (and players alike) do not appreciate that the purpose of the bounce, and one of the great things about the bounce, is that it provides a random element. The bounce traditionally involved players having to improvise a little if it went a skew. Also, bad bounces tended to even out. In a sense recalling the bounce is a bit of contradiction, and it keeps only the ritual or spectacle.

I certainly don't appreciate it. Why on earth would you want a random element injected into a game by an official? Surely the role of officials in any sport is to get it right to the best of their abilities.
As for bad bounces evening out, if that's true, then throw it up and ensure this is definitely the case. People say that a bad bounce hasn't cost a team a premiership. Why risk it happening one day when we can throw it up and eliminate one way for an official to impact on a result? Tradition? A pretty lame reason to keep the bounce when so many other traditions have fallen by the wayside.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

I certainly don't appreciate it. Why on earth would you want a random element injected into a game by an official? Surely the role of officials in any sport is to get it right to the best of their abilities.
As for bad bounces evening out, if that's true, then throw it up and ensure this is definitely the case. People say that a bad bounce hasn't cost a team a premiership. Why risk it happening one day when we can throw it up and eliminate one way for an official to impact on a result? Tradition? A pretty lame reason to keep the bounce when so many other traditions have fallen by the wayside.

A degree of chance is in intrinsic to Rules. It is why we play with an orb shaped ball and have in place rules that allow said ball to bounce along the ground in often unpredictable patterns (unlike League). The umpires bounce simply mirrors this tendency. Perhaps we should just play with a round ball as they do in Ireland?

Oh, and by the by, as i state above i only want the bounce kept if it is not recalled. Otherwise it serves no purpose but symbolism or a weak nod to tradition.

 

[Strawbs]

I enjoy the fact that we play with a footy, not a round ball. What I'm saying is there is sufficient random activity generated by said ball without the match officials getting in on the act. I simply can't understand why we'd want the umpires having ANY impact that can easily be avoided.

 

[Bob_vic]

I think the bounce should stay and we should get rid of the "recall" rule. The art of ruckmen and the surrounding players improvising according to the bounce of the ball is gradually starting to fade, ie. intuition. Football needs improvisation and intuition. If it becomes too predictable, it will become boring, and people will eventually turn their backs on the back for good. Some set plays are good, but too many of them is bad for the game. We've had the balance right for 150 years. If it wasn't right, football wouldn't be the most popular sport per capita in the world. Don't mess with it.

We've all gotten too used of just the two ruckmen in the middle contesting the bounce. For the majority of the last 150 years, it wasn't like that at all. Hence, the names of the "followers": Ruck, Ruck-Rover, Rover.

Strawbs isn't "wrong", or neither am I. BOTH opinions are healthy to this art we call football.

Although, I disagree with "match officials" getting in on the act. Aussie Rules was invented without the bounce. It wasn't until the early 1890s that the VFA, "in their wisdom", decided that the field umpires should bounce the ball instead. I'm speculating that one reason (as well as the improvisation reason) to have a random bounce is to break up packs quicker, rather than causing a secondary "ball up". (Bounces used to be substantially more random than they are these days, especially before the 1960s.) In fact, many umpires (including myself), when they have a string of ball ups, will purposely throw the ball a little bit offline in order to break up the pack and get the ball moving. It works everytime!

A bounce makes the contesting players focus more on the ball, because they don't know for sure exactly where the ball is going.

In the end, the game is always about keeping your eyes on the ball; playing the ball, not the man; and it always has been umpired like that. The AFL freely admit that in the introduction to their level 1 course. Rowan Sawers even says it on the level 1 video, and he's still the AFL Field Umpires Coach.

There should be more umpires as keen to bounce as Blommy. It's frustrating when guys won't put any effort in anymore to learn and practise the skill. I also find it annoying when the ground is perfectly good to bounce on and the other umpire "can't be bothered", "back's too sore", "is too scared" to bounce, or some other lame excuse. It's getting to the ridiculous stage that some umpires actually brag about how bad they are at bouncing - an attitude which affects other parts of the umpire ability. (BTW, if the umpire is too scared to bounce, it's really questionable whether they should be umpiring at all; the rationale being that it too affects other parts of their ability as an umpire; but that's my controversial view.)

Back pain is through poor bouncing technique. If it's done correctly, there shouldn't be any pain. Local leagues killing the bounce, under the false pretence of keeping umpires umpiring for longer, is the most likely thing to kill the bounce in the AFL. If it means more lower games are run with one umpire, so be it, but at least the standard of that one umpire will actually be higher than two blokes who haven't really put in the effort to be deserving of being appointed to a match. A lot of the lower grade matches only required one good umpire anyway. A fit umpire can easily keep up. I think that's better than having 2 unfit umpires. Melees aren't that much of an issue these days compared to yesteryear - the culture has changed. If melees are still a concern, those umpires who miss out could be used as extra boundary umpires (for games that usually have club boundaries), meaning that there's always extra sets of eyes looking behind play.

Those older blokes who find it difficult to run and bounce (and were/are good umpires), could be better utilised as coaches and observers - allowing them to pass on their knowledge to a greater number of younger umpires, rather than keeping them running around the paddock. Some older blokes might not like me saying that, but it comes a time when you need to move on and teach/mentor the younger ones. That's life. (IMHO) If you can still run and bounce, all well and good - you deserve to be still around running around in the middle.

 

[Sandy Grouper]

a massive vertical bounce of an oval footy to start a specticle - what a brilliant thing it is. Long Live The Bounce Down!!

 

[fearnofoe12]

The purpose of the bounce is to restart play after a stoppage. It is not meant to be fair and equitable, and was is in fact designed to be a random event, one that forces play on and does not mimick the basketball jump ball scenario.

Learn something everyday. Cheers Preservative

 

[fearnofoe12]

Sorry, I realise that sounded sarcastic. I meant...

The purpose of the bounce is to restart play after a stoppage. It is not meant to be fair and equitable, and was is in fact designed to be a random event, one that forces play on and does not mimick the basketball jump ball scenario.

 

[Sandy Grouper]

if the bounce down is ever abolished from our game i am going to make a stand and positively refuse to ring mates and ask "what time's throw up?"

 

[Russian]

We've had the balance right for 150 years. If it wasn't right, football wouldn't be the most popular sport per capita in the world. Don't mess with it.

Maybe 140. Then we brought in rules/interpretations that stop ruckmen taking the ball out of the ruck, coming off anything other than a 5 metre run up at the centre bounce, using their body to defend their position to win the tap that they've worked to get before their opponent, banned jumping early to put off the opponent, banned anyone other than one nominated ruckman from contesting the centre bounce, and introduced protected areas for umpires to run backwards through that weren't needed for those 100 years.

"The bounce" is more than umpire's action, and that's the only part we haven't changed to the basketball tip off. I'd prefer all those other rules were removed but since that isn't going to happen the ball has to go up straightish and therefore bouncing is pointless.

 

[Strawbs]

a massive vertical bounce of an oval footy to start a specticle - what a brilliant thing it is. Long Live The Bounce Down!!

I don't get what's so exciting about a bounce. You must be over the moon about other aspects of the game (eg speccie) if the umpire's bounce pushes your buttons. Good for you!

 

[borgsta2006]

I loved bouncing the footy, but unless you are a "Pathway Umpire" up here in NSW, then you are meant to throw the ball up. I think it is a real shame, but I agree with the first post, that unfortunately the bounce will die a slow, painful death.
You are one of the rare ex VFL umpires who actually goes back to a local league to give something back mate and well done. Hope you are enjoying SFL. It is a good league.

 

[kickingoals]

Must say that after seeing some games this year i believe the bounce should only be used at the start of each game , maybe even only at start of each quater , but it is a sham with this call back rule , its a blight on the game .

 

[tubbis]

Now correct me if I'm wrong anywhere but I just thought of a scary hypothetical.

1. The clock restarts once the ball hits the deck for the bounce.
2. If the ball is recalled back, its usually a good 3-4 seconds before the umpire blows the whistle to stop the clock again. The time is not rewinded to regain those few seconds.
3. What if one day an umpire decides to have another go at the bounce instead of just throwing it up? What if he shanks it again. (This is the part I'm iffy about. Is there a rule that states they must throw it up after a recalled bounce?)

Heres my scenario:
Grand Final day 5 years from now. Your team is playing, and you're 3 points down in the last quarter and 29 minutes have been played.
You've kicked the last 4 goals of the match and the momentum is definitely swinging your way as the opposition's team is getting flogged and have their heads down (for whatever reason, maybe they don't have any fit players left on bench)
In the process of the 2nd bounce's recall, the siren goes.
Imagine the headlines.

Now you can't tell me if you were the team mounting an epic comeback that you wouldn't be pissed off.

 

[silky-smooth]

Yeah but shit happens. The siren went and they had a lesser score, bad luck.

But I see your point and can only imagine the media masturbation over it.

 

[Blommy]

I loved bouncing the footy, but unless you are a "Pathway Umpire" up here in NSW, then you are meant to throw the ball up.

I hope you are ignoring the "meant" bit Borgy

I am enjoying bouncing again this year let me tell ya

 

[Bob_vic]

3. What if one day an umpire decides to have another go at the bounce instead of just throwing it up? What if he shanks it again. (This is the part I'm iffy about. Is there a rule that states they must throw it up after a recalled bounce?)

The law doesn't actually say to throw it up the second time, but the instruction is from the AFL to throw it up, which is as good as law.