That's just reporting of the coaches comments isn't it?
-
Guest - BigFooty Tipping 2025 - Get on! - $500 first prize - Weekly Prizes - Click to Join
PLUS Your club board comp is now up!
Analysis Umpires
- Thread starter thylacine60
- Start date
- Tagged users None
T2B_
The Avo King
- Feb 13, 2011
- 54,767
- 93,555
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Tasmania Devils, Dragons FFC
I don't pay any mind to umpiring conspiracies etc but yesterday... I was flabbergasted.
Its not like we were the team often coming off contests second best either, y'know, how the dominant team going in harder can win more free kicks etc. We were that team and couldn't buy a free kick.
Its not like we were the team often coming off contests second best either, y'know, how the dominant team going in harder can win more free kicks etc. We were that team and couldn't buy a free kick.
Voss was asked the question in the presser, so the media brought it up, and then they all reported on it.
I have it from a pretty good authority that the umpires got booted from where they were based so now there isn’t anywhere for them to train. They are basically given a training regime to do solo and do some stuff in smaller groups when they can manage it themselves, and the over the interwebs stuff.
Is it any wonder that the umpiring this year has been particularly poor?
Also I am absolutely ropable about the fiasco on Friday night. There is no rule in the rule book that say a player has to return the ball directly to the field umpire. The argument is that this could be considered time wasting i.e.the umpires have probably been given a guideline to say “if a player doesn’t give the ball straight back it is time wasting”. It is embarrassing that an umpire with years of service would be that lacking in common sense to understand that a guideline is there as an example of where there may be a rule breach. The situation of that incident still needs to be taken into consideration. It is doubly embarrassing that the AFL has doubled down on this being a correct interpretation, just shows the org is run by a bunch of absolute muppets.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Is it any wonder that the umpiring this year has been particularly poor?
Also I am absolutely ropable about the fiasco on Friday night. There is no rule in the rule book that say a player has to return the ball directly to the field umpire. The argument is that this could be considered time wasting i.e.the umpires have probably been given a guideline to say “if a player doesn’t give the ball straight back it is time wasting”. It is embarrassing that an umpire with years of service would be that lacking in common sense to understand that a guideline is there as an example of where there may be a rule breach. The situation of that incident still needs to be taken into consideration. It is doubly embarrassing that the AFL has doubled down on this being a correct interpretation, just shows the org is run by a bunch of absolute muppets.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- May 1, 2002
- 12,136
- 20,703
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Correct.
this is reporting via the press conference and not via the media commentating or broadcasting. Watching football programs and listening to SEN as an example is what I’m raising. Nowhere.That’s not true, the media were all over it.
Hardwick calls for umpiring change, Voss plans to 'follow up'
Suns coach Damien Hardwick has called for an adjustment from umpires to make the game saferwww.afl.com.au
‘It is dangerous’: Hardwick and Voss tackle umpires
Damien Hardwick has called on the game’s decision-makers to do faster calls on holding-the-ball decisions.www.theage.com.au
‘Very, very dangerous’: Voss, Hardwick call out issue AFL ‘has to get on top of’
‘Very, very dangerous’: Coaches call out issue AFL ‘has to get on top of’www.foxsports.com.au
JustaBattler
Everyone Looks Better In Blue
- May 31, 2012
- 28,856
- 67,598
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The media reported on umps not blowing the whistle on holding the ball -not on the free kick differential.
- May 1, 2002
- 12,136
- 20,703
- AFL Club
- Carlton
I’ll add - it’s not the free kick count it’s the frees that where missed, incorrectly interpreted (for a better phrase) and not given to us but given to GC. Holding the ball, Push in the back, Holding the man, Shepherding off the ball……just truly appalling.
Imagine if we had lost……
Imagine if we had lost……
Especially having the ball 100 more times for almost half the amount of frees
LegendaryBlues
Senior List
- Mar 17, 2011
- 273
- 666
- AFL Club
- Carlton
I did have to laugh at the afl putting a "respect" sign on the scoreboard after the crowd had enough and began their frustration.
Id have to watch the game again, but being at the ground it really felt that everytime we got momentum, a free or 50 would get plucked from nowhere. Im glad vossy at least mentioned it out loud.
Id have to watch the game again, but being at the ground it really felt that everytime we got momentum, a free or 50 would get plucked from nowhere. Im glad vossy at least mentioned it out loud.
Another stand-out decision, which doesn’t show up in the free kick count, or have any effect on the result because Charlie was able to snap the goal anyway , but points to the appalling one-sided nature of the umpiring, was to call Charlie’s clear mark in the 4th as touched, even though it wasn’t touched at all.
I bleed Blue
Brownlow Medallist
Exclusive behind the scenes footage at umpires meeting
- Jun 4, 2016
- 13,349
- 40,822
- AFL Club
- Carlton
that's a thing they've started doing? Never noticed
LegendaryBlues
Senior List
- Mar 17, 2011
- 273
- 666
- AFL Club
- Carlton
I don't think I've ever seen it before, just noticed it at the game yesterday after the crowd started chanting "BS!"
The 3AW commentary team were daring the scoreboard attendant to post the free kick count at three quarter time
‘Ball. Yes!’: Why AFL umpires need to revive this great footy catchcry
The holding-the-ball rule hasn’t changed, but the way the AFL’s umpires are officiating it has. It’s no wonder players, coaches, past greats and fans are confused and frustrated.
4 Points, Point 2 is Cripps
I agree the holding ball the rule or the interpretation of it has been a joke for some time, but on the one being highlighted with Charlie holding onto it for a while before setting up our first goal.
However, are we all totally ignoring the fact that seconds earlier, Mac Andrew put two hands in Charlie's back and shoved him out of a marking contest for no free kick?
However, are we all totally ignoring the fact that seconds earlier, Mac Andrew put two hands in Charlie's back and shoved him out of a marking contest for no free kick?
Interesting article this morning by Whateley about the poor state of umpiring towards holding the ball calls…
Last edited:
- Jun 15, 2017
- 4,182
- 10,833
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Tottenham Hotspur
Hope that's one that will be "clarified" by Vossy this week with umpire management...
... And the general treatment of CC and Harry in the forward line. And in particular, despite what opposition and some media think regarding CC's "soft" treatment last season, he's actually just that good that opposition have to infringe illegally to halve a contest. Often scragged, pushed and chopped and almost ignored this season by umps. I think front-on contact in contest has been particularly poorly umpired this year (often let go).
I don't get the media's uproar about Charlie spinning round and round.
My view is that Andrew's tackle on Charlie isn't a proper tackle. Don't know what the rule book specifies about tackles but I don't think it's a tackle unless the ball is pinned to the player and the ball has nowhere to go.
In Charlie's scenario it should be play on until he either disposes properly (play on), ball gets pinned against him (has prior, so free kick against) or he tries to dispose but unsuccessfully (also free against).
The ball is free in the player's hand and he has the ability to dispose and the ball isn't pinned or dead. So let the game play on.
By the way, pinned/dead ball doesn't require the tackler to drag the player to ground, it requires the ball to be pinned to the possessing player's body such that it isn't going anywhere.
Anyone else have thoughts on this?
My view is that Andrew's tackle on Charlie isn't a proper tackle. Don't know what the rule book specifies about tackles but I don't think it's a tackle unless the ball is pinned to the player and the ball has nowhere to go.
In Charlie's scenario it should be play on until he either disposes properly (play on), ball gets pinned against him (has prior, so free kick against) or he tries to dispose but unsuccessfully (also free against).
The ball is free in the player's hand and he has the ability to dispose and the ball isn't pinned or dead. So let the game play on.
By the way, pinned/dead ball doesn't require the tackler to drag the player to ground, it requires the ball to be pinned to the possessing player's body such that it isn't going anywhere.
Anyone else have thoughts on this?
I’m not sure there’s been uproar about that particular tackle, but they’ve used that example because it was the one that Hardwick specified as an example, because of the danger. Hardwick’s general point was that in taking so long to blow the whistle, it creates a dangerous situation for both players. Mac’s legs were wrapped around Charlie, and also if he was to bring him to ground, there’s a risk of Charlie being injured and Andrew being suspended.
That said, it’s not one of the bad non-holding-the-balls. There was no prior, and the tackle didn’t restrict him enough to stop him from being able to dispose of the ball properly, which he did as soon as he was able to balance properly.
BluStreak
Norm Smith Medallist
Also the umps are told that while the ball is not pinned they are to hold off from blowing the whistle.
If history is any guide - then if Charlie’s “holding the ball” is used as the DVD example for the umpires dept he’ll be reamed for years just like Lance Whitnall was for shepherding out in marking contests.
No words to explain how much it frustrated me the way Lance was umpired
