Analysis Umpires

[teddy-hopkins]

You do realise this graphic shows exactly why its a grey area?

If the purple dot is the mark, and the red line is a direct line between the mark and the middle of the goal square, the kangaroos player should be in line with the red line. The fact he isnt, and if you extend the red line, he is almost 10m from it, shows he is a long way from where he should be.

Given the umpire didnt call play-on, it shouldve been paid a 50m penalty, BUT the mistake here is the umpire shouldve called play on straight away because the kangaroos player did not stop in a reasonable amount of time after taking the mark.

The only grey area you're talking about is that the North player who took the mark didn't do so and stop dead in his tracks and then retreat in a direct path away from the goals.

If you don't allow this every mark taken with a guy moving across the ground would have to be called play on immediately because it says in the book you have to go back in a direct line.

Regardless - the ump blew his whistle, then the Collingwood players ran over the mark. Even if what you're saying is true they're not allowed to do that until the ump has called play on which he didn't do.

Obvious 50.

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

She's a symptom of the AFL continuing to promote internal candidates who have zero qualifications for the job. The previous 2 GM of football were former footballers with previous high profile jobs within clubs.

That doesn't grant her immunity for being useless at her job. She gets up in front of the public and spouts gaslighting nonsense and lies she deserves every bit of criticism coming her way.

It gets even better.

Earlier tonight on 3AW, their reporter was at the AFL Hall of Fame at the beginning of the night.....said that it was exciting, all the dignitaries beginning to arrive, although Laura Kane came in through the back entrance to avoid the media.

How's that for leadership from an AFL executive on their night of nights?

 

[teddy-hopkins]

It gets even better.

Earlier tonight on 3AW, their reporter was at the AFL Hall of Fame at the beginning of the night.....said that it was exciting, all the dignitaries beginning to arrive, although Laura Kane came in through the back entrance to avoid the media.

How's that for leadership from an AFL executive on their night of nights?

Sums up where we're at I suppose.

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

You do realise this graphic shows exactly why its a grey area?

If the purple dot is the mark, and the red line is a direct line between the mark and the middle of the goal square, the kangaroos player should be in line with the red line. The fact he isnt, and if you extend the red line, he is almost 10m from it, shows he is a long way from where he should be.

Given the umpire didnt call play-on, it shouldve been paid a 50m penalty, BUT the mistake here is the umpire shouldve called play on straight away because the kangaroos player did not stop in a reasonable amount of time after taking the mark.

Not even close, the player ran back slightly within the overall line of the mark, if you listen to the umpire he did call a mark even though the 2 filth players both had ran past the spot of the mark, clearly heard on the from the umpire on the replay vision,
North player looked confused and took his chance to play on, the explanation from Kane is a load of rubbish, her explanation of the situation doesn’t even back up the audio of the umpires call…
She’s doing a horrible job of explaining different things so far…

 

[Juddernaut08]

You do realise this graphic shows exactly why its a grey area?

If the purple dot is the mark, and the red line is a direct line between the mark and the middle of the goal square, the kangaroos player should be in line with the red line. The fact he isnt, and if you extend the red line, he is almost 10m from it, shows he is a long way from where he should be.

Given the umpire didnt call play-on, it shouldve been paid a 50m penalty, BUT the mistake here is the umpire shouldve called play on straight away because the kangaroos player did not stop in a reasonable amount of time after taking the mark.

is that you laura

 

[DangerousD]

You do realise this graphic shows exactly why its a grey area?

If the purple dot is the mark, and the red line is a direct line between the mark and the middle of the goal square, the kangaroos player should be in line with the red line. The fact he isnt, and if you extend the red line, he is almost 10m from it, shows he is a long way from where he should be.

Given the umpire didnt call play-on, it shouldve been paid a 50m penalty, BUT the mistake here is the umpire shouldve called play on straight away because the kangaroos player did not stop in a reasonable amount of time after taking the mark.

All i see with that is, what i see every game, a player takes a mark and moves laterally a few meters, the umps very rarely call it unless, you’re a defender, then they call play on at the drop of a hat.

 

[BluStreak]

it was so obvious a 50m penalty. It was disgusting decision and cost Nth the game. Now all we hear is how magnificent a comeback it was. Well done Umps. You won the game not Collingwood.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

@ 4:45 mark, Bartel goes over the review that awarded Jack Crisp

25

Jack Crisp

Age

30

Ht

190cm

Wt

91kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.2

5star

K

11.5

4star

HB

9.7

5star

M

4.6

4star

T

4.0

5star

MG

307.6

4star

D

17.7

4star

K

10.7

4star

HB

7.0

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

3star

MG

307.6

4star

D

14.4

4star

K

8.4

4star

HB

6.0

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

3.0

5star

a goal despite Scott clearly touching it...

 

[Navy Blues 73]

@ 4:45 mark, Bartel goes over the review that awarded Jack Crisp a goal despite Scott clearly touching it...

And Barrett being the AFL stooge he is still wouldn't admit it was touched in case of upsetting the hand that feeds him.

 

[RPCB]

@ 4:45 mark, Bartel goes over the review that awarded Jack Crisp a goal despite Scott clearly touching it...

Lol at Eddie saying what Laura Kane said “makes perfect sense” and then going on to say that 50 should have been paid. That’s not what Laura Kane said at all.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

at which point Scott knowing he wasn’t going to get a 50 used the split second to play on

Looking at the vision I reckon the umpire starts an arm action to signal 50 (in response to Scott calling for a 50) just before Scott takes off and then the umpire changes his 50 signal to 'play on'.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

Looking at the vision I reckon the umpire starts an arm action to signal 50 just before Scott takes off (in response to Scott calling for a 50) and then the umpire changes his 50 signal to 'play on'.

There's been a few moments like that I've noticed. One in our last game. TDK smacked illegally umpire puts whistle to mouth and then Essendon got the clearance and nothing was ever called.... Like they're getting stage fright with actually blowing the whistle sometimes.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

There's been a few moments like that I've noticed. One in our last game. TDK smacked illegally umpire puts whistle to mouth and then Essendon got the clearance and nothing was ever called.... Like they're getting stage fright with actually blowing the whistle sometimes.

That was at a centre bounce when the other ruck blocked him?

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

That was at a centre bounce when the other ruck blocked him?

I think it was a stoppage near the centre square but not a centre bounce. I think...

 

[teddy-hopkins]

Lol at Eddie saying what Laura Kane said “makes perfect sense” and then going on to say that 50 should have been paid. That’s not what Laura Kane said at all.

Eddie is so holier than thou these days. He sees there's a pile on Laura Kane and thinks what can I say that makes me feel better than everyone else. Whether the words coming out of his mouth make sense or not.

Can't finish one sentence without mentioning "back when I was at Collingwood [insert humble-brag here]"

Reminds me of Sheedy post coaching career - massive ego + struggling with irrelevance so he constantly says stuff to pat himself on the back.

 

[OldBlueFan]

Like the rest of us, I was extremely happy with last night's performance, and I wish all I was thinking about today was how well the team performed ... but I was just gobsmacked by this:

First shot: It is clear that Cameron takes the mark just inside 50. Let's be generous and say that he's a metre inside 50. Once Cameron and Gov get up after going over the 50 metre line at the completion of the play, the umpire starts calling Gov back immediately.

Second shot: Gov complies and is pointing at exactly where the mark should be, but the ump keeps calling him back.

Third shot: Don't think the ump's just calling him back a little bit ... the umpire is pointing to where he wants Gov to stand.

That's at least 3, if not 4 metres closer to goal. A distance that can be crucial with shots from about 50 out.



And then, just to put icing on the cake, the umpire makes the second mistake of not calling play-on, and therefore disallowing the goal, when Cameron runs off his line while taking the shot after the siren.

 

[LegendaryBlues]

The question surely needs to be asked how there wasn't an umpire with a view from behind cameron to make the call.
The controlling umpire is side on, but still should have been able to see. Worst thing is that even when the players know what's going on, the umpire basically just ignores and moves on.

 

[SurreyBlue]

The holding the ball rule is doing my head in. They have NFI what to pay anymore. It’s embarrassing.

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

They need to amend the HTB/incorrect disposal rule back to its original form, if you are caught/tackled while trying to dispose of the ball by hand and foot and you miss the disposal completely then it should be rewarded to the tackler, none of this made an attempt bullcrap, this alone would clear up most of the decisions making it easier on the umpires ability to make the right calls…

They’ve only just realized to go back to blowing the whistle quickly when the ball is held/pinned to a player who can’t release it, instead of waiting for the ball to just somehow eventually pop out so the can hopefully allow the play to roll on…

Same goes with the amount of time players are given to get rid of the ball, players spun around in circles or given a ridiculous amount of time to offload the ball so that the game hopefully flows on, back to the original rule in blowing the whistle in the fair but correct amount of time…

The changing of these original rules to suit the AFL’s way they wanted the game to be played has hurt the game by horrendous interpretations of some simple rules, you will always have some poor umpiring in games but the AFL and the rules committee are the core reason why the game is umpired in the way it is…

 

[skadoosh]

Like the rest of us, I was extremely happy with last night's performance, and I wish all I was thinking about today was how well the team performed ... but I was just gobsmacked by this:

First shot: It is clear that Cameron takes the mark just inside 50. Let's be generous and say that he's a metre inside 50. Once Cameron and Gov get up after going over the 50 metre line at the completion of the play, the umpire starts calling Gov back immediately.

Second shot: Gov complies and is pointing at exactly where the mark should be, but the ump keeps calling him back.

Third shot: Don't think the ump's just calling him back a little bit ... the umpire is pointing to where he wants Gov to stand.

That's at least 3, if not 4 metres closer to goal. A distance that can be crucial with shots from about 50 out.

View attachment 2026490

And then, just to put icing on the cake, the umpire makes the second mistake of not calling play-on, and therefore disallowing the goal, when Cameron runs off his line while taking the shot after the siren.

Which Ump was this?

 

[teagueyubeauty]

The holding the ball rule is doing my head in. They have NFI what to pay anymore. It’s embarrassing.

I said it at the time, they changed the interpretation of the wrong part of the rule.
If they’d been more strict on incorrect disposal every fan to a man and woman would have been happy.

But no, they disrespect the ball winner and so what happens 3 weeks later is the rule essentially what it was 4 weeks ago.

Absolute dumb campaigners


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[ESKIE]

Man I love Charlies curls

 

[Stamos]

I said it at the time, they changed the interpretation of the wrong part of the rule.
If they’d been more strict on incorrect disposal every fan to a man and woman would have been happy.

But no, they disrespect the ball winner and so what happens 3 weeks later is the rule essentially what it was 4 weeks ago.

Absolute dumb campaigners


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Cripps spoke well about this on SEN today

 

[BlueSuede]

Like the rest of us, I was extremely happy with last night's performance, and I wish all I was thinking about today was how well the team performed ... but I was just gobsmacked by this:

First shot: It is clear that Cameron takes the mark just inside 50. Let's be generous and say that he's a metre inside 50. Once Cameron and Gov get up after going over the 50 metre line at the completion of the play, the umpire starts calling Gov back immediately.

Second shot: Gov complies and is pointing at exactly where the mark should be, but the ump keeps calling him back.

Third shot: Don't think the ump's just calling him back a little bit ... the umpire is pointing to where he wants Gov to stand.

That's at least 3, if not 4 metres closer to goal. A distance that can be crucial with shots from about 50 out.

View attachment 2026490

And then, just to put icing on the cake, the umpire makes the second mistake of not calling play-on, and therefore disallowing the goal, when Cameron runs off his line while taking the shot after the siren.

Thanks for these graphics. Watching at home I was already furious when Gov was made to go five metres back from where the mark was took, but then livid when the play on wasn't called.

Anyway, all's well that ends well - just had a very frustrated half time!

 

[Blues_Man]

Umpires showing their ineptness and complete lack of consistence all game