Roast Umpiring: Corruption or Incompetence, or both

[butchyboy101]

Still, if you allow me a suggestions the standard for revision shouldn't be your own; at least, not at first. Those calls AND NO-CALLS must be primarily measured against one another. What would be the definition for HTB, DoB, marks, high tackles, fifties, etc.,d they call HTB similarly throughout the game?

Kind of ignored this question before, but thought I would provide the definitions we use for these free kicks. One thing to be aware of is that our philosophy in umpiring isn’t really to pay free kicks based on what we paid previously, it is to pay free kicks based on the laws and our interpretations. This may lead to inconsistency but is just the way it is coached.

Definitions
HTB: There are three ways HTB can be paid:
1. Players has prior opportunity (defined as a chance to handball or kick), legally tackled, fails to immediately legally dispose of ball.
2. Dived on ball, player must get ball out from pack. If he does not, free kick.
3. Absorbs tackle, fails to make a genuine attempt to get ball out.

DoB: SANFL and AFL differ slightly. Particularly now in the SANFL last kick/handball is paid, so we are encouraged to very rarely pay deliberate. In the AFL, the definition I have heard from the AFL is “what was the players options” IE could he kick it to the middle of the ground, or did he go straight to the boundary? I don’t like this definition. If you are interested in the old one that I preferred, just ask.

Mark: Player must control the ball

High tackle: Contact above the shoulder

Fifties: There are quite a range of times a 50m can be paid. You can read them in the rule book (google AFL law book LDF).

 

[GremioPower]

Kind of ignored this question before, but thought I would provide the definitions we use for these free kicks. One thing to be aware of is that our philosophy in umpiring isn’t really to pay free kicks based on what we paid previously, it is to pay free kicks based on the laws and our interpretations. This may lead to inconsistency but is just the way it is coached.

Definitions
HTB: There are three ways HTB can be paid:
1. Players has prior opportunity (defined as a chance to handball or kick), legally tackled, fails to immediately legally dispose of ball.
2. Dived on ball, player must get ball out from pack. If he does not, free kick.
3. Absorbs tackle, fails to make a genuine attempt to get ball out.

DoB: SANFL and AFL differ slightly. Particularly now in the SANFL last kick/handball is paid, so we are encouraged to very rarely pay deliberate. In the AFL, the definition I have heard from the AFL is “what was the players options” IE could he kick it to the middle of the ground, or did he go straight to the boundary? I don’t like this definition. If you are interested in the old one that I preferred, just ask.

Mark: Player must control the ball

High tackle: Contact above the shoulder

Fifties: There are quite a range of times a 50m can be paid. You can read them in the rule book (google AFL law book LDF).

Here:
https://www.google.com.br/url?sa=t&...gCTkQFggkMAA&usg=AOvVaw0fXiHTC5odMe163sIrpKAX

Thanks.

 

[mic59]

The 4-umpire experiment is now over and in rounds 13 and 14 there were 576 frees paid in 12 games at an average of 48 per game. In rounds 11 and 12 there were 681 frees in 16 games which is an average of 42.55. Watching a few games on telly there didn't seem to be too much difference between the number of howlers missed.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Last games we have had oppo sooking about us apparently getting a free ride from the umps. On grandstand they were in particular and talked about the home ground umpiring we get lol.

 

[xflamedancer]

Last games we have had oppo sooking about us apparently getting a free ride from the umps. On grandstand they were in particular and talked about the home ground umpiring we get lol.

#freekickport I'd like to see that

 

[Visenfest]

Last games we have had oppo sooking about us apparently getting a free ride from the umps. On grandstand they were in particular and talked about the home ground umpiring we get lol.

5 minutes of research would dispel the myth that we get the rub of the green at home, and they couldn't even be bothered doing that.

 

[GremioPower]

I have concluded that it doesn't make sense considering the frees count. Either the frees are there or they aren't, a team can deservedly get more frees than the opposition, and there is no rule stating frees should be evenly spread between teams.

Frees count only hides where the true issue lies: inconsistent calling within a game. Mistakes will always happen, but calling plays consistently most of the time is key for a fair game.

By QT, it must be clear for everybody the standards the umpires are using for their calls; and those standards must remain the same until the final siren. If a team gets a 40-12 count under such a circumstance, that is absolutely fine.

 

[chiwigi]

Just FYI in this thread. Butchyboy definitely has the umpiring background he claims, he is also as hardcore a Ports fan as you will get.

Basically, if he says it wasn’t a free for us, it wasn’t a free .

 

[Weez]

It's the inconsistency that frustrates me. For example yesterday gray clearly got legged/tripped in front of goal but called play on (happened last week too)

EXACT same thing happened in the Bulldogs game and it got called a free...

Then they pay that awful hanging on free to Armitage 10m out because he throws his arms out..

 

[It Just Is]

We get wrecked by umpires in Tassie and there’s barely a peep in the media.

North Melbourne give up a goal or two in a comfortable win and it’s up the top of the agenda on Monday nights footy shows.

 

[GremioPower]

We get wrecked by umpires in Tassie and there’s barely a peep in the media.

North Melbourne give up a goal or two in a comfortable win and it’s up the top of the agenda on Monday nights footy shows.

 

[Smithy7]

Umpire Incompetence ...
Why did they not pay a free to SPP here ..Unbelievable

 

[Alberton Proud]

View attachment 525839
Umpire Incompetence ...
Why did they not pay a free to SPP here ..Unbelievable

SPP clearly ducked = prior opportunity = should have been a free to the dogs

#afllogic

 

[RossFC]

View attachment 525839
Umpire Incompetence ...
Why did they not pay a free to SPP here ..Unbelievable

Looks like that St Kilda player likes SPP a bit too much.

 

[Smithy7]

SPP clearly ducked = prior opportunity = should have been a free to the dogs

#afllogic

Yes ... ducked down to get the ball, he never had the ball ........ commentators must be wrong as well, saying why not a free to SPP

 

[Alberton Proud]

If that was Tom Mitchell and the tackler was SPP it would have reached saturation exposure in the Vic media to the point where they would have been calling for a 2 week ban

 

[Garibaldi Red]

View attachment 525839
Umpire Incompetence ...
Why did they not pay a free to SPP here ..Unbelievable

Contact below the knees, free kick St Kilda

 

[Moo87]

Nothing like enforcing the 10m protected zone for a crucial shot by allowing someone to stand around 3m away instead, completely ignoring the 9m goalsquare line which could’ve easily been used to set them up. It’s the same pattern of umpires not using the available cues, similar to the Marshall 50 weeks ago, which are completely baffling.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Nothing like enforcing the 10m protected zone for a crucial shot by allowing someone to stand around 3m away instead, completely ignoring the 9m goalsquare line which could’ve easily been used to set them up. It’s the same pattern of umpires not using the available cues, similar to the Marshall 50 weeks ago, which are completely baffling.

This was infuriating, and at a crunch moment of the game. Wingard pointed it out and the ump just ignored him.

We should absolutely be asking questions, but obviously we won't.

 

[mic59]

Nothing like enforcing the 10m protected zone for a crucial shot by allowing someone to stand around 3m away instead, completely ignoring the 9m goalsquare line which could’ve easily been used to set them up. It’s the same pattern of umpires not using the available cues, similar to the Marshall 50 weeks ago, which are completely baffling.

I'm glad you posted this, I saw that too and I thought that's so basic an error by an ump that maybe I was wrong. Although I probably shouldn't be surprised at all with some of the howlers where they demonstrate that they can't even measure properly.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Nothing like enforcing the 10m protected zone for a crucial shot by allowing someone to stand around 3m away instead, completely ignoring the 9m goalsquare line which could’ve easily been used to set them up. It’s the same pattern of umpires not using the available cues, similar to the Marshall 50 weeks ago, which are completely baffling.

They are dumb, unaccountable swill. Nothing will happen to the idiot who set this up and the other 2 dills especially the one who was inside our 50m arc.

 

[Moo87]

This was infuriating, and at a crunch moment of the game. Wingard pointed it out and the ump just ignored him.

We should absolutely be asking questions, but obviously we won't.

At least Ken questioned it in his press conference. It’s not even an area of interpretation, nor can you argue about the perception of the distance. It was just clearly wrong, and they had time to correct it.

 

[ploppy]

This encroaching on the players free kick for goal has to stop its ruining the game. They should be allowed nowhere near it. If it was anywhere else it would be 50 metres. The point should be made the defenders can do nothing it’s going to be a goal unless the kicker misses.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Mark made by umpire





Off goes Chad

 

[TeeKray]

The free against Shaw was bullshit in the first place, it was kind of karma that it ended up being dubiously touched.