Umpiring

[Area51]

Has there been a single comment on this by AFL accredited media? Grant Thomas has made comment but he is persona non grata at the AFL.

It speaks to the state of the AFL media, they are not journalists, they are sycophantic AFL story pushers that is all. Whether there is a clear instruction from AFL HQ to the umps to rort us or not makes no difference. The fact that the media are silent on it screams out loud that they are conflicted and complicit. By not calling it out they are "manufacturing consent" for it to continue. I use that term deliberately, read Chomsky.

 

[Coach_Required]

I think our supporters have been terrific regarding this issue, we are sick and tired of it and the constant booing is starting to get noticed. The media are trying their best to sweep it under the carpet but last weeks game it was getting too hard to ignore.

It's a shame our next game will be at the GABBA, I'm expecting something similar to the Saints game free kick wise.

 

[chriso11]

what I see is that players are being trained to not pin the arm to avoid a dangerous tackle. This gets combined with letting the play go on too long during a tackle and leads to the tackled player invariably finding a way to dispose of the ball through a mung kick or handball. Result is basically no holding the ball calls, and the utility of the tackle actually diminishing in our game. Hence turning it into some kind of basketball rugby

 

[banana_bus]

Where is the link to the thread on the main board? Or has this been deleted

 

[Coach_Required]

what I see is that players are being trained to not pin the arm to avoid a dangerous tackle. This gets combined with letting the play go on too long during a tackle and leads to the tackled player invariably finding a way to dispose of the ball through a mung kick or handball. Result is basically no holding the ball calls, and the utility of the tackle actually diminishing in our game. Hence turning it into some kind of basketball rugby

I just remember from quite a few years ago, the AFL rather not call holding the ball or incorrect disposal if the player attempts to get rid of it because the AFL wants the game to continue to flow. Free kicks stop the flow of the game.

Just a shame they only interpret it this way when we are tackling.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Alright this is actually something *y when looking at total frees across the league.

Taranto is 1st in the league for disposals, 3rd for contested disposals. 4th in the league for tackles, sitting 316th in the league for frees for. He has 190 total contested touches and 98 tackles and has got 9 FREES. 9! in 14 games.

Last year he has 25 touches, 9.7 contested and 4.8 tackles and got 1.7 frees per game.
This year he has 32 touches, 13.6 contested and 7 tackles and gets 0.6 frees per game.

Whats changed other than him moving clubs?

Adam Cerra has 34 frees for the season. Taranto, Prestia, Cotchin and Martin have a COMBINED 30 frees.

Not that the same contested possessions should lead to the same frees, but players that are wining the ball in close generally have a higher chance of getting infringed on. This is the top 20 contested ball winners with Richmond main midfielders.

Player	Contested Disposals	Frees for	Contested touches per free
Cerra	149	34	4.4
Mitchell	157	26	6
Rowell	186	27	6.9
Newcombe	145	21	6.9
Serong	181	26	7
Dunkley	184	26	7.1
Butters	155	21	7.4
Laird	180	23	7.8
Neale	189	24	7.9
Cripps	206	21	9.8
Oliver	157	16	9.8
Bont	198	18	11
Worpel	161	14	11.5
Crouch	164	14	11.7
Bolton	141	11	12.8
Martin	115	8	14.4
Libba	176	12	14.7
Kelly	174	11	15.8
Cotchin	97	6	16.2
Prestia	117	7	16.7
Green	188	11	17.1
Petrecca	180	10	18
Taranto	190	9	21.1
Anderson	166	6	27.7

That is astonishing about Taranto. Astonishing, but not surprising.

 

[Tiger Toffee]

And the reaming will continue in the next game, brisbane are +51.

Expect a -10 free kick count again.

 

[robin kennedy]

Has there been a single comment on this by AFL accredited media? Grant Thomas has made comment but he is persona non grata at the AFL.

It speaks to the state of the AFL media, they are not journalists, they are sycophantic AFL story pushers that is all. Whether there is a clear instruction from AFL HQ to the umps to rort us or not makes no difference. The fact that the media are silent on it screams out loud that they are conflicted and complicit. By not calling it out they are "manufacturing consent" for it to continue. I use that term deliberately, read Chomsky.

Absolutely, someone have the honesty, the guts and the integrity to actually call it as it is instead of the simple tow the line attitude that appears to run through the full AFL media. Are they on a direction? Who knows, all I know is, it`s a game first that I want to see not a contrived entertainment production. We all talk about the importance of honesty, well here is your chance. (Not only a reflection of RFC, this is a problem through the complete system. Umpiring, commentry, media reporting etc. etc.)

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

Has there been a single comment on this by AFL accredited media? Grant Thomas has made comment but he is persona non grata at the AFL.

It speaks to the state of the AFL media, they are not journalists, they are sycophantic AFL story pushers that is all. Whether there is a clear instruction from AFL HQ to the umps to rort us or not makes no difference. The fact that the media are silent on it screams out loud that they are conflicted and complicit. By not calling it out they are "manufacturing consent" for it to continue. I use that term deliberately, read Chomsky.

Some poster on here made the point as to what gain/advantage does the AFL achieve by being silent on the Umpiring suspect bias...maybe the answer lies hidden there...What do the AFL stand to gain?!?
What do the AFL stand to gain by allowing this sad state of affairs to continue...?!?
How does the State of the Game cope...?!?
How does the State of Umpiring cope...?!?
How does the State of Sports Journalism cope...well we all know the answer to that one...
Far as I am concerned...the powers that be, that manage the game, have it all stitched up. Just reminds me of my old Work place, the management had tight control and it was their way or the Highway! Even the Unions struggled to be relevant. H+O and fear of wrongful injury and being sued for it was the only Law respected! In such a tightly managed atmosphere it is hard to voice opposition....there is no oxygen to fan the embers of dissent!
I suspect the RFC has raised little issue with the AFL, for now , over this suspect umpiring bias...because B.G. is focused on the $70M plus redevelopment of PRO. But what would I know...

 

[Charlie Pannam]

remember when the head of umpires used to have a presso every Tuesday and run through good and bad stuff. Most importantly put up their hands when they got things wrong

Can’t do these days, we might hurt their feelings, might upset them, might lose umpires to the game, blah blah blah.

AFL’s way of putting their head in the sand and ignoring a growing problem

 

[Neen]

With the growing amounts of facts and data pointing towards the umpiring problems associated with our club, we only need one or two high profile media personalities to start the ball rolling. No more shoving it under the carpet.

 

[TheOptimum18]

If he paid the free kick it would also have been deemed correct because he held the ball with one arm free for a significant time and did not dispose of the ball correctly. Plenty of occasions on the weekend where these tackles were rewarded with a free kick.

But did he have prior? That is the first question that umps ask, and that determines if the player MUST legally dispose the ball, or whether they only need to make an attempt to.

If he didn't have prior (as in the case here, where Crouch (I think?)) was immediately tackled upon possessing the ball. Then, regardless of if he had an arm free or not, because Crouch had no prior, he only needs to attempt to dispose the ball.

 

[Livonski]

But did he have prior? That is the first question that umps ask, and that determines if the player MUST legally dispose the ball, or whether they only need to make an attempt to.

If he didn't have prior (as in the case here, where Crouch (I think?)) was immediately tackled upon possessing the ball. Then, regardless of if he had an arm free or not, because Crouch had no prior, he only needs to attempt to dispose the ball.

Well if that actually is the rule it is stupid.
Introduces another level of unnecessary complexity. If you get tackled with the ball and illegally dispose of it....BALL.
And as for Razor with the "accidentally got him high"? Jeez don't tell me that's a rule. 90% of high contact is accidental.
And above all this, the inconsistencies are glaring, it's needs to be simplified.
When I played footy (I know, I know) if you got tackled you had to get rid of it by handball or kick, there was no prior opportunity rubbish.
And if you were under the pump, often you didn't take possession but knocked it on, knowing if you picked it up you'd be tackled and pinged.
The ball movement was just fine back then with no prior.

 

[smasha]

I am trying to understand or explore how they could personally profit $ from their action? Otherwise what are their motives for blatant bias against us every week? Something is going on behind the scenes here. This weekly rorting is not happening by accident...

Something is going on behind the scenes.

 

[smasha]

And the reaming will continue in the next game, brisbane are +51.

Expect a -10 free kick count again.

Another swallowed third umpire replay.

 

[smasha]

remember when the head of umpires used to have a presso every Tuesday and run through good and bad stuff. Most importantly put up their hands when they got things wrong

Can’t do these days, we might hurt their feelings, might upset them, might lose umpires to the game, blah blah blah.

AFL’s way of putting their head in the sand and ignoring a growing problem

WE still got rorted ,they just covered it with a sorrreee and did it again the next week.

 

[Waca Jr]

Watched on tv, but the disapproval of the umpires post game was loud enough for me to enjoy. The bronx cheers just as loud too. The Channel 7 commentary was a disgrace too. Refused to bite all night. The best was Baker being tripped some campaigner said he tripped over himself in what world did that happen?

 

[beema limapep]

And the reaming will continue in the next game, brisbane are +51.

Expect a -10 free kick count again.

World record territory incoming.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Alright this is actually something *y when looking at total frees across the league.

Taranto is 1st in the league for disposals, 3rd for contested disposals. 4th in the league for tackles, sitting 316th in the league for frees for. He has 190 total contested touches and 98 tackles and has got 9 FREES. 9! in 14 games.

Last year he has 25 touches, 9.7 contested and 4.8 tackles and got 1.7 frees per game.
This year he has 32 touches, 13.6 contested and 7 tackles and gets 0.6 frees per game.

Whats changed other than him moving clubs?

Adam Cerra has 34 frees for the season. Taranto, Prestia, Cotchin and Martin have a COMBINED 30 frees.

Not that the same contested possessions should lead to the same frees, but players that are wining the ball in close generally have a higher chance of getting infringed on. This is the top 20 contested ball winners with Richmond main midfielders.

Player	Contested Disposals	Frees for	Contested touches per free
Cerra	149	34	4.4
Mitchell	157	26	6
Rowell	186	27	6.9
Newcombe	145	21	6.9
Serong	181	26	7
Dunkley	184	26	7.1
Butters	155	21	7.4
Laird	180	23	7.8
Neale	189	24	7.9
Cripps	206	21	9.8
Oliver	157	16	9.8
Bont	198	18	11
Worpel	161	14	11.5
Crouch	164	14	11.7
Bolton	141	11	12.8
Martin	115	8	14.4
Libba	176	12	14.7
Kelly	174	11	15.8
Cotchin	97	6	16.2
Prestia	117	7	16.7
Green	188	11	17.1
Petrecca	180	10	18
Taranto	190	9	21.1
Anderson	166	6	27.7

That’s a great analysis. Comparing like for like and taking in all opponents. It seems miraculous that competing teams stop offending against only Richmond players at stoppages.

Here’s another list taking in just 2022-23. It’s looking at frees kicks as a percentage of contested marks.

So for example Charlie Curnow has had 78 contested marks, has received 51 free kicks. So his ratio is 51 / 78 = 65.4.

Here they are from 1 to 13:

Larkey: 100%
Allen: 100
McKay: 72.7
Walker: 70.6
Naughton: 67.2
Curnow: 65.4
JRoo: 56.9
Daniher: 56.4
Michocek: 50
Dixon: 41.7
Lynch: 40.3
Hogan: 37.5
Hawkins: 35.9

Or ‘frees for’ minus ‘frees against’:

Curnow: 27
McKay: 24
Naughton: 24
Allen: 19
Larkey: 15
Hogan: 8
Daniher: -6
Michocek: -7
Lynch: -8
JRoo: -10
Dixon: -12
Walker: -12
Hawkins: -17

Hawkins, Walker and Dixon are potentially slightl outliers as they contest forward 50 ruck contests, but I don’t know the stats for FA in ruck contests.

So if your gut tells you Curnow and McKay get a good run from the umpires….you were right.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Tiger V]

keep getting told that it's the way the Tigers play on the edge and that's why we give away a lot of free's.
it's not that at all it's about the free's don't get paid. this cannot keep going on it is starting to become too obvious the shit will hit the fan soon.

 

[Neen]

Watched on tv, but the disapproval of the umpires post game was loud enough for me to enjoy. The bronx cheers just as loud too. The Channel 7 commentary was a disgrace too. Refused to bite all night. The best was Baker being tripped some campaigner said he tripped over himself in what world did that happen?

Being at the ground, hearing the very loud boos and then watching the replay suggests the boos were faded out of the live telecast. This has been done for years - especially prior to 2017, then the Cheer and Grog squad used the "Bullsheet, Bullsheet" when dodgy frees were given to the oppo in front of goal.

But it completely ignored by the commentators, which is a reflection on their lack of professionalism. Like I posted earlier, all that is needed is a high profile media guru with the stats in their hand and it would be an interesting story at least. Now if we were Collingwood, Bulldogs or Geelong - it would have been a huge story YEARS ago...

 

[Wallaby]

It's McQualter's fault. Seriously.

Up until Rd 10, we had not a bad run with frees. We won the free kick count 5 times - we lost it 5 times. We had a total of 185 Frees for, and 182 against. No real complaints, I thought.

Since McQualter taking over, we have lost the free kick count 4 straight times - 14-23, 10-15, 7-18, 12-25.
Of those games -
The fewest free kicks in any game this season Port Adelaide have conceded was 14, against us Rd 11.
The fewest free kicks in any game this season GWS have conceded was 10, against us in Rd 12.
The fewest free kicks in any game this season Fremantle have conceded was 7, against us in Rd 13.
The fewest free kicks in any game this season St Kilda have conceded was 12, against us in Rd 14.

IT'S NOT US INFRINGING! - IT"S OUR OPPONENTS MIRACULOUSLY NOT INFRINGING AGAINST US!!

It's the lowest free-kick count (43) over 4 games that any side has received in 4 straight games over the year.
It's the worst total free-kick differential (-38) for any side for 4 straight games over the year.

The next Lowest free kick total for 4 straight rounds was Essendon, who received 49 in Rds 8-11. However, their differential over that period was only (-12). Essendon games have been in general low free-kick total games for both sides, and Essendon have received more frees than their opponents.

The next worst differential I could find for 4 straight games was Adelaide (-22) Rd 9-12.

And overall - woo-hoo! - were back on top of the negative free kick differential ladder!

 

[Tigerbob68]

This has been done for years - especially prior to 2017, then the Cheer and Grog squad used the "Bullsheet, Bullsheet" when dodgy frees were given to the oppo in front of goal.

Go back and watch the 1995 SF v Essendon when there was a few free kicks to the Bummers that the crowd didn't like

 

[All Aust]

And the reaming will continue in the next game, brisbane are +51.

Expect a -10 free kick count again.

Totally getting screwed on the no reward for good tackles. On the other stuff, I am happy that the fluoros give fewer free kicks to the oppo. That is the oppos have to endure the same contacts as we do. Probs, we'd just be slightly negative on the free kick ladder. That would match our game style.

Just one glass half full observation. The further we've free kick screwed, the better we've been playing. Go figure? If this trend continue vs Bears, scoreboard wise, we gonna whoop their hairy ass.

 

[biaseddustyfan]

But did he have prior? That is the first question that umps ask, and that determines if the player MUST legally dispose the ball, or whether they only need to make an attempt to.

If he didn't have prior (as in the case here, where Crouch (I think?)) was immediately tackled upon possessing the ball. Then, regardless of if he had an arm free or not, because Crouch had no prior, he only needs to attempt to dispose the ball.

worth clarifying, he needs to genuinely attempt to correctly dispose of it

if a player has zero prior, but just chucks or drops the ball, or doesn't really look like they're even trying, that is still a free kick against them for incorrect disposal or HTB. they need to genuinely attempt to make a proper handball or kick

for the record I don't remember this particular tackle that's being talked about, so maybe it was a correct ruling here. but yeah no prior doesn't mean you can get away with anything, and the umpires certainly let that happen a lot. just watch a carltoon game