Worst umpiring decisions

[beyondthevalley ofthedogs]

Evidence of cheating please.

We've all made casual wisecracks in the outer about umpires being paid off but surely you don't seriously believe there is systemic cheating?

If it's a choice between conspiracy or incompetence, back incompetence every time (a variation of Hanlon's Razor)

I once worked with one of his fellow umpires (boundary not field) who knew the "offender". In his words, not cheating just a massive "brain fade" (you should see all the free kicks that quarter - those two aren't even the worst!). A 300 plus game veteran - never umpired at senior level again and rightly so

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

I think we are very naive if we think AFL umpiring is not open to corruption, there is a lot of money tied up in AFL.

 

[dogwatch]

I think we are very naive if we think AFL umpiring is not open to corruption, there is a lot of money tied up in AFL.

I can agree with this, but it should not be the go-to response when decisions don't go our way in any given match.
999 times out of a 1000 there will be a less dramatic and less satisfying reason for it.

 

[MYOB]

I reckon that one against Baker for shepherding the goal through was one of the worst I've seen. Can't recall seeing it paid before. And of course it killed our chance of pulling a rabbit out of the hat.
Another crazy one was when Johnno was knocked out and a free paid against him for holding the ball.
Then the cluster* of frees v the Saints in that 2009 final - Captain Collapse dive, Hargrave's incorrect disposal when he kicked the ball when tackled and Acker's deliberate OOB when he kicked it about 50 m down field and it ended up bouncing sideways over the boundary.

The worst one of 09 was when the ball was on the wing, a FK was paid to us on the HBF and they paid the free on the HBF rather than the wing.

 

[Fossie 32]

The worst one of 09 was when the ball was on the wing, a FK was paid to us on the HBF and they paid the free on the HBF rather than the wing.

Add that to the list!

 

[hutchy31]

The worst one in recent history in my mind was the Blicavs non htb call in the final seconds against Brisbane last year.

That was not only an incredible non-decision because it was so obviously there, it also absolutely decided the game as a) there was less than a kick in it and Geelong were ahead, b) Bailey would have definitely kicked the goal as it was effectively in the goal square, and c) there would’ve been no time left for Geelong to respond.

That’s an all-timer for me, and puts the Baker one in perspective.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

There was a Brisbane game against Geelong, several years ago, where in the last minute a Brisbane player was tackled without the ball, it should have been a free kick to Brisbane, but instead Geelong played on goaled and win the game. It also meant Brisbane missed finals. I will try and find it. It caused a bit of a stir, but no change.

 

[Libbaaaa]

It was more a push in the back instead of a shepherd, bad timing as he’d just jumped so it looked a lot worse. It’s just you hardly ever see them and Port got every rub of the green imaginable throughout the game that made it even worse for us.

I see Port fans point to the free kick count that they only got 1 more than us. I refuse to watch it, but I think we got about 5 free kicks in the last few minutes that really evened it up. Naughton for a hold when he marked it anyway and Williams after disposal were 2 of them.

It wasn’t even the count though, it’s everything they missed for us and everything they got as a result, like Rioli dragging Duryea to the ground and JHF getting the resulting goal that ended it late, or early 2nd quarter Powell-Pepper getting up laughing that he’d conned a free kick in the pocket that he nearly goaled from. Or worst of all, Naughton & Lobb being held at every contest and never called until the late one when it no longer mattered

From memory the reason it stuck out to me was it was a good metre from the goal line with Baker having his back to the ball. Usually it’s a free for all on the goal line when players are facing the ball.

Regardless don’t think we win even if it’s paid. Also Cody needs to send that into the third tier, no pressure snap.

 

[Nat Fyfe]

I know of a dog's player who was cheated out of Brownlow and it wasn't Grant.

Gotta be West losing to Woewodin in 2000 right? Woewodin not even in the top 5 players on field in the final round of the season and polls 2, robbing West of sharing the medal. Literally no one expected those votes, not even Shane himself

 

[Fossie 32]

And George Bissett

 

[geoffjennings79]

The worst umpiring decisions have been going from 2 to 3 field umpires, then to 4. Not far behind is some of the appointments to the Director of Umpiring role and other senior roles.

Also the continual complexity added to rules and interpretations, which are not always the same thing.

And the enforcement at the start of the season of a new or modified rule, only fir it to be completely ignored after a few weeks like it never existed.

And rules of the week suddenly being enforced in scenarios that in weeks prior did not draw any umpiring decision.

Also the scenarios where a player is incapacitated through an oppo player act, so the victim's team is inconvenienced at best, or effectively penalised at worst, but the perpetrator and his team suffer no consequences until after the completion of the game. Sling tackles, instances where an immediate report is warranted, etc. The penalty should be in-game - sin-bin, send off, yellow shower from victim's supporters - there has to be an immediate consequence.

Anyway, I'm bemused by my ability to be totally pragmatic at junior and local leagues and accept the umpires are doing the best that they can, as opposed to the well-paid but completely incompetent maggots who are rewarded with completely $%@&ing up the game at the highest levels of AFL and AFLW.

Oh well.

 

[dogwatch]

The worst umpiring decisions have been going from 2 to 3 field umpires, then to 4. Not far behind is some of the appointments to the Director of Umpiring role and other senior roles.

Also the continual complexity added to rules and interpretations, which are not always the same thing.

And the enforcement at the start of the season of a new or modified rule, only fir it to be completely ignored after a few weeks like it never existed.

And rules of the week suddenly being enforced in scenarios that in weeks prior did not draw any umpiring decision.

Also the scenarios where a player is incapacitated through an oppo player act, so the victim's team is inconvenienced at best, or effectively penalised at worst, but the perpetrator and his team suffer no consequences until after the completion of the game. Sling tackles, instances where an immediate report is warranted, etc. The penalty should be in-game - sin-bin, send off, yellow shower from victim's supporters - there has to be an immediate consequence.

Anyway, I'm bemused by my ability to be totally pragmatic at junior and local leagues and accept the umpires are doing the best that they can, as opposed to the well-paid but completely incompetent maggots who are rewarded with completely $%@&ing up the game at the highest levels of AFL and AFLW.

Oh well.

You've summed it up pretty well GJ79.

Except you forgot that the "after the game" consequences often disappear too if the perpetrators club have enough money for lawyers to take on the AFL. The AFL seems to back down and quash the original conviction more often than not. And it's not like it's just an occasional egregious decision that everyone agrees is a mistake - it seems to happen every other week, What does this say about the integrity and thoroughness of their judicial system in the first place? On average you'd expect most appeals to be dismissed.

I'm in agreement with you though, that it's not so much the maggots* as the maggot-in-chief (Lord of the Flies?) who is to blame.


* A disgraceful term! Some of my best friends are mag... umpires.

 

[scooter600x]

The worst umpiring "decision" (it wasn't a decision, as such) was in the 98 Qualifying final v West Coast at the MCG.

Wirrapunda got a free inside the centre square. As the umpires swapped positions, the 2nd umpire set the mark just inside the 50, effectively giving him a 10m penalty. The ball cleared Scott Wynd on the goal line by inches and we lost by 5 pts.

Another one from that night - Chris Grant put his knee on Jakovich's head as he took a hanger and got a free against him for high contact!

Shocking windy conditions and we kicked it out on the full something like 23 times.

 

[geoffjennings79]

The worst umpiring "decision" (it wasn't a decision, as such) was in the 98 Qualifying final v West Coast at the MCG.

Wirrapunda got a free inside the centre square. As the umpires swapped positions, the 2nd umpire set the mark just inside the 50, effectively giving him a 10m penalty. The ball cleared Scott Wynd on the goal line by inches and we lost by 5 pts.

Another one from that night - Chris Grant put his knee on Jakovich's head as he took a hanger and got a free against him for high contact!

Shocking windy conditions and we kicked it out on the full something like 23 times.

We thrashed WCE in 98, the game you're thinking of was 99. Winmar got crunched in the opening minutes by Wirrpanda, and he was finished for the night, so we played one man down.

But 99 qual was lost at selection. Swirly wind, Wallace omitted James Cook. Our reserves played first on the Friday night, and Cook was kicking them from everywhere.

Seniors - Scott Cummings kicks 4.1 - allowing for the breeze perfectly. Our forwards took turns finding larger margins to miss by, including numerous set shots on the full as you say. Kolyniuk the only one who had any idea, and nearly dragged us over the line, with 4 goals of his own. From memory we were banging it forward repeatedly late, just couldn't get it to Billy one more time to pinch the game.

Admittedly Cookie struggled the last handful of H&A games, so Wallace decided to go in short in the forward line.

Also Eagles went direct, played the wind really well, while we accumulated possessions going round in circles - a not unfamiliar story!
More kicks, more marks, more handballs, more kicks at goal - same scoring shots. It's in our DNA!

 

[Mantis Toboggan]

the Riewoldt dive in 2099 come to mind.

This is a hell of a prediction dogwatch

 

[dogwatch]

This is a hell of a prediction dogwatch

Just call me Nostradogwatch

 

[gohardorgohome]

Worst one ever in my opinion was when I was a teenager in the 80s

The Footscray player went to punch the ball away as a spoil. The ball then hit the point post.

Umpire Vas Vasilou then paid a free kick to Carlton for deliberate out of bounds…

Vasilou got dropped the next week and wasn’t heard of much thereafter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GetDimmaBack]

This is more of a puzzle than a bad decision:

Full back marks on the goal line, b/w goal post and behind post.
Kicks from behind the line - inside the boundary - and hits the back of the behind post.

Without consulting the rule book, what's the correct decision?


BTW, this actually happened in a game involving the Dogs.

 

[X_box_X]

Ever heard of Tom Henning Ovrebo?

Google & YouTube him and you'll understand why I've mentioned him. The experienced referee is remembered for one thing and one thing only.

I'm surprised he wasn't killed, honestly.

 

[X_box_X]

This is more of a puzzle than a bad decision:

Full back marks on the goal line, b/w goal post and behind post.
Kicks from behind the line - inside the boundary - and hits the back of the behind post.

What's the correct decision?

Out of bounds, IMO.

One rule that annoys me is the ball has to travel 15 metres for a mark to be paid, but the same logic doesn't apply for balls kicked OOF. I.e. If the ball is inside the field of play close to the boundary line, and in the midst of a contest the ball travels over the line after coming off a player's boot, a free kick is paid. Yet if the ball travelled the same distance straight into a player's chest, it's play on.

If it's good for the goose, then surely it has to be good for the gander.

 

[geoffjennings79]

This is more of a puzzle than a bad decision:

Full back marks on the goal line, b/w goal post and behind post.
Kicks from behind the line - inside the boundary - and hits the back of the behind post.

Without consulting the rule book, what's the correct decision?


BTW, this actually happened in a game involving the Dogs.

Isn't it effectively in play once the ball is kicked in that scenario? I'd say a rushed behind... but, well this is the AFL - so decision probably varies based on club involved!

Who was our FB that did this?

I remember Quinlan marking the ball at Geelong Rd end standing behind the post with one hand either side of the post, with his hands still in play before the ball hit the post. Never seen a still shot, but it's in one of those Ch7 1970s season highlights.

 

[Fossie 32]

This is more of a puzzle than a bad decision:

Full back marks on the goal line, b/w goal post and behind post.
Kicks from behind the line - inside the boundary - and hits the back of the behind post.

Without consulting the rule book, what's the correct decision?


BTW, this actually happened in a game involving the Dogs.

I would have thought it hasn't entered the field of play so the kick could be taken again

 

[dogwatch]

This is more of a puzzle than a bad decision:

Full back marks on the goal line, b/w goal post and behind post.
Kicks from behind the line - inside the boundary - and hits the back of the behind post.

Without consulting the rule book, what's the correct decision?


BTW, this actually happened in a game involving the Dogs.

There's a rule book? I never knew that.

 

[geoffjennings79]

There's a rule book? I never knew that.

Neither do the AFL!

 

[Fossie 32]

I would have thought it hasn't entered the field of play so the kick could be taken again

Oh hang in it happened to us - decision out on the full