State of Umpiring [merged]

[mightytiges]

I just watched the replay of the game. The umpiring was as shocking on TV as it was watching it live at the ground  .

There were a number of times last night where both players were grabbing each other's jumper in the same aerial contest yet every single one was paid a free to St Kilda  . It was even picked on the TV when a Saints opponent clearly had a fist full of Jack's #8 on the back of his jumper and the dopey ump paid it a free against Jack .

I also had to laugh when Razor Ray said to one of our players who queried why there wasn't a free to us for high contact - "Nah, it was accidental" . Can Razor show us in the AFL rulebook where "I didn't mean to do it" is an excuse?

[Tiger Khosh]

Are you saying that prior opportunity should be removed and the player tackled should automatically be called for holding the ball?

If the ball isn't disposed of legally, yes I think that's the suggestion.

Pick it up and get rid of it or just punch/kick it along


Personally I think we shouldn't pay high contact if it doesn't start high and isn't severe.

That would result in a ridiculous amount of free kicks and get rid of all stoppages other than throw ins and centre bounces.

Prior opportunity itself isn’t a rule it’s a way that they adjudicate the holding the ball rule. if you make it so players would be pinged holding the ball even if they are tackled straight away then what is their motivation to grab the ball other than in uncontested situations? You’d be left with players just kicking it off the ground or continuously paddling it on the ground or even worse just huddled around the ball waiting for someone to pick it up just so they can tackle them and win a free kick.

[Diocletian]

If a player has the time to take more than one step then they have the time to get rid off the ball. Reduce the (unofficial?) 360 rule to 240 as well.

[Andyy]

Are you saying that prior opportunity should be removed and the player tackled should automatically be called for holding the ball?

If the ball isn't disposed of legally, yes I think that's the suggestion.

Pick it up and get rid of it or just punch/kick it along


Personally I think we shouldn't pay high contact if it doesn't start high and isn't severe.

That would result in a ridiculous amount of free kicks and get rid of all stoppages other than throw ins and centre bounces.

Prior opportunity itself isn’t a rule it’s a way that they adjudicate the holding the ball rule. if you make it so players would be pinged holding the ball even if they are tackled straight away then what is their motivation to grab the ball other than in uncontested situations? You’d be left with players just kicking it off the ground or continuously paddling it on the ground or even worse just huddled around the ball waiting for someone to pick it up just so they can tackle them and win a free kick.

Used to be more like that a long time ago.

Less congestion would be good. Not saying it's the way to go though.

[Tiger Khosh]

Are you saying that prior opportunity should be removed and the player tackled should automatically be called for holding the ball?

If the ball isn't disposed of legally, yes I think that's the suggestion.

Pick it up and get rid of it or just punch/kick it along


Personally I think we shouldn't pay high contact if it doesn't start high and isn't severe.

That would result in a ridiculous amount of free kicks and get rid of all stoppages other than throw ins and centre bounces.

Prior opportunity itself isn’t a rule it’s a way that they adjudicate the holding the ball rule. if you make it so players would be pinged holding the ball even if they are tackled straight away then what is their motivation to grab the ball other than in uncontested situations? You’d be left with players just kicking it off the ground or continuously paddling it on the ground or even worse just huddled around the ball waiting for someone to pick it up just so they can tackle them and win a free kick.

Used to be more like that a long time ago.

Less congestion would be good. Not saying it's the way to go though.

Must have been pre-afl era? From what I can remember ‘prior opportunity’ has been reduced more and more as the years go by.

Imo the main cause of the inconsistent umpiring is that the afl feel the need to add more rules and change the interpretation of existing rules in their pathetic attempt to open up the game because apparently that’s what the ‘fans’ want.

Leave the game alone I say. It’s fine how it is/was. Nothing they are doing are actually proving to statistically increase scoring (at least significantly) and they are just making it aesthetically worse seeing players stand around like traffic cones like it’s netball.

[one-eyed]

There were a number of times last night where both players were grabbing each other's jumper in the same aerial contest yet every single one was paid a free to St Kilda  . It was even picked on the TV when a Saints opponent clearly had a fist full of Jack's #8 on the back of his jumper and the dopey ump paid it a free against Jack .

This was paid a free AGAINST Bolton plus 50 for dissent .


https://twitter.com/Richmond_TT/status/1670256734563352576

[Tiger Khosh]

I dread to think what awaits us in Brisbane in a fortnight might go see the Doc and get some medication in advance

Brisbane with the best free kick differential in the league while we have the second worst. What could possibly go wrong…..

[WilliamPowell]

There were a number of times last night where both players were grabbing each other's jumper in the same aerial contest yet every single one was paid a free to St Kilda  . It was even picked on the TV when a Saints opponent clearly had a fist full of Jack's #8 on the back of his jumper and the dopey ump paid it a free against Jack .

This was paid a free AGAINST Bolton plus 50 for dissent .


https://twitter.com/Richmond_TT/status/1670256734563352576

Clearly the free was wrong but once paid the dissent was the right call

I get that Shai was peeved but he just has shut up. He gives away to many 50 metre penalties

[Tiger Khosh]

You’re right WP but it’s much easier said then done with the shaftings we are continually getting not to explode at some point especially during tight contests.

[mightytiges]

I do love when Jobe Watson says the ump (Razor) was blindsided and missed Bolton's jumper being grabbed. Isn't this why there's four umpires now?

Vision of the above Bolton pic: https://twitter.com/outbreezyWC/status/1670030767274221569

[WilliamPowell]

I do love when Jobe Watson says the ump (Razor) was blindsided and missed Bolton's jumper being grabbed. Isn't this why there's four umpires now?

Vision of the above Bolton pic: https://twitter.com/outbreezyWC/status/1670030767274221569

The single biggest problem with the 4 ump system is you have an umpire like Razor who will call what he sees even if he isn't the controlling ump which is why they bought in this system. But then you have others who just look at one another and do nothing. They even go to blow their whistle and stop at the last second 

Now there was a free for a hold against Cotch in the 2nd I think it was that Razor called as the non officiating ump while Boton was running forward. I think most us got agitated because the ball was bought back to Cotch but it was actually the correct call. Ball had to come back as Razor had called the free, can't pay advantage if a free is called by the non officiating ump. This situation is why we have 4 umpires now. Point I'm trying to make is this system will only work if ALL umps are prepared to pay the stuff they see (like Razor did)  then the system may just stand a chance

[The Machine]

There were a number of times last night where both players were grabbing each other's jumper in the same aerial contest yet every single one was paid a free to St Kilda  . It was even picked on the TV when a Saints opponent clearly had a fist full of Jack's #8 on the back of his jumper and the dopey ump paid it a free against Jack .

This was paid a free AGAINST Bolton plus 50 for dissent .


https://twitter.com/Richmond_TT/status/1670256734563352576

Clearly the free was wrong but once paid the dissent was the right call

I get that Shai was peeved but he just has shut up. He gives away to many 50 metre penalties

The umps were pathetic, however this one the ump was facing the players, thus didn't see the hold on the back of the jumper.

[The Machine]

I just watched the replay of the game. The umpiring was as shocking on TV as it was watching it live at the ground  .

There were a number of times last night where both players were grabbing each other's jumper in the same aerial contest yet every single one was paid a free to St Kilda  . It was even picked on the TV when a Saints opponent clearly had a fist full of Jack's #8 on the back of his jumper and the dopey ump paid it a free against Jack .

I also had to laugh when Razor Ray said to one of our players who queried why there wasn't a free to us for high contact - "Nah, it was accidental" . Can Razor show us in the AFL rulebook where "I didn't mean to do it" is an excuse?

Shocking call from Razor Ray- we are never afforded the same- ever!

[Chuck17]

There were a number of times last night where both players were grabbing each other's jumper in the same aerial contest yet every single one was paid a free to St Kilda  . It was even picked on the TV when a Saints opponent clearly had a fist full of Jack's #8 on the back of his jumper and the dopey ump paid it a free against Jack .

This was paid a free AGAINST Bolton plus 50 for dissent .


https://twitter.com/Richmond_TT/status/1670256734563352576

Clearly the free was wrong but once paid the dissent was the right call

I get that Shai was peeved but he just has shut up. He gives away to many 50 metre penalties

The rule is being over officiated and is a killer for the game like the host of other things the AFL does to stuff up the game.

A crap decision is a crap decision and anyone should have the right to express their disagreeance with it as long as it isnt over the top or physically threatening.

[Buddysucks]

Given the state of the AFL tribunal at the moment Gary Rohan must be thinking he’s in trouble for the contact on teammate Jeremy Cameron 😳