State of Umpiring [merged]

[RollsRoyce]

Can someone explain what the free kick against Browny on the members wing was for when he didn't have possession of the footy?

It has no effect on the outcome of the game but there were some perplexing double standards with holding the ball decisions yesterday  ???.

I can't remember the specific incident you're talking about MT.But then, I spent a lot of the day with my head in my hands,before leaving at 3/4 time. But what I would say is that there have been some perplexing double standards re: holding the ball and Richmond for several weeks now, at least. Cast your mind back to the North game. Or even the Saints game. The incidents that got my blood boiling yesterday were:
(1) When Tambling was tackled round the neck and pinged for holding the ball, right in front of Sydney's goals of course.
(2) When Moore was pinged for interfering with White in the goalsquare, when in fact it was clearly the no.18 who had slung him out of the contest.
Just in general play though, the umpires were applying the often-used "the split-second a Richmond player is tackled, it's holding the ball" rule.

 

[Tigermonk]

Can someone explain what the free kick against Browny on the members wing was for when he didn't have possession of the footy?

It has no effect on the outcome of the game but there were some perplexing double standards with holding the ball decisions yesterday  ???.

yes it dumbfounded me as well. seen something the same before that & the decision was wrong again. Umpires dont know thier own rules

[Chuck17]

Can someone explain what the free kick against Browny on the members wing was for when he didn't have possession of the footy?

It has no effect on the outcome of the game but there were some perplexing double standards with holding the ball decisions yesterday  ???.

I can't remember the specific incident you're talking about MT.But then, I spent a lot of the day with my head in my hands,before leaving at 3/4 time. But what I would say is that there have been some perplexing double standards re: holding the ball and Richmond for several weeks now, at least. Cast your mind back to the North game. Or even the Saints game. The incidents that got my blood boiling yesterday were:
(1) When Tambling was tackled round the neck and pinged for holding the ball, right in front of Sydney's goals of course.
(2) When Moore was pinged for interfering with White in the goalsquare, when in fact it was clearly the no.18 who had slung him out of the contest.
Just in general play though, the umpires were applying the often-used "the split-second a Richmond player is tackled, it's holding the ball" rule.
 

Apart from the fourth when it appeared the ump's were trying to even things up a bit the standard of umpriing was absolutely atrocious.  The number of times the Swans seemed to throw the ball out or illegal dispose of the ball was incredible and then we were getting pinned the second we looked like getting tackled.

[Tigermonk]

what l dont understand is when we tackle & turn them in a complete circle thats holding the ball in my knowledge.
But when we get grabbed lightly its holding the ball.
alot of head high tackles went unrewarded also.
l watch every game every week & Richmond is the most poorly umpired side in the AFL & why l cant explain

[RollsRoyce]

what l dont understand is when we tackle & turn them in a complete circle thats holding the ball in my knowledge.
But when we get grabbed lightly its holding the ball.
alot of head high tackles went unrewarded also.
l watch every game every week & Richmond is the most poorly umpired side in the AFL & why l cant explain

Might have something to do with Geischen???

[Tigermonk]

Might have something to do with Geischen???

l will punch his lights out at the next family gathering 

[mightytiges]

Might have something to do with Geischen???

The day Geisch steps down as coach of the umpires will be a great day for umpiring. It's ridiculous that because of the criticism the umps copped over not putting a stop to Baker and Stevie Johnson early on in that game that this week we have the umps instructed to overumpire and stamp their authority on each game. The annoying thing is not so much the change itself but that no one is told about it - not the players, not the coaches and not the spectators. We have these hardened interpretations just sprung on us without warning.

I hope Dimma has told our boys to watch out about not giving 50m away or off the ball free kicks (hello Jake King) as that's what the umps seem instructed to crack down on this round.

[Smokey]

Anyone thinking that the state of umpiring at AFL level is anything better than deplorable should have watched the game last night between Bulldogs and Hawthorn.  The Hawks were slaughtered with terrible decisions - all going one way - and it is a credit to them that they still managed to get up and win.  If they had lost it would have been a travesty of justice - the umpiring was just disgraceful and biased.

[RollsRoyce]

Anyone thinking that the state of umpiring at AFL level is anything better than deplorable should have watched the game last night between Bulldogs and Hawthorn.  The Hawks were slaughtered with terrible decisions - all going one way - and it is a credit to them that they still managed to get up and win.  If they had lost it would have been a travesty of justice - the umpiring was just disgraceful and biased.

Yep, you're absolutely spot on Smokey. You can forgive them for the odd bad decision. But when it's just one way traffic all night long,then it's pretty obvious that they're biased. Boy, you could sure hear the fury of the Hawks fans booming out of the TV too.   

[bojangles17]

let's just say since our first NAB cup game there has been noticable improvement, fair dinkum I almost gave up on afl following that heist. Incidently has anyone else been paid similar frees for same infringement...giesch has to go, especially so after EVERY umpire seemingly missed ea of Bakers indiscretions the other night

[wayne]

How about Osbourne's unrealistic attempt to mark...

He got his hands on the BALL!!!! 

[Fishfinger]

Odd call as to the free against Osborne. Was a free though.
If you jump all over an opponent's back and mark, it's a mark. If you don't mark, it's in the back.

I just watched the game and couldn't see any umpiring bias. Maybe 4 mistakes, 2 each way. The mark paid to Renouf for the first goal of the match was a howler.

The hawks fans seemed to spend more time whinging than cheering. I don't think they had much to whinge about.

[Hellenic Tiger]

History has shown.

Gieschen was a token coach at AFL level.

That tokeness has been part of the AFL umpiring ranks for some time now.

The way I see it the fish rots at the head but at the same time Gieschen is a puppet  with the strings being

pulled by that krunt Anderson who is destroying the uniqueness of this great game and unifiying it rule wise

with other less physical ball sports.

[Owl]

what made me laugh was the 360 decision...the umpire calls holding the ball and literally called '360' but he actually turned himself only 180 degrees to handball .... what stuffing school did he go to ?  He fired a hand pass off behind him, that is 180, if you are spun around to face back to where you were facing in the first place, THAT is 360 and would of been holding the ball according to the 360 rule.  Where do they find these half wits?  Can I just quit my day job and rock up to the CES and apply for an AFL Umpire job or something, Ill hide all my qualifications and tell them I am a numpty halfwit, I should be a shoe in.

[Chuck17]

Lol Owl

U couldn't do and worse