Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!

[shad]

That free kick against Batch(you all know the one) would that umpire( you know who) have paid that free if it was Mick Martyn doing the nigling

When i played footy, they were the free kicks you didnt want to get because you knew what was coming (via a smack in the head) at the next contest or as soon as the umpire turned his back.

I have umpired a bit and ATM I have a weekly gig at my son's U13s. I tend to be pretty strict on off the ball aggression and tactics designed to physically intimidate, mainly due to the huge difference in size and maturity of the boys at this level. There is no way on earth that I would have paid a free for what Batch was doing although I may have directed him to stop if the kid was really little.

 

[purepoweryouth]

I have umpired a bit and ATM I have a weekly gig at my son's U13s. I tend to be pretty strict on off the ball aggression and tactics designed to physically intimidate, mainly due to the huge difference in size and maturity of the boys at this level. There is no way on earth that I would have paid a free for what Batch was doing although I may have directed him to stop if the kid was really little.

Hey that sounds like what happened. Dumbpire Stevic just wanted to protect little Cameron.

 

[Tigers of Old]

It didn't cost the game luckily, but definite Bias IMO

A little one eyed but even allowing for that it's a good breakdown. We were very clearly stiffed.

 

[tigertim]

http://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/afl/umpire-boss-jeff-gieschen-defends-wests-whistleblowers/story-e6frg1xu-1226397674635

As expected Giesch defends his boys.

 

[tiges]

http://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/afl/umpire-boss-jeff-gieschen-defends-wests-whistleblowers/story-e6frg1xu-1226397674635

As expected Giesch defends his boys.

lol, geez this game is going backwards.

 

[mjb]

Nearly drove off the road this morning when KB defended the Cameron free kick as correct. Said that the umpire told him repeatedly to stop, then had to play the free kick or seem powerless. Still don't know exactly what the free was for though, if what Batch did was a free kick then most forwards in the completion should kick 100 goals on a regular basis.

 

[Sintiger]

I don't like criticising the Umpires a lot because it sounds like sour grapes to me. However that free against Batchelor showed off an umpire who has no feel for the game. Awful decision that can be defended as technically correct but is not a free that 99.9% of footy fans would like to see paid. I am not surprised that KB defended it as he always defends Umpires.
There are too many of these creeping into the way the game is being officiated.

 

[WesternTiger]

"Champion Data have indicated the umpires probably now have to make an interpretation or a call on about 3000 transactions a game. If we're walking away with only five or six that we're thinking about, we're not going too bad."

This is a fair call from Giesch however how do you explain the Batch one, the inconsistency with the deliberate OOB and the treatment King receives?

 

[WesternTiger]

I don't like criticising the Umpires a lot because it sounds like sour grapes to me. However that free against Batchelor showed off an umpire who has no feel for the game. Awful decision that can be defended as technically correct but is not a free that 99.9% of footy fans would like to see paid. I am not surprised that KB defended it as he always defends Umpires.
There are too many of these creeping into the way the game is being officiated.

But what is the free though Sin? Rough play?

 

[jimbob]

Nearly drove off the road this morning when KB defended the Cameron free kick as correct. Said that the umpire told him repeatedly to stop, then had to play the free kick or seem powerless. Still don't know exactly what the free was for though, if what Batch did was a free kick then most forwards in the completion should kick 100 goals on a regular basis.

Jack should easily win the Coleman this year - as obviously they will start paying this type of free kick to him. Can see him getting at least a goal a quarter out of this. A silver lining !!!! :rofl

 

[Sintiger]

But what is the free though Sin? Rough play?

I would have to listen to the replay audio again Westie but the umpire actually stated what the free kick was for when he paid it. I will get the IQ going later and check it out.

 

[TigerForce]

"Champion Data have indicated the umpires probably now have to make an interpretation or a call on about 3000 transactions a game. If we're walking away with only five or six that we're thinking about, we're not going too bad."

This is a fair call from Giesch however how do you explain the Batch one, the inconsistency with the deliberate OOB and the treatment King receives?

3000 transactions?? Building a mountain out of a molehill. They should just concentrate on major incidents and not meaningless minor ones.

Umpires need to be educated and trained better. Sack Gieschen, he's worse than a bureaucrat twiddling his thumbs at the desk all day.

 

[EJC]

3000 transactions?? Building a mountain out of a molehill. They should just concentrate on major incidents and not meaningless minor ones.

Umpires need to be educated and trained better. Sack Gieschen, he's worse than a bureaucrat twiddling his thumbs at the desk all day.

Yes it's an interesting point. Gieschen came down to VAFA umpiring pre-season a few years back (hmm, confession time, I once did a season of blowing the whistle) and he addressed the group on rule changes and what not.

One part of his address has always stuck in my craw. He stated that research indicated AFL fans wanted to see every single technical infringement in 120 mins of footy identified and paid against the offender.

Now, I've been going to watch local, VFL/AFL and interstate footy for 30 years and I've never met a single supporter that would agree with that sentiment. Rather, time and time and time again, I hear the call - from Tiger fans and those who have the misfortune not to be - to 'let the game go'.

Have I got this wrong? Is anyone aware of such research? Surely, as we can see from other sports, the quality of the adjudicating comes down to the feel for the game, appreciating its nuances and having an instinct for what is a major infraction as opposed to officiating from a pedantic perspective.

Was the passion for our game built upon rules such as 'knocking the arm'? Or 'deliberate out of bounds'? Or, for god's sake, a 50m penalty for putting a toe into the 'protected area'?

 

[Azza]

I'd like to know exactly what are Geish's and his department KPI's, and how are they measured. There's no reason for it to be a state secret. What proof is there that the umpiring is consistent? What proof is there that it's improved under his watch? What statistical analysis does the umpiring department do? Is analysis done to assess bias in individual umpires?

All we get is flim flam about only a few crook decisions out of thousands, and not being able to criticise umpires.

If AFL thinks the umpiring department is doing such a great job, why doesn't it prove it to hose down the continual criticism?

 

[TOT70]

If they paid a free for every technical infringement there would be over 100 free kicks given in every game. I’m old enough to remember a brief period in the 1970s where the decision to penalise every infringement was taken and the game turned into a REAL farce, with every contest decided by a blow of the whistle. This experiment was thankfully short-lived, lasting less than a season.

This is the problem. Umpires have to pick and choose what they penalise. How many dodgy hand-passes do you see in a game? How many players are held off the ball? How many technical pushes-in-the back are there in a typical game? How many examples of incorrect disposal? How many shepherds are more than 5 metres from the ball? How many tackles have incidental high contact?

Most are let go, in the interests of keeping the game flowing. Most of the free kicks given are generally for obvious and poorly-disguised breaches of the rules, such as blatant one-handed throws.

Every now and again, an umpire impacts the game through a poor decision that leads to a goal within a couple of disposals. They might give a “tiggy-touchwood” free kick, ignore a blatant throw, reward a head-duck or pluck a “Hands-in-the-back.”

My view is that if there are 100+ incidents during a game that COULD lead to a free kick and you have a policy of only calling 30%-40% of them, then there is a responsibility to keep the numbers roughly equal for both teams. Fans get annoyed with umpires when they see a game slip away due to one team receiving 7 frees to 1 in a 20 minute period of a game and kicking 5 unanswered goals during this period.

Inevitably, I don’t notice umpires at all when the whistle blows both ways throughout a game.

 

[RedanTiger]

One part of his address has always stuck in my craw. He stated that research indicated AFL fans wanted to see every single technical infringement in 120 mins of footy identified and paid against the offender.

Now, I've been going to watch local, VFL/AFL and interstate footy for 30 years and I've never met a single supporter that would agree with that sentiment. Rather, time and time and time again, I hear the call - from Tiger fans and those who have the misfortune not to be - to 'let the game go'.

Have I got this wrong? Is anyone aware of such research? Surely, as we can see from other sports, the quality of the adjudicating comes down to the feel for the game, appreciating its nuances and having an instinct for what is a major infraction as opposed to officiating from a pedantic perspective.

I think this comes from a survey the league did years ago.
Like all these things its the way you extrapolate the data but even more so the way you phrase the questions.
In regard to this point I vaguely remember it being reported it came from response to a question something like:
"Do you agree that all infringements should be paid?"
Of course most answer "Yes"
From this response comes the AFL statement that a majority of fans want ALL frees paid with no qualifications.

 

[TigerForce]

Every now and again, an umpire impacts the game through a poor decision that leads to a goal within a couple of disposals. They might give a “tiggy-touchwood” free kick, ignore a blatant throw, reward a head-duck or pluck a “Hands-in-the-back.”

What is the purpose of doing this? Just let the game flow. Hands on a back is the most stupid of the lot and meaningless. Ducking the head is the player's risk if he gets tackled high and should be let go. The only head high tackles to pay are the rougher, 'around the neck' types. Push in the back when tackling a player from behind who dives on purpose??

With 3 umpires on a field, they can't even monitor their own zone which is why I believe they need to loosen up and umpire the game like a player by running around the ground closer to the ball instead of virtually standing 30 metres away.

 

[YinnarTiger]

One part of his address has always stuck in my craw. He stated that research indicated AFL fans wanted to see every single technical infringement in 120 mins of footy identified and paid against the offender.

I think it was him who used that response to the suggestion that umpires not blow the whistle unless they wanted to stop play for a free or a ball-up. The first reaction of half the players is to stop when they hear the whistle. If you think you've got the advantage and play on you risk giving a 50m penalty if you're wrong (Richo vs Mal Michael that night), if you've stopped you risk losing any advantage you had.

 

[GEDS1]

I must admit to watching ALL games now with one eye on the umpires performance and it's bad for all and sundry (bar WCE and Essendon). The performance of the umpires is terrible and they have taken out the ruggedness of the game - pity.

The number one issue for me and will be for the rest of the season is how Luke Power did not get penalised for deliberate and Batch did ?

 

[IanG]

One part of his address has always stuck in my craw. He stated that research indicated AFL fans wanted to see every single technical infringement in 120 mins of footy identified and paid against the offender.

Thats pretty stupid of him given they clearly let minor infringement go.