Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!

[Meteoric Rise]

Read on Twitter that when we hit the front in the 3rd quarter the free kick count was 18-12
Finished 33-13
That’s just staggering

It is staggering the free kick count after we hit the lead in the 3rd term. Crows basically scored 5 goals to nil while getting 15 free kicks to our 1, before the umps put the whistle away and we got a couple of late goals.

But what is easily overlooked was the first period of Crow scoring dominance when they outscored us 10 goals to 4 from 12 mins Q1 to 2 mins Q3 was also accompanied by a free kick count roughly about 16-5 the Crows way.

So our three smaller periods of scoring dominance, 2 goals v nil at both the start and end of the game and the 4 goals to nil in Q3 were accompanied by a free kick count roughly 7-2 in our favour.

The Crows 2 longer periods of scoring dominance were accompanied by a free kick count roughly 31-6 in their favour. Remember this does not account for marks paid that shouldn’t have been of which the Crows had at least 2 during those periods.

You don’t see many game results more affected by umpiring than this one.

 

[CarnTheTiges]

I was visiting some relos over Easter, one of whom is a Doggies supporter, so we watched the Roos v Dogs game on Friday.

Oh my goodness, talk about ducking & staging, the Bulldogs are masters at both. At one stage I thought Weightman had been hit by a freight train, forensic replays by the coverage showed an ever so slight tug of the jumper. And as for Macrea!!!!!! words fail me & yet HE NEVER get outed by the commentators or the umpires.


As DavidSSS says, all we want is for the games to be umpired with consistency of interpretation, not the lopsided cr@p that we consistently endure.

The Dogs are coached to play that way. If the umpires did their jobs properly they’d play differently, because they wouldn’t be rewarded for it.

 

[TigerForce]

It is staggering the free kick count after we hit the lead in the 3rd term. Crows basically scored 5 goals to nil while getting 15 free kicks to our 1, before the umps put the whistle away and we got a couple of late goals.

But what is easily overlooked was the first period of Crow scoring dominance when they outscored us 10 goals to 4 from 12 mins Q1 to 2 mins Q3 was also accompanied by a free kick count roughly about 15-5 the Crows way.

So our three smaller periods of scoring dominance, 2 goals v nil at both the start and end of the game and the 4 goals to nil in Q3 were accompanied by a free kick count roughly 7-2 in our favour.

The Crows 2 longer periods of scoring dominance were accompanied by a free kick count roughly 31-6 in their favour. Remember this does not account for marks paid that shouldn’t have been of which the Crows had at least 2 during those periods.

You don’t see many game results more affected by umpiring than this one.

Good points MR.

Just heard them speak about the 15-1 on SEN but as always when it comes to Richmond claiming, the football media just sweeps it under the carpet and there's no agreement or solution besides the old cliche "that it's because of the way we play". We can't win.

A bloke spoke now on SEN mentioning the noise of affirmation and was asked how do we solve it. All he could say was maybe the dumpires should wear ear muffs. If you're gonna call a radio station to be heard publicly, raise a good point and come up with an answer like that, you're an idiot. How about saying something that can fix the problem such as providing coaches more power to review certain decisions (as NFL does)?

 

[TigerMasochist]

Funny statement from Nicks. Tommy put his head over the ball, went for it and got pinged.....!

Yep.
The original rule was invented to stop players just wildly sliding in at the ball and taking out players legs who were already at the vicinity of the ground ball. As per most of the rule inventions at H.Q. it's metamorphosed into penalise the bloke who's head down arse up chasing the loose ground ball n reward the *smile* for standing in his way.
If the ball doesn't roll your way, you're not allowed to chase it along the ground any more. You have to stand n wait for someone else to have a turn at picking it up if it happens to roll in their direction.

 

[RoarEmotion]

We need an independent body that reviews all decisions and non decisions and gives specific results / feedback to umpires so they can improve and share overall trends and data with all stakeholders.

 

[123cups]

I hope you don’t mind, I would like to test your logic a bit here, and my own.

I think it doesn’t matter ultimately if all of the free kicks are not paid in the centre of the ground when calculating their average value. Once you take into account free kicks deep in defence, at half back, centre, wing, half forward and within range of goal, the average position should be roughly the centre of the ground should it not?

Then if you do as you say, and discount for the the frees that would have ended in inside 50’s anyway, I can see how you arrive at the outcome an average free kick is not worth an average inside 50. The trouble is you need to add back the extra inside 50’s the opposition would have achieved had the free kicks not been paid.

So where some free kicks might be worth zero extras inside 50’s net, because you were going to go inside 50 anyway, other free kicks are worth net 2 x inside 50’s, ie the extra inside 50 you get, plus the inside 50 your opposition does not get.

When all is said and done then, shouldn’t an average free kick be worth roughly an average inside 50? And therefore, 4 bad decisions against you would be worth roughly one goal, on average?

The value of a free kick should also take into account the 3 basic conditions at the time the free kick is paid:

in possession
ball in dispute
opposition possession "turnover free".

It'd be interesting to see if we give away more free kicks in a particular state of the game compared to other clubs.

We can't control the frees we receive, but we do have control over the frees we give away (to an extent).

 

[RoarEmotion]

The value of a free kick should also take into account the 3 basic conditions at the time the free kick is paid:

in possession
ball in dispute
opposition possession "turnover free".

It'd be interesting to see if we give away more free kicks in a particular state of the game compared to other clubs.

We can't control the frees we receive, but we do have control over the frees we give away (to an extent).

Felt like a lot of ‘ball in dispute’ frees or non decisions to the crows. Pretty much every time we were applying pressure.

A big issue is the ones not paid. There is no stat out there for this I’m aware of. In general that’s what feels like the bias to me. We definitely have some offenders that give away more than league average IMO (nank, Riewoldt, vlaustin, Pickett) but we seem to get unders. I think davidsss made a chart of this showing our frees for is well under league average - which maybe supports a view other teams play for more or the tin hat view we get treated differently (other than in finals which have been even IMO).

 

[123cups]

Yep.
The original rule was invented to stop players just wildly sliding in at the ball and taking out players legs who were already at the vicinity of the ground ball. As per most of the rule inventions at H.Q. it's metamorphosed into penalise the bloke who's head down arse up chasing the loose ground ball n reward the *smile* for standing in his way.
If the ball doesn't roll your way, you're not allowed to chase it along the ground any more. You have to stand n wait for someone else to have a turn at picking it up if it happens to roll in their direction.

Like most rules, the original spirit of the rule has been forgotten and umpires are just looking for oversimplified cues.

The original problem the sliding rule was trying to solve was where a player is 2nd to the content and he's sliding in sideways at an angle to the contest.

In this situation, Tom Lynch was behind the ball in a straight line, the ball's trajectory was in a straight line, and Tom stayed on his feet and was 1st to the ball.

The opposition player who won the free kick came in at an angle to the ball and was 2nd to the contest.

Isn't this obvious? Or am I wrong?

 

[TigerMasochist]

Like most rules, the original spirit of the rule has been forgotten and umpires are just looking for oversimplified cues.

The original problem the sliding rule was trying to solve was where a player is 2nd to the content and he's sliding in sideways at an angle to the contest.

In this situation, Tom Lynch was behind the ball in a straight line, the ball's trajectory was in a straight line, and Tom stayed on his feet and was 1st to the ball.

The opposition player who won the free kick came in at an angle to the ball and was 2nd to the contest.

Isn't this obvious? Or am I wrong?

Simply should never ever have been a free kick against Lynch. Just another case of maggots who have no idea of how the game is played or what the rules are.

 

[Harry]

As DavidSSS says, all we want is for the games to be umpired with consistency of interpretation, not the lopsided cr@p that we consistently endure.

If anything we are umpired the most consistent.

 

[TT33]

If anything we are umpired the most consistent.

Yep, but it's very lopsided against us.

 

[Tigers of Old]

It's the calls we don't get that's killing us.

 

[CarnTheTiges]

Taking the supposed vendetta the umps have against Richmond out of this (it’s a competition wide issue), umpires have favourite players, too. In todays game, Selwood was tackled, let go off the ball, like he always does. Umpire calls a free and to everyone’s surprise gives it to Selwood for holding the man. Hawk spreads his arms and asks why, as you would, and gets a 50! FMD! This has to stop! Either that or the AFL send a communication that says anyone who responds in any way, shape or form to any umpire decision is going to get 50. The only way this is going to change is if ALL the coaches raise it as a group with the AFL.

 

[tigertim]

Just for something different a free kick to Poorkins when actually STAGED in a ruck contest (dived forward like he was shot out of a cannon!). Then Haw thorn get stung a 50m penalty for “umpire abuse”. This instance was doubly pathetic, a free to that prick then a 50m.

 

[IanG]

Hawkins just gets a free (which wasn't there) and the Hawks players watch the replay then raise their hands without saying anything and 50 gets paid, WTF! This is disgraceful.

 

[DavidSSS]

Just started watching Hawthorn v Geelong - huge stage from Hawkins, 15.47 to go 3rd quarter and he gets a free and 50.

Unbelievable, Hawkins constantly pushes opponents in the back yet gets a free when he stages.

Are they going to fine Hawkins or suspend him for staging?

Yeah, pigs might fly.

Absolute joke.

DS

 

[btoz_01]

Wow 16min mark 3rd qtr
Dawks v Pussies Shovkins launches himself to his left after a minor touch from Frost and you guessed it is paid free and then 50m resulting in a goal
No chance AFL will sight Shovkins for staging
Absolutely disgraceful umpiring

 

[artball]

Just for something different a free kick to Poorkins when actually STAGED in a ruck contest (dived forward like he was shot out of a cannon!). Then Haw thorn get stung a 50m penalty for “umpire abuse”. This instance was doubly pathetic, a free to that prick then a 50m.

just saw that... its a shambles... glad Luke Hodge made a comment ..

Hasn't Brad Scott got something to do with the Umpires now as part of his 'portfolio' ?

 

[IanG]

With umpiring like this at some point there is probably going to be an incident,

 

[btoz_01]

Umps giving the game to Pussies who are constantly staging