Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!

[The Big Richo]

Did he really remonstarte? He actually just tried to get his attention and point out he had been held by the arm. Watch the replay, there was no animosity or anger.

There was no "decision", does there have to be a decision to be dissent?

The protected area extends 5m behind the player that marks the ball and 10m out either side of him. In the replay Baker is clearly within that radius and as the nearest tiger was the one to go to the mark. Buckley was wrong.

Play on is still a decision so by gesturing he was held he is still telling the umpire he was wrong, anger or not.

I just think it is an incredibly dumb act to start gesturing at an umpire about any free kick at the moment. It's not like the umpire is going to say yeah good point Tom, let's take it back and pay the free. The only possible outcome for him is to give an advantage to the other team.oIf he wants to let the umpire know he is being held there are other ways he can do it without the risk.

I don't understand the Baker ono but I'm still backing Buckley's knowledge over mine.I think it's a stand rule issue rather than protected area.o

 

[tommystigers]

View attachment 15386View attachment 15387

Jack gets that paid against 20-30 times a year for an unrealistic attempt. The bloke is already at the apex before the ball is within 10-15 metres. The hawthorn player in front actually marks the ball. Disgraceful cheating by umpire 6.

 

[tigersnake]

The 50 against Baker in the 3rd qtr. He was the closest man to the contest, ran directly to man the mark. Baker was not more than 6m away when Newcombe marked it and was the nearest player to the ball. Surely he is entitled to go to the mark? Watch a replay, it happened at 17.50 left in 3rd qtr. He was the nearest tigers player and ran directly there. The protected area extends 10m either side of the player that takes the mark and 5m behind him. Baker was within that area when the hawks guy marked it and ran directly to the mark. Bad decision.

13.30 to go in the third, Nash receives a handball and is tackled by Grimes. Nash tries to fend Grimes off whilst being tackled (co incidenbtly the fend is over Grimes shoulder and into his neck). Grimesd hangs on and Nash throws the ball out one handed, he doesn't evenb attempt to get his other hand to it. Play on.

The Nash one was the gold medal for me. Took on the tackler, had it for a week, then dropped it. Just a real doozy. Then he did it immediately after in the same passage I think but not quite as ridiculous.

The Bakes 50 was there. I hate the rule, and they often don't pay it, all aspects of new stand rule and the flow on effects are a dogs breakfast in terms of logic and consistency, but it was there.

Buckley loved Pickett's hip and shoulder. Says a bit.

 

[22nd Man]

Good point. Their game does lend itself to the review system with the stoppages etc.

Victoria did not get the nanny state moniker for nothing.

I watched that game.... there aren't a lot of stoppages in NRL . In fact less than our footy... No throw ins or ball ups (very few scrims in Rugba leeg )

 

[MD Jazz]

the Baker one was borderline, pretty sure the rules say if you are in the 'protected zone" you have to get out the quickest way possible. my issue with that 50 is that there are plenty the same, where players come from behind to man the mark that arent paid.
same as Nanks. he prob knew what he was doing, but most of the time the ump will say there was a team mate there.

boltons was a 50 (ignoring the dodgy free). the whistle went Bolton continued on and kicked the ball. another time in the game the whistle blew for a free to us. players stopped. the hawks with the ball continued on and kicked the ball. no 50.

the one free we got for holding the ball, the tackler got off the hawk player who was penalised, the hawk player then let go of the ball, leaving it on the grround. no 50. a few weeks ago Balta had a 50 paid against him when his opponent was holding the ball against Balta. Noah never grabbed the ball, or held it. his opponent let go of it, and Balta was penalised 50 for not giving it back.

the game is incredibly hard to umpire, but there are massive inconsistencies in the way it is umpired, both week to week and within games. and we appear to be on the wrong end of many of the "inconsistent" interpretations.

This post borders on extreme nuance, stop it.

 

[MD Jazz]

I just think it is an incredibly dumb act to start gesturing at an umpire about any free kick at the moment. It's not like the umpire is going to say yeah good point Tom, let's take it back and pay the free. The only possible outcome for him is to give an advantage to the other team.oIf he wants to let the umpire know he is being held there are other ways he can do it without the risk.

How else does he do it? I would have thought that was the best time to do it. The play had stopped, he simply got the umps attention and indicated he had been held. There was no anger/malice/abuse.

I don't think they are allowed to approach umps after qtr's so not sure he will get a beter time.

Unfortunately, the rule is completely subjective and creates more fan/player/commentator confusion.

 

[Brodders17]

How else does he do it? I would have thought that was the best time to do it. The play had stopped, he simply got the umps attention and indicated he had been held. There was no anger/malice/abuse.

I don't think they are allowed to approach umps after qtr's so not sure he will get a beter time.

Unfortunately, the rule is completely subjective and creates more fan/player/commentator confusion.

Maybe we should change our black to blue, and call all our players Jeremy then we might allowed to make repeated comments and gestures to the umpire without copping a 50.

 

[Redford]

After McGovern went off his brain not once but three times over the one same incident yesterday - yelling and waving his arms - but no 50 dissent resulted, it’s clear that the umpires don’t want to apply it.

Even they think it’s bs.

 

[larabee]

After McGovern went off his brain not once but three times over the one same incident yesterday - yelling and waving his arms - but no 50 dissent resulted, it’s clear that the umpires don’t want to apply it.

Even they think it’s bs.

except for Razor, he loooooves it

 

[Harry]

I don't even notice the umpire reaming anymore. I'm actually surprised when they pay an obvious free to us these days.

 

[CarnTheTiges]

Are the umpires consulted about the rule changes at all? I’d also like to know what qualifications Scott possessed that had umpiring thrown into his portfolio. The fact that it was tossed in as an afterthought really says that the AFL don’t care about the umpires or the rules. Just the optics and the money that they get from tv rights and betting agencies.

 

[RoarEmotion]

How else does he do it? I would have thought that was the best time to do it. The play had stopped, he simply got the umps attention and indicated he had been held. There was no anger/malice/abuse.

I don't think they are allowed to approach umps after qtr's so not sure he will get a beter time.

Unfortunately, the rule is completely subjective and creates more fan/player/commentator confusion.

There is a better way to do it. You ask the umpire if you can discuss the contest (and assuming they aren’t petty and ignore you) just ask them to watch out for being held next time please because you thought you were being held but maybe the ump didn’t see it or disagreed. Try and influence the next contest / do it in earshot of the defender too / do it respectfully.

You are absolutely correct on the subjective nature of it. Different umps will pay it differently.

@The Big Richo is right though - just be smarter and don’t risk it. Especially with razor. That is stupid as you can almost guarantee he will pay it. Emma has her work cut out. This kind of *smile* kills us.

I’m pissed at the rule but also pissed at our players who can’t control themselves. Have the emotion but channel it into desire/effort and not frustration.

 

[The Big Richo]

How else does he do it? I would have thought that was the best time to do it. The play had stopped, he simply got the umps attention and indicated he had been held. There was no anger/malice/abuse.

I don't think they are allowed to approach umps after qtr's so not sure he will get a beter time.

Unfortunately, the rule is completely subjective and creates more fan/player/commentator confusion.

The Captain can talk to the umpires during the game and at the break but informally after every goal there are conversations between players and umpires about what is happening in the game. They all stand there having a drink and the forwards whinge they are being held and the defenders whinge they are being blocked.

I don't think the rule is subjective, if you question a decision, especially with gestures then you cop a penalty. Like any rule sometimes the umpire won't see it, sometimes they might not pay it and sometimes what we think we see as viewers might not be the full picture, but if you do it then that's the outcome you are risking. It's like speeding, you can often get away with it but if you get caught you cop the penalty.

I don't have any sympathy for the players and I don't think a strong leadership group would either. The easiest thing you will ever be asked to do on an AFL ground is nothing.

 

[Tony Braxton-Hicks]

What's the free kick ladder for the year to date?

 

[Redford]

What's the free kick ladder for the year to date?

 

[T-Shirt Tommy]

I don't even notice the umpire reaming anymore. I'm actually surprised when they pay an obvious free to us these days.

My mind is actually at the point where if the frees are even (or slightly in our favour) at the end of the game, I feel guilty.

 

[Sintiger]

After McGovern went off his brain not once but three times over the one same incident yesterday - yelling and waving his arms - but no 50 dissent resulted, it’s clear that the umpires don’t want to apply it.

Even they think it’s bs.

I saw a replay of the DeGoey incident from Friday night where he had a 50 against him. Thought it was garbage.

The only other footy I watched on the weekend apart from the Tigs was 20 minutes or so of the suns & dockers. In that time I reckon I saw 4 players show more dissent that DeGoey did and not one of them was penalised.

Whenever we have this level of subjectivity in decision making by umpires there will be problems.

 

[The Big Richo]

@tigertim if you are able, I'd love to see the update on those figures you posted last week please.

 

[tigertim]

@tigertim if you are able, I'd love to see the update on those figures you posted last week please.

Sorry, I don't, I just found them on a FB page I think .

 

[MD Jazz]

I don't think the rule is subjective, if you question a decision, especially with gestures then you cop a penalty. Like any rule sometimes the umpire won't see it, sometimes they might not pay it and sometimes what we think we see as viewers might not be the full picture, but if you do it then that's the outcome you are risking. It's like speeding, you can often get away with it but if you get caught you cop the penalty.

Not subjective? Its completely subjective depending on how the individual umpire feels/views/sees the players reaction. How many examples of the same type of reaction but different umpire do you need to see to demonstrate this? See Singtigers post above.

Arms thrown up and sometimes penalised and others not. The original rule was fine. Carry on and cop a 50. But it allowed for a natural reaction. Especially when the umpire has made an error. It wasn't an issue. It now is.