Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!

[Redford]

im confused. you said it wasnt a rule change, and now you are saying it is?

im obviously a bit younger than you, as i cant say the introduction of the centre square had any impact on my life.

i reckon changing the way we score, by playing the ball off the post, or by ignoring touched balls is changing the fabric of the game.

I wasn’t around for the non centre square either. But neither of us had to be: the game obviously improved a lot by its introduction.

Deleting a rule could be considered a change. Semantics.

You don’t know what’s touched or what’s hitting a goal post right now, so if that’s what you want to continue to be part of the fabric of the game, like I said, fair enough.

To me, that piece of fabric has a big stain on it.

 

[waiting]

These surveys they do , I’ve never seen one or asked to provide feedback.

The AFL don’t care about fans, the true fan, so these surveys I think would be just to appease to be seen to be doing or hearing why fans are staying away. ‘Not what they think the fan is staying away. It will always be geared and worded in a way that doesn’t reflect sincerity and honesty.

I mean look at how Brad Scott has overseen this season with a ‘rule change’ that didn’t need just a drastic overhaul but show some common sense. But no they tried to drum down their reasoning why the ‘dissent’ rule was brought in. He then went on the front foot on its strict interpretation, meanwhile there were umpires who I’m sure thought the rule was crap and were paying ‘dissent’ and others not.

Then in secrecy without any hint, informing coaches, media and who knows maybe, I say maybe not even the umpires.

Common sense has prevailed and he went underground.

Taking the fan as being ‘stupid’ is how this administration under Gill is conducting themselves.

Get people with relevant skills in the position they oversee.

Bring back the game to the fans.

Get rid of the rules they have brought in since Hockings appointment and now Scott , simplify it for the umpires, no grey areas and watch the fans return in droves.

Finally Thursday night games don’t work, especially during the winter months. Have for say the first four block of games , the last and finals.

Our great game that many of us grew up playing, loving and watching is slowly deteriorating to shizen….

 

[The Big Richo]

Some good ones. Nearly as good as mine
Dunno how not nominating a ruckman will see them out of the game. Just make them get to the contest quicker by throwing the ball up. Sometimes there’s no ruck nomination now. If more players from one team go up, free to the oppo. Same as 3rd man up rule.

We've been over this one before, it has to be either nominate or allow as many up as you like as it was before. Or the third option would be to totally change the rules around defending.

If you keep only two allowed up then it will be impossible. For example Geelong have a ball up 20 metres out from goal with Cameron, Hawkins, Rategolea and Blicavs all around the ball. If you don't have to nominate then as soon as a defender stands in front of them or lays body on them they have given a free away for blocking the ruckman's run at the ball.

So either every player has to stand a metre apart or you have to allow third men up which means every team will play a Cripps size player and jump on the other ruckman. Blokes like Nankervis will never play footy at AFL level again.

There's no way to preserve the genuine ruck contest without nominating. I agree though they should do it quicker, just have the player raise their hands and go, don't stop and check them off.

 

[Brodders17]

I wasn’t around for the non centre square either. But neither of us had to be: the game obviously improved a lot by its introduction.

Deleting a rule could be considered a change. Semantics.

You don’t know what’s touched or what’s hitting a goal post right now, so if that’s what you want to continue to be part of the fabric of the game, like I said, fair enough.

To me, that piece of fabric has a big stain on it.

just to clarify a rushed point through the goals would still be a point, right?
so rather than the ump guessing whether it was touched, the ump would now need to guess whether the player who touched the ball touched with enough force to constitute a rushed point, or just touched it, which is still a goal?

i dont reckon there are enough issues of touched or not touched, or post or not post to justify changing the way we score- which i would consider to be a pretty large part of the 'fabric of the game'.

 

[mrposhman]

Images of what the AFL do with your surveys.

 

[Willo]

Footy Fans Survey: have a say on the AFL's biggest topics and win two tickets to the grand final

Vote now on footy's hot topics

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[Willo]

We've been over this one before, it has to be either nominate or allow as many up as you like as it was before. Or the third option would be to totally change the rules around defending.

If you keep only two allowed up then it will be impossible. For example Geelong have a ball up 20 metres out from goal with Cameron, Hawkins, Rategolea and Blicavs all around the ball. If you don't have to nominate then as soon as a defender stands in front of them or lays body on them they have given a free away for blocking the ruckman's run at the ball.

So either every player has to stand a metre apart or you have to allow third men up which means every team will play a Cripps size player and jump on the other ruckman. Blokes like Nankervis will never play footy at AFL level again.

There's no way to preserve the genuine ruck contest without nominating. I agree though they should do it quicker, just have the player raise their hands and go, don't stop and check them off.

Some good points. But what did they do before the ruck nomination rule? And why was it changed?

 

[mrposhman]

Footy Fans Survey: have a say on the AFL's biggest topics and win two tickets to the grand final

Vote now on footy's hot topics

www.foxsports.com.au

OMG are they serious.

Yes the thing that concerns me most about the game is who is coming over to mine for a BBQ!! You couldn't make this *smile* up.

 

[Redford]

just to clarify a rushed point through the goals would still be a point, right?

so rather than the ump guessing whether it was touched, the ump would now need to guess whether the player who touched the ball touched with enough force to constitute a rushed point, or just touched it, which is still a goal?

i dont reckon there are enough issues of touched or not touched, or post or not post to justify changing the way we score- which i would consider to be a pretty large part of the 'fabric of the game'.

Yes. A defender can still CARRY the ball over the goal line = behind. Nothing changes in that respect.

Other than an attacking player either carrying,palming, tapping or punching the ball over the goal line - which is pretty easy to see coz they have to have their hand facing the goal line and is the current rule and nothing changes in that respect anyway either - then everything else would be a goal if it crossed the goal line.

This means a bunch of guys going up in the air and possibly or possibly not touching the ball with their finger tips is irrelevant as is a defender trying to claim they got a nail on the ball or it grazed their knuckle. Too bad. You didn’t defend well enough. Goal.

Yes that means a defender can’t fake fumble/tap the ball over the goal line which is embarrassing to watch and yes they can’t just spoil it over the goal line for a behind they have to be good enough to spoil it from being a goal by spoiling it into their attacking direction and towards play.

 

[jb03]

Apparently we are the only team to benefit from a dodgy 50 for the protection area which has suddenly become a twitter topic despite it happening to all teams every week (including one against HRS last night).

I might be against the grain on the ruck nomination rule but it has to be in if there is a restriction to the number (two) of ruckman that can contest. Even if third man up was still allowed i think the two ruckmen nominating actually works and stops random free kicks for blocking ruckmen that actually aren't really ruckmen.

 

[Brodders17]

Yes. A defender can still CARRY the ball over the goal line = behind. Nothing changes in that respect.

Other than an attacking player either carrying,palming, tapping or punching the ball over the goal line - which is pretty easy to see coz they have to have their hand facing the goal line and is the current rule and nothing changes in that respect anyway either - then everything else would be a goal if it crossed the goal line.

This means a bunch of guys going up in the air and possibly or possibly not touching the ball with their finger tips is irrelevant as is a defender trying to claim they got a nail on the ball or it grazed their knuckle. Too bad. You didn’t defend well enough. Goal.

Yes that means a defender can’t fake fumble/tap the ball over the goal line which is embarrassing to watch and yes they can’t just spoil it over the goal line for a behind they have to be good enough to spoil it from being a goal by spoiling it into their attacking direction and towards play.

We will need a new stat for "own goals"

 

[mrposhman]

Yes. A defender can still CARRY the ball over the goal line = behind. Nothing changes in that respect.

Other than an attacking player either carrying,palming, tapping or punching the ball over the goal line - which is pretty easy to see coz they have to have their hand facing the goal line and is the current rule and nothing changes in that respect anyway either - then everything else would be a goal if it crossed the goal line.

This means a bunch of guys going up in the air and possibly or possibly not touching the ball with their finger tips is irrelevant as is a defender trying to claim they got a nail on the ball or it grazed their knuckle. Too bad. You didn’t defend well enough. Goal.

Yes that means a defender can’t fake fumble/tap the ball over the goal line which is embarrassing to watch and yes they can’t just spoil it over the goal line for a behind they have to be good enough to spoil it from being a goal by spoiling it into their attacking direction and towards play.

I think it would be simpler and much easier to work if you still allow defenders to spoil over the line, but just take away the touched off the boot. If they can't smother it, then they haven't defended well enough, but if a player kicks from 50 out and doesn't make the distance you should be able to rush it through, otherwise there will be far more that just bomb it long to the goal square and then hope to force it over the line, which will make it very very scrappy in the goal square. Not sure we want to push towards that, a goal should only be able to be scored off the boot.

 

[Redford]

I think it would be simpler and much easier to work if you still allow defenders to spoil over the line, but just take away the touched off the boot. If they can't smother it, then they haven't defended well enough, but if a player kicks from 50 out and doesn't make the distance you should be able to rush it through, otherwise there will be far more that just bomb it long to the goal square and then hope to force it over the line, which will make it very very scrappy in the goal square. Not sure we want to push towards that, a goal should only be able to be scored off the boot.

Might be mis-interpreting that, but that's not addressing the touched or not touched confusion and ARC rubbish on the goal line though is it ?

 

[mrposhman]

Might be mis-interpreting that, but that's not addressing the touched or not touched confusion and ARC rubbish on the goal line though is it ?

I would hazard a guess that most of the ones that look messy on ARC are either touched off the boot (rather than those touched / marked on the line), and I agree with you on if it clips the post its a goal.

Reckon you get rid of most of the contentious ones by still allowing spoils over the line for rushed behinds through the goal posts, but removing the touched off the boot calls and those that clip the post.

 

[Redford]

I would hazard a guess that most of the ones that look messy on ARC are either touched off the boot (rather than those touched / marked on the line), and I agree with you on if it clips the post its a goal.

Reckon you get rid of most of the contentious ones by still allowing spoils over the line for rushed behinds through the goal posts, but removing the touched off the boot calls and those that clip the post.

Dunno posh. A lot of the "touched" reviews are on the goal line as much as they are further back up the field I reckon. But yes, even just an off the boot iteration would be an improvement.

 

[Brodders17]

Dunno posh. A lot of the "touched" reviews are on the goal line as much as they are further back up the field I reckon. But yes, even just an off the boot iteration would be an improvement.

So the pack forms on the line, the ball comes in high, the pack goes up, the ball comes off fingers, thru the goals. Goal! But wait, up to the ARC, who's fingers did it come off? There were about 10 hands in there so it could take a while.
Finally a decision- it came off a forward. Now the big question is did he tap it thru, or spill it. Back to the ARC, or is it umpires interpretation? Either way they will have to guess his intention, while the crowd has a nap.
Not sure your drastic change to the game the has been scored for over 100 years will eliminate the issue you see.

 

[mrposhman]

Dunno posh. A lot of the "touched" reviews are on the goal line as much as they are further back up the field I reckon. But yes, even just an off the boot iteration would be an improvement.

I think removing the ability to rush a behind is too big a change to make. The marginal finger going back off the boot I'd happily get rid of, but I reckon we would create a lot of congestion and players trying to flick the ball through off a defender, which isn't the way we should be going. We need to give the defenders something to defend with.

 

[Redford]

I think removing the ability to rush a behind is too big a change to make. The marginal finger going back off the boot I'd happily get rid of, but I reckon we would create a lot of congestion and players trying to flick the ball through off a defender, which isn't the way we should be going. We need to give the defenders something to defend with.

No, you're not removing the ability to rush a behind. You can still: a) walk or run it through the goal line (just as you can now) or: b) punch, tap, walk it etc. through the behind line (again just as you can now).

 

[The Big Richo]

Some good points. But what did they do before the ruck nomination rule? And why was it changed?

It was open slather previously, anyone could go up at any time. The Hawthorn under Clarkson worked out if you had an ordinary ruckman you could make sure one of your players jumped on the back of the other ruckman every contest and negate them.

 

[Little Ziggyadee]

Footy Fans Survey: have a say on the AFL's biggest topics and win two tickets to the grand final

Vote now on footy's hot topics

www.foxsports.com.au

Can't open it