Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!

[The Big Richo]

Yes there are too many instances of Tiger players giving away dumb free kicks, but I'm sure that there is a degree that come from complete exasperation at the umpiring.

Yeah I agree with that, I'm just saying it is unacceptable. Not to say it will never happen, but it should be seen for what it is, a selfish, individual act.

I remember Chris Scott on 360 last year when they were discussing dissent saying he had made a concerted effort to drop the coaches box theatrics about umpiring because he expected his players to be better than that.

I reckon our club still carry the idea that if the umpire makes a mistake you are entitled to go off about it because they were the ones who got it wrong.

 

[RoarEmotion]

Yeah I agree with that, I'm just saying it is unacceptable. Not to say it will never happen, but it should be seen for what it is, a selfish, individual act.

I remember Chris Scott on 360 last year when they were discussing dissent saying he had made a concerted effort to drop the coaches box theatrics about umpiring because he expected his players to be better than that.

I reckon our club still carry the idea that if the umpire makes a mistake you are entitled to go off about it because they were the ones who got it wrong.

I think you still want a way to call to the attention of the umpire that they are missing infringements.

Frustration usually comes as a reaction to the feeling of being wronged or at yourself for doing something stupid. Need to work out how to engage the emotion in a positive way though and also not in a way that puts the ump offside.

 

[Jason King]

This is one of many examples I could give, but why and how does Cerra keep getting away with this?

This one was holding the ball first and yet was still called HTB even though Jack did everything possible to avoid getting in his back.

Props to Brayshaw sounding like he had a lobotomy.

 

[MD Jazz]

I remember Chris Scott on 360 last year when they were discussing dissent saying he had made a concerted effort to drop the coaches box theatrics about umpiring because he expected his players to be better than that.

I find that a bit hypocritical given hs "I'm not complaining", complaining about the MCG surface. No different to players whingeing to umpires.

 

[MD Jazz]

This is one of many examples I could give, but why and how does Cerra keep getting away with this?

This one was holding the ball first and yet was still called HTB even though Jack did everything possible to avoid getting in his back.

Props to Brayshaw sounding like he had a lobotomy.

Cerra is taking the crumple to the next level

 

[artball]

This is one of many examples I could give, but why and how does Cerra keep getting away with this?

nickname him 'The Swan'

 

[The Big Richo]

This is one of many examples I could give, but why and how does Cerra keep getting away with this?

Good warm up for the week. It's definitely not holding the ball, he didn't have prior, and the tackle causes the ball to spill.

That's the one commonly misinterpreted as 'dropping the ball' which isn't a rule.

Even though he caused the movement, it's hard to argue in the back when you end up lying on top of him. I'd call it a clever draw of a free kick, but I can see why people don't like it. I don't mind drawing high contact either.

 

[mrposhman]

I've run a lot of theories around this over the years and never quite nailed it, mainly because I think there's a lot of factors at play.

There's definitely some game style factors, but when you really drill into ours our differential is often only because of a handful of players.

Nankervis is unquestionably elite at free kicks against. He goes at -.8 on career free kick differential. That doesn't sound like much but it's huge. Buddy Franklin who I believe is the all time leader in frees against goes at -.6. Tom Lynch is -.1 Dustin Martin -.5.

-.8 is the highest negative differential over a reasonable length careerI have ever seen and the second highest is -.7. The owner of that? M. Pickett.

But again this focuses purely on the frees against column. How can it be that we are constantly given less frees than the opposition. I can accept the frees against, I think you have articulated that part pretty well, we have several players that play close to the line and infringe (Nank and Pickett are 2) but why do we not get the same frees as other teams. I watch most games, and there are frees to forwards that I watch and react that "Jack and Lynch don't get that treatment", or HTB decisions that we don't get that other teams do etc.

What is it that we are doing where umpires cannot see the holds etc on Lynch and Jack that we can see in the crowd, or where they can't see players failing to control the disposal by dropping it etc?? I just cannot understand the frees for column. The frees against is ok, but why don't we draw the same frees that other teams get?

 

[The Big Richo]

But again this focuses purely on the frees against column. How can it be that we are constantly given less frees than the opposition. I can accept the frees against, I think you have articulated that part pretty well, we have several players that play close to the line and infringe (Nank and Pickett are 2) but why do we not get the same frees as other teams. I watch most games, and there are frees to forwards that I watch and react that "Jack and Lynch don't get that treatment", or HTB decisions that we don't get that other teams do etc.

What is it that we are doing where umpires cannot see the holds etc on Lynch and Jack that we can see in the crowd, or where they can't see players failing to control the disposal by dropping it etc?? I just cannot understand the frees for column. The frees against is ok, but why don't we draw the same frees that other teams get?

I'm not being a smart arse here so don't take me the wrong way but I'd suggest your bias in some of that. I watch games and see some frees we get, some we miss and the same for the opposition. Most people tend to focus only on what happens to their team and in my experience most supporters of other teams would say exactly what you are saying.

The other thing most people don't stop and consider is when you watch the game at the ground or on TV you are mostly watching from the opposite perspective to the umpires (maybe not so much now with 4). So you are outside looking in, they are generally in looking out, so naturally you are going to see things regularly that they miss and vice versa. Think about how often we see a replay from the other angle that makes something clear we couldn't see from the initial shot. And vice versa.

Having said that I also think the we don't get frees feeling is more complicated than it seems.

Year	Frees For Average	AFL Rank	AFL Average	Spread 1-18	Frees Against Ave/Rank
2017	18.8	10th	18.8	4.1	21.2/18th
2018	17.5	18th	20.5	4.9	22.6/17th
2019	18.5	11th	18.8	3.7	19.6/11th
2020	15.0	14th	16.0	4.9	18.3/17th
2021	17.1	18th	19.1	4	21.1/18th
2022	18.8	17th	20.2	3.5	22.5/18th
2023	17.5	13th	20	15.5	22.5/14th

So over those years our cumulative difference from the AFL average for frees for is - 10.2, our difference in frees against is +14.1, so we do worse in frees against.

Bet that makes you feel better!

Worth noting though these are very narrow clusters of stats. A change of one free kick a quarter either way would almost send you from last to first, as seen by the spread.

 

[The Big Richo]

By the way, there's a reason 2019 was a relatively good year if you stop and think about it.

 

[shad]

Regardless of whether we are playing or not I am finding the standard of umpiring pretty poor.

For example any umpire who is still paying a too high free kick for a Selwood shrug is a *smile* idiot and should not be a professional umpire. And I see it every week.

 

[CarnTheTiges]

This is one of many examples I could give, but why and how does Cerra keep getting away with this?

This one was holding the ball first and yet was still called HTB even though Jack did everything possible to avoid getting in his back.

Props to Brayshaw sounding like he had a lobotomy.

if they charge him with acting he’ll miraculously find a way to stop doing it.

 

[Little Ziggyadee]

This is one of many examples I could give, but why and how does Cerra keep getting away with this?

This one was holding the ball first and yet was still called HTB even though Jack did everything possible to avoid getting in his back.

Props to Brayshaw sounding like he had a lobotomy.

He got 5 in the back free kicks in round 1 last year.
He played with rubber hips

 

[CarnTheTiges]

Scott and Lyon brought up the whole getting rid of the centre bounce thing again on 360 last night. I don’t personally mind if it goes, but their rationale for doing it was that umpires find it really hard to do properly. How did umpires years ago get it right? Or did they consistently stuff it up like the ones we have now do, and we never noticed?

 

[RoarEmotion]

Scott and Lyon brought up the whole getting rid of the centre bounce thing again on 360 last night. I don’t personally mind if it goes, but their rationale for doing it was that umpires find it really hard to do properly. How did umpires years ago get it right? Or did they consistently stuff it up like the ones we have now do, and we never noticed?

I think the logic was that better general Umpires who can’t bounce get excluded. I don’t mind this logic - I’d rather better general umpiring than a good bouncer and average everywhere else.

 

[Jason King]

Good warm up for the week. It's definitely not holding the ball, he didn't have prior, and the tackle causes the ball to spill.

That's the one commonly misinterpreted as 'dropping the ball' which isn't a rule.

Even though he caused the movement, it's hard to argue in the back when you end up lying on top of him. I'd call it a clever draw of a free kick, but I can see why people don't like it. I don't mind drawing high contact either.

Good call on the dropping the ball. I would still argue incorrect disposal but im sure there are some weird rule hierarchy on that.

On Cerra and the dive, it's physically nearly impossible to not fall down if you have a hold of someone and they drop or dive forward. The umps need to do better, they have no issue with "the boy who cried wolf" rule with Ginnivan.

 

[The Big Richo]

Good call on the dropping the ball. I would still argue incorrect disposal but im sure there are some weird rule hierarchy on that.

On Cerra and the dive, it's physically nearly impossible to not fall down if you have a hold of someone and they drop or dive forward. The umps need to do better, they have no issue with "the boy who cried wolf" rule with Ginnivan.

Prior opportunity is the key. If you haven't had prior then the only way it can be holding the ball is if you either just accept the tackle and do nothing or throw the ball away.

My view is always that if you get the ball first the reward is you control the play and if you are skilful enough to use that advantage to draw a free kick then more power to you.

I don't mind the Selwood shrug or the Ginnivan knee drop or the Cerra dive, as far as I'm concerned they won the ball so they are entitled to make the play, and it is up to their opponent to tackle lower or turn them in the tackle. The only exception for me would be if a player goes head first into a player in front of them, which should be play on or better still a free to the other team to discourage it.

 

[MD Jazz]

Good warm up for the week. It's definitely not holding the ball, he didn't have prior, and the tackle causes the ball to spill.

That's the one commonly misinterpreted as 'dropping the ball' which isn't a rule.

Even though he caused the movement, it's hard to argue in the back when you end up lying on top of him. I'd call it a clever draw of a free kick, but I can see why people don't like it. I don't mind drawing high contact either.

18.6.3 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Incorrect Disposal Where a Player in Possession of the Football has not had Prior Opportunity, a field Umpire shall award a Free Kick if that Player elects to Incorrectly Dispose of the football when Legally Tackled. For the avoidance of doubt, a Player does not elect to Incorrectly Dispose of the football when: (a) the Player genuinely attempts to Correctly Dispose of the football; (b) the Legal Tackle causes the football to be dislodged from the Player’s possession.


You sure the tackle caused the ball to spill? It looks like he tries to shrug the tackle (watch his shoulders) and as his arms are grabbed he loses the ball. Yes, probably no prior (although if you fend that is considered prior opportunity -attempting to break the tackle is also considered prior?

If you think the ball was no dislodged by the tackle it should be a free for incorrect disposal.

This again is one of those 50/50's that we never seem to get. I can see how the umpire could have thought the ball was dislodged by the tackle but at real speed it simply looks like dropping the ball.

"Clever" draw of the free kick, probably, but for me the likes of Cerra and Crumples are lesser footballers for the way they try and draw free kicks.

 

[MD Jazz]

I don't mind the Selwood shrug or the Ginnivan knee drop or the Cerra dive, as far as I'm concerned they won the ball so they are entitled to make the play, and it is up to their opponent to tackle lower or turn them in the tackle. The only exception for me would be if a player goes head first into a player in front of them, which should be play on or better still a free to the other team to discourage it.

You do know they changed the interpretation because of Selwood so that the shrugger forcing the initial legal tackle higher doesn't get rewarded.

IMO liking those sort of actions is a bit like being a fan of the mankad. It's not really playing the game in the correct spirit.

 

[The Big Richo]

You sure the tackle caused the ball to spill? It looks like he tries to shrug the tackle (watch his shoulders) and as his arms are grabbed he loses the ball. Yes, probably no prior (although if you fend that is considered prior opportunity -attempting to break the tackle is also considered prior?

Yep, prior is only before the tackle. Him trying to roll the shoulders and get his arms free to handball is an attempt to dispose of the ball.

The only way that might apply is if he just tucked the ball under his arm and tried to push off the tackler in which case the umpire might say you're not actually trying to dispose of the ball just muscle the tackle off. But twisting, turning etc trying to get free is part of trying to dispose of the ball.

Without prior it is almost impossible to get a holding the ball (as it should be) unless the tackled player just gives up or throws the ball out with one hand. I reckon the holding the ball rule would sit better with most people if they considered prior opportunity in those terms.

You do know they changed the interpretation because of Selwood so that the shrugger forcing the initial legal tackle higher doesn't get rewarded.

IMO liking those sort of actions is a bit like being a fan of the mankad. It's not really playing the game in the correct spirit.

Yeah I know, I just don't agree. Same with Ginnivan last year, I don't like it not being a free if you take someone high.

If your tackling technique is good and you get low and take the hips then all the shrugging or ducking in the world makes no difference.

I do like mankads as well, no warnings, just run them out if they are creeping.