Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute! | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!

Sintiger said:
What has also happened is that a player very rarely gets penalised now when the ball is knocked out in the tackle and what we see is that interpretation seems to be superceding prior opportunity.
It’s annoying because the player has still been tackled even if the ball has been knocked out of their hands, so if they had prior opportunity it should be a free.
Click to expand...
Its a raffle, a shitshow. My biggest beef at the moment is the application of prior opp. Putting aside the constant stuff-ups, inconsistency and other variables, currently, if a player gets tackled when he's very hot he has 2 options; a) tries to get rid of it, big chance of free to opp, b) just clutches the ball to his chest and surrender to the tackle, ball up. My problem isn't that a) is a free, it always has been and should be, problem is that b) isn't a free. Logically, if you see a tackle come and just brace and surrender, isn't that prior opp?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
tigersnake said:
Another mind boggling farce is that the umps seems to be giving players longer and longer to get rid of the ball when tackled. I understand the need to get rid of sling tackles, but surely part of that strategy would include not giving players a long time, longer than I've ever seen, to get rid of it and actually invite the sling tackle? Or are the AFL just cynically using the sling tackle crackdown as a way to minimise stoppages and get more Dusty moments?

Either way, they stink.
Click to expand...

It's stupidity. They need to adjudicate the tackle much quicker. Decide if there was prior and either award a free or ball up and be done with it. The way they let tackles go on and on is a major reason for sling tackles. What choice does the tackling player have? They have to take their opponent down if the tackle goes on for too long.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Sintiger said:
I didn't watch the whole game last night but one thing I did notice was that the Essendon players were continually standing a metre or two over the mark when Port took a mark in the forward line and then waited for the umpire to bring them back. Sometimes the umpires didn't

I assume it is deliberate
Click to expand...
It's like they switch strategy from week to week. Sometimes they tell the players to stand straight away. Other times they give the players time to decide whether to stand the mark or go outside 5. Sometimes they don't even say stand. Other times they allow the player to go 2-3m over the mark then call them back (as you noted) other times they immediately penalise that player with a 50. Sometimes they give the player inside the 9 leniency (as if the players may not yet know the rule) other times they pay 50 when the player pretends not to know. (usually this players initials are SB).

In some ways I feel sorry for them, the stand rule has introduced a whole nother level of distraction and decision making. And more ability for variation from game to game and umpire to umpire. A bit like dissent. It's only dissent if the umpire feels it is. Which varies umpire to umpire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
With the GWS v Demons today, up to 1/2 time GWS have had one lonely free to 14
How can that be?
 
  • Angry
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 users
There was a 50 against port last night that was interesting.

Ess player took a clear mark and the umpire never blew his whistle for a mark then the player got tackled.

The port player said to the ump you never blew your whistle. Which got ignored and just told here is your mark.

The commentators go he has probably got a fair point there.

So potentially if the kick was touched or the ball hadn’t travelled 15m then it was ok what the port player did and I assume since no umpire blew a whistle then the player could assume one of those things.

Potentially a double umpire error. I do like 50m when the player takes an obvious mark and then a few seconds later gets tackled to slow down play but this wasn’t that as I think the 15m was in play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I just watched the last quarter of the Melbourne GWS game.

Gawn goes for a mark in front of goal, dropped, possibly could have been paid, but then goes for the ball and one of his arms is clearly being held by the GWS player.

A few minutes later a GWS player is trying to gather the ball on the run while Petracca tackles him.

Plenty more instances of this I could cite.

FFS, pay holding the man. Both of the above were really obvious, yet 4 umpires can't see it? Bollocks, they are not enforcing the rule.

You want a more open game, you want players to gain possession and actually have a chance to dispose to advantage, you want more Dusty moments, you want more scoring? Don't bring in nonsensical crap like the stand rule, just enforce one of the oldest rules in the game, if a player is not in possession of the ball they get a free kick. A player attempting to gain possession, by definition, is not in possession of the ball.

They have turned the game into a rolling maul because of the stupid way the rules are interpreted, and they try to fix it by adding in stupid rules which are damned near impossible to adjudicate, see MD Jazz's post above. It isn't working and it is damned frustrating as players don't get a decent chance to gather the ball because they are getting tackled before they have it.

I assume the morons running the show are happy with this situation, nobody could be stupid enough not to see the detrimental impact not enforcing holding the man has on the game.

DS
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 10 users
MD Jazz said:
It's like they switch strategy from week to week. Sometimes they tell the players to stand straight away. Other times they give the players time to decide whether to stand the mark or go outside 5. Sometimes they don't even say stand. Other times they allow the player to go 2-3m over the mark then call them back (as you noted) other times they immediately penalise that player with a 50. Sometimes they give the player inside the 9 leniency (as if the players may not yet know the rule) other times they pay 50 when the player pretends not to know. (usually this players initials are SB).

In some ways I feel sorry for them, the stand rule has introduced a whole nother level of distraction and decision making. And more ability for variation from game to game and umpire to umpire. A bit like dissent. It's only dissent if the umpire feels it is. Which varies umpire to umpire.
Click to expand...
Yep, 5 players can yell at the umpire & point to the replay on the scoreboard & that's fine, next minute another guy shrugs his shoulders at another ump & he get pinged 50 metres.
Mind bogglingly (I think that's a word) stupid.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 4 users
TT33 said:
Yep, 5 players can yell at the umpire & point to the replay on the scoreboard & that's fine, next minute another guy shrugs his shoulders at another ump & he get pinged 50 metres.
Mind bogglingly (I think that's a word) stupid.
Click to expand...
It’s the vibe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
MD Jazz said:
It's like they switch strategy from week to week. Sometimes they tell the players to stand straight away. Other times they give the players time to decide whether to stand the mark or go outside 5. Sometimes they don't even say stand. Other times they allow the player to go 2-3m over the mark then call them back (as you noted) other times they immediately penalise that player with a 50. Sometimes they give the player inside the 9 leniency (as if the players may not yet know the rule) other times they pay 50 when the player pretends not to know. (usually this players initials are SB).

In some ways I feel sorry for them, the stand rule has introduced a whole nother level of distraction and decision making. And more ability for variation from game to game and umpire to umpire. A bit like dissent. It's only dissent if the umpire feels it is. Which varies umpire to umpire.
Click to expand...
There was an instance in our game where a player was running across where the mark would be, the ump called stand, but the player had kept running so the ump just pretended he never said anything.

Even the Port player kicking at goal after the siren- he was allowed to come inside his line to allow him to run an arc after the siren, when he ended up kicking it he was slightly to the side of the Bomber on the mark, the player on the mark had to stretch his arm sideways rather than straight up cos he couldnt move his feet.

At the start of the season the rule was tweaked to say a player either had to go straight to the mark, or not. This tweak has been tweaked again to allow players to put their arms up on the mark, then start moving backwards. Perhaps they will tweak it again soon.

Again just a stupid rule that causes as many issues as it allegedly solves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Sintiger said:
I didn't watch the whole game last night but one thing I did notice was that the Essendon players were continually standing a metre or two over the mark when Port took a mark in the forward line and then waited for the umpire to bring them back. Sometimes the umpires didn't

I assume it is deliberate
Click to expand...
The umpires are too worried about "stand" they often just ignore where the mark should be.
there was a case in our game where we took a mark standing pretty much still, the Lion "stood" on his attacking side of our player- so clearly over the mark- and the ump called stand.

The other issue is where the "line" is the player with the ball has to be on. it is different every time. obviously in the forward half it should be in direct line with the goal. but on the wing? on the back flank? in the back pocket?
maybe one of our rules experts can clarify.
it didnt matter so much when the person on the mark could move, but now they can end up in an irrelevant position depending on the umpires interpretation at the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users
Brodders17 said:
The umpires are too worried about "stand" they often just ignore where the mark should be.
there was a case in our game where we took a mark standing pretty much still, the Lion "stood" on his attacking side of our player- so clearly over the mark- and the ump called stand.

The other issue is where the "line" is the player with the ball has to be on. it is different every time. obviously in the forward half it should be in direct line with the goal. but on the wing? on the back flank? in the back pocket?
maybe one of our rules experts can clarify.
it didnt matter so much when the person on the mark could move, but now they can end up in an irrelevant position depending on the umpires interpretation at the time.
Click to expand...
There was one yesterday in the Melbourne GWS game where the GWS player is told to stand say about 5m in from the boundary while the Melbourne player having a shot for goal just makes up his own line about 2 metres further inboard. The gws player on the mark can’t do anything otherwise he,ll get penalised 50m!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Brodders17 said:
The umpires are too worried about "stand" they often just ignore where the mark should be.
there was a case in our game where we took a mark standing pretty much still, the Lion "stood" on his attacking side of our player- so clearly over the mark- and the ump called stand.

The other issue is where the "line" is the player with the ball has to be on. it is different every time. obviously in the forward half it should be in direct line with the goal. but on the wing? on the back flank? in the back pocket?
maybe one of our rules experts can clarify.
it didnt matter so much when the person on the mark could move, but now they can end up in an irrelevant position depending on the umpires interpretation at the time.
Click to expand...
The so-called “line” pisses me of no end. The player is told to “stand” meanwhile the player taking the kick is 5m or more around from the man on the mark. The umpire should either 1) call him back to the “line” or 2) immediately call “play on”.
But what do these *smile* do? They just ignore it.
I’ve stopped watching other games. Umpires are so *smile* useless and the “stand” rule is the most juvenile anathema on a professional game I’ve ever seen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users
tigertim said:
There was one yesterday in the Melbourne GWS game where the GWS player is told to stand say about 5m in from the boundary while the Melbourne player having a shot for goal just makes up his own line about 2 metres further inboard. The gws player on the mark can’t do anything otherwise he,ll get penalised 50m!
Click to expand...
Who knew that playing extremely well the game "freeze when the music stops" as a kid would be critical to AFL footballing success.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
You must log in or register to reply here.
< Round 24: the Datsun Stanza games. | Wildcard round >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom