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!

Are 7 asking was that a high tackle and free to the swans…?
The issue is not whether it was high or not. The issue is the umpire decision to ball it up was absolutely incorrect. If it was not high tackle free to Swans then it was free to Tigers for holding the ball. Player had prior opp and did not try to dispose of it. Ball up was incorrect. Let see what the AFL Gestapo excuse is this week
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The issue is not whether it was high or not. The issue is the umpire decision to ball it up was absolutely incorrect. If it was not high tackle free to Swans then it was free to Tigers for holding the ball. Player had prior opp and did not try to dispose of it. Ball up was incorrect. Let see what the AFL Gestapo excuse is this week

Correct and I said that at the game, it was either a free to Sydney for high contact or a free to Richmond for HTB. There's no half in half out crap, but thats what that decision was, 1 foot in each camp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The issue is not whether it was high or not. The issue is the umpire decision to ball it up was absolutely incorrect. If it was not high tackle free to Swans then it was free to Tigers for holding the ball. Player had prior opp and did not try to dispose of it. Ball up was incorrect. Let see what the AFL Gestapo excuse is this week
I highlighted just that earlier. My question had an element of sarcasm however are 7 asking whether it should have been high or are they asking should it be holding the ball?
 
The umpires are instructed that lowering the body is not prior but ducking is. In this case umpire interpreted it as lowering not ducking, hence no prior. So another grey area created - ducking vs lowering, just what the game needs. I would also say he had a couple of seconds prior after the initial tackle, when he was sitting on his backside like a stunned mullet
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Old Jack R (as against young Jack R) was almost pack raped last night & couldn't get a free. I wish he was looked after the way Pawkins is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
There was also a marking contest where Martin was clearly dragged down - they never miss those for Curnow
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ohhh poor things. These 'incidents' are so minor you don't even notice them. It's all revenue raising again. I wish retired players would speak out in easily losing money like this.

1688721813949.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
The Pickett treatment by the AFL is racism. Cannot be anything else. Hes treated by entirely different standards to any other AFL player. On the field and by the tribunal. It's a joke.
He does, but why do they hate Bakes so much? He gets his head ripped of 2-3 times a game, and gets nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Ohhh poor things. These 'incidents' are so minor you don't even notice them. It's all revenue raising again. I wish retired players would speak out in easily losing money like this.

View attachment 19871
What did JIzzy Cameron get for cleaning up the boundary umpire when doing a lap of honour to celebrate kicking a goal?
*smile* proxy Christian picks and chooses his victims. Surely it’s time someone called this clown out
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
What did JIzzy Cameron get for cleaning up the boundary umpire when doing a lap of honour to celebrate kicking a goal?
*smile* proxy Christian picks and chooses his victims. Surely it’s time someone called this clown out
Yeah....what an 'accident' that was when celebrating like a clown. Awareness wasn't even thought by these dopey flogs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
What did JIzzy Cameron get for cleaning up the boundary umpire when doing a lap of honour to celebrate kicking a goal?
*smile* proxy Christian picks and chooses his victims. Surely it’s time someone called this clown out

But, but, but that was an accident!!!!!!.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
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
Sadly the *smile* wits in suits at AFLHQ are to stupid to comprehend the simplicity of what you are saying SSSDatsun. They're all paid *smile* loads of money to understand that AFL is a very complicated game with complex issues upsetting and frustrating the fans so it therefore takes administrative genius to navigate through these complexities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The Pickett treatment by the AFL is racism. Cannot be anything else. Hes treated by entirely different standards to any other AFL player. On the field and by the tribunal. It's a joke.

This is like those black and white retards calling for a strike over their little ducking mincer just hurts credibility

Whatever the reason we cop a hiding each week its nothing to do with race
 
On this solid foundational principles you can then add new rules. There should be an independent body established to oversee rules to ensure one *smile* knuckle can’t make knee jerk decisions to supposedly increase scoring.
That'd be the former players that used to be the rules of the game committee. Pretty sure that most of them packed up the kit bag n walked away a few years ago because the flogs at HQ simply over rode them time n time again because they knew how to fix everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user