Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!

[Baloo]

There's no way the result could be reversed. Over a minute left on the clock which is plenty of time for the Swans to score another goal. Sydney would run straight to the courts and file an injunction if the AFL tried. We, the fans, would be up in arms over the AFL deciding the result of a game like this.

Nonsensical thinking.

 

[rocsta75]

The AFL had the power to award the win to the Crows post game because of a clear goal not awarded.

Your argument above is conjecture and the Swans yet again get the rub of the AFL.

No they don't have the power cause the result was unknown. Tell me if Sydney was Richmond and we were down by less than a goal with 70 secs to go you would accept that the afl would award the win. to the opposition No way. Betting agencies wouldn't accept it. That is then cheating. As i said can't correct one error with another error. Why not overturn the elimination final non goal, Dom Shed goal in the GF - was it a free kick to Maynard? Let's overturn that where do we stop. It doesn't happen nor should it. 70 sec left from a centre bounce left plenty of time for Swans to kick a goal. Therefore you absolutely cannot overturn a result based on speculation. The only time a result has been changed was siren gate. Thats because they could go back in time not forward and speculate.

 

[rocsta75]

Yeh, Syd would have had to kick a goial to win so would have been attacking. But it's more likely the Crows win if the goal is confirmed.

Yea your word "more likely" not certain. Therefore only speculation and not conclusive. Cant award a result on specualtion

 

[Sintiger]

The AFL has the power to do what it wants or haven’t you noticed. Stop making excuses for their bull#%^t.

I am not making excuses just stating facts.

I am definitely not a fan of what happened but anyone with any degree of common sense can understand why the game result can't be changed

 

[mrposhman]

Open the internet and look at Juventus demoted - you can jump through your own hoops and answer your own questions if you want the answers you seek!

So you are comparing umpire incompetence (there is no evidence of any wrongdoing by the Swans) with deliberate bribes being paid to provide favourable referees (and decisions) for Juventus games!!

Thats a heck of a long bow to be making.

 

[DavidSSS]

The result cannot be changed, that is clear.

As Dimma would say, you work on what you can control.

So, how about they work on getting the umpiring up to a standard that could be described as being better than complete and utter incompetence.

DS

 

[Tigerdangerous]

So you are comparing umpire incompetence (there is no evidence of any wrongdoing by the Swans) with deliberate bribes being paid to provide favourable referees (and decisions) for Juventus games!!

Thats a heck of a long bow to be making.

I’m comparing the behaviour and performance of the two administrative bodies and the AFL is, let’s be honest, run very poorly with massive doses of nepotism that keeps it chugging along

 

[MD Jazz]

A good point raised by Lloyd. Umpire has no idea that Nadal has run off his line pretty early in his runup. Poor Maynard stands there like an idiot. Nadal effectively gets a shot from 10m closer than he should (maybe 5m).

AFL happy because its a score and we all love goals. Yay!

Please please please get rid of this stupid *smile* rule.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1693604232811712869

 

[RoarEmotion]

The result cannot be changed, that is clear.

As Dimma would say, you work on what you can control.

So, how about they work on getting the umpiring up to a standard that could be described as being better than complete and utter incompetence.

DS

Yep - It’s the system that’s the issue - not the umpires. And that is a leadership issue.

No transparency or accountability means no learning or improving (hidden behind the mask of we don’t have enough umpires)

Media clearly encouraged to not talk about umpiring errors. The fox footy coverage of the Adelaide goal was downright embarrassing with emperors new clothes on full display.

Rules added / modified that make the umpires job way too difficult / nigh impossible as they have minutia to deal with (Eg stand rule) that take focus away from being present in the game itself.

More umpires on the field with too many rules that are subjective is a recipe for inconsistency. Focus should be to maximise consistency imo.

Examples - Dissent / htb / htm / 15m kicks / protected zone infringements / insufficient intent / too high vs ducking all subject to interpretation / when you have to stand and when is not standing not standing / play on calls after standing … the list goes on and on and on (and out of bounds now added to that list).

Mega penalties (50m) for egregious infractions or bureaucratic ones lead to player and fan frustration.

More umpires also dilutes talent - we just added the 28-36th best umpires to the pool.

Scourge of gambling hanging over the sports’ head combined with above factors is a recipe for corruption given no transparency.

Underinvestment in technology for multiple years despite multiple examples of it being worse than other sports.

Highly rated players with friends in media. not called out for staging. Dangerfield and Selwood the classics. Look at the media treatment that Ginnivan, rance and grimes got. Insufficient penalties for staging. This should be a weekly focus of the tribunal to make the
umpires’ job easier. King not flopping means less umpire errors.

Terrible succession planning by leadership despite being more highly paid than the best players in the game.
- Lack of football operations leadership.
- Two CEOs at once. You can’t have two chiefs.(just *smile* off Gil)
- Dan Richardson brought in after being moved out of other organisations where he seemed to have abjectly failed - who is he mates with?

 

[Baloo]

Rules added / modified that make the umpires job way too difficult

My favorite is when the rules don't change, but there's a new interpretation of the rule.

 

[Brodders17]

I’m comparing the behaviour and performance of the two administrative bodies and the AFL is, let’s be honest, run very poorly with massive doses of nepotism that keeps it chugging along

Yes, we all wish the AFL was run by FIFA, that would clean up the game quick smart.

We are all still waiting for your examples of results being overturned after the finish due to an in game umpiring error?

 

[mrposhman]

I’m comparing the behaviour and performance of the two administrative bodies and the AFL is, let’s be honest, run very poorly with massive doses of nepotism that keeps it chugging along

Serie A was forced to do something by a club using underhand ways of influencing results.
We are talking about an umpiring mistake (a pretty big one) here. There is nothing to suggest that the Swans were involved so they are completely different scenarios that you are trying to package together as the same.

I similar argument, is where in Serie A, a ref missed a fairly obvious penalty shout in the last minute of a game. Can you show me an example of where Serie A have overturned results due to that?

 

[RoarEmotion]

Looks like netball had a howler earlier in the year.

Result not changed.

Result to stand as Netball Australia investigates umpiring error in chaotic ending | Super Netball | The Guardian

Investigation launched into the error that benefitted Melbourne Vixens in their eventual win over Collingwood Magpies

amp.theguardian.com

 

[Nico]

A good point raised by Lloyd. Umpire has no idea that Nadal has run off his line pretty early in his runup. Poor Maynard stands there like an idiot. Nadal effectively gets a shot from 10m closer than he should (maybe 5m).

AFL happy because its a score and we all love goals. Yay!

Please please please get rid of this stupid *smile* rule.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1693604232811712869

With 4 umpires on the ground, how hard would it be for an umpire to stand 20 metres behind the player taking the kick for goal, and if they deviate off the line, immediately call play on.

2 umps close to goal looking for infringements and helping the goal ump out (if the ball is close to the post, or touched close to goal line...call for a review), 1 ump on the mark, 1 ump behind the goal kicker.

This would be applicable with or without the stupid stand rule.

 

[tigersnake]

A good point raised by Lloyd. Umpire has no idea that Nadal has run off his line pretty early in his runup. Poor Maynard stands there like an idiot. Nadal effectively gets a shot from 10m closer than he should (maybe 5m).

AFL happy because its a score and we all love goals. Yay!

Please please please get rid of this stupid *smile* rule.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1693604232811712869

Why stop at i50? This happens constantly all over the ground, the player on the marks can't move, but the player taking his kick can move off his line or is never even put on his line. The whole thing is a total farce.

I agree with Lloyd though, in that you would think, wouldn't you?, that the ump might be a bit more vigiliant in applying the rules during set shot. But the problem he highlights occurs constantly all over the ground, so just get rid of it.

 

[DavidSSS]

A good point raised by Lloyd. Umpire has no idea that Nadal has run off his line pretty early in his runup. Poor Maynard stands there like an idiot. Nadal effectively gets a shot from 10m closer than he should (maybe 5m).

AFL happy because its a score and we all love goals. Yay!

Please please please get rid of this stupid *smile* rule.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1693604232811712869

A problem with 1 clear cause: the stupid stand rule.

Which means, 1 clear solution: get rid of the stupid stand rule.

Doesn't matter how many inconsistent morons you place around the player with the ball, there will always be variations, umpires who call play on while the player is walking back and others who don't call play on until the following week.

There is a problem with adjudication, but the rule causes that, the real problem is the rule, it is just monumentally f***ing stupid.

DS

 

[frickenel]

Most of our players don’t have heads. That’s the only explanation for how rarely we get paid for too high.

Watching the head high contact on Jack in the opening 10 minutes, a few seconds after MacKay tried to ride him like he's a rodeo bull, you're probably on the money. The head high stuff IS just as back as the lack of taqckle reward.

 

[artball]

Re: Crows/Swans..

the goal umpire was convinced that a clear goal was a point that didn't require (f)arc..... there's yr problem.

 

[MD Jazz]

A problem with 1 clear cause: the stupid stand rule.

Which means, 1 clear solution: get rid of the stupid stand rule.

Doesn't matter how many inconsistent morons you place around the player with the ball, there will always be variations, umpires who call play on while the player is walking back and others who don't call play on until the following week.

There is a problem with adjudication, but the rule causes that, the real problem is the rule, it is just monumentally f***ing stupid.

DS

And its not just the play on call that is a "variable".

It's the variation in time it takes them to say "stand". Which means a player may well be trying to creep back outside 5. And the ump calls stand and the player may be moving which is a 50. Unless it's not and then the ump says "outside 5".

Or the case where the player deliberately encroaches an extra 2-3m over the mark by pointing at the ground. And some umps call him to "come back 2m". And some don't. And some pay 50 for going over the mark and holding up play, and some don't.

And all the while they have to keep a mental note of how long the player has had the ball because they need to call play on at some point. And in the last 2 minutes that time is shrunk because we want to add to the excitement by giving the opposition time to get the ball back.

 

[DavidSSS]

Re: Crows/Swans..

the goal umpire was convinced that a clear goal was a point that didn't require (f)arc..... there's yr problem.

Not the only problem, yes, the goal ump got it wrong, but so did all 4 field umpires because none of them called for a review, which they should have, instead, one of them must have called all clear which was wrong. The field umpires are in control of the game, the rules say so.

DS