Brett Rosebury-Umpire | 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.

Brett Rosebury-Umpire

graystar1

Tiger Legend
Apr 28, 2004
6,879
1,801
From the site that cannot be mentioned today explains quite a bit on how difficult it is to umpire today.
Just a snippet, but good to read.
1626995861057.png
 

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
10,523
17,874
Melbourne
He has added a bit of mayo there but the number of tackles is much higher:

Tackles per game 1999-2021 R18.jpg

But you have to ask why tackles are higher. I'm not sure exactly how they count these but in the old days the umpires would call a stoppage once a pack started to form, now they leave it for half an hour. Plus, do they count the second player coming in to tackle as another tackle?

I reckon a fair amount of the issue here, as with a number of the other issues, is how they adjudicate the game now - letting a lot of infringements go to keep the free kick numbers down, not penalising holding the man most of the time etc.

This is a problem the AFL have brought upon themselves.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
27,017
14,792
Whichever way you measure it that's a huge increase in tackles, which personally I don't mind as I love tackles.
 

Baloo

Delisted Free Agent
Nov 8, 2005
44,113
18,924
Whichever way you measure it that's a huge increase in tackles, which personally I don't mind as I love tackles.

tackles or tackle? Asking for a friend who also lived in Indonesia for a while.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 5 users

zippadeee

Tiger Legend
Oct 8, 2004
39,639
15,415
How hard is it?
There's 3 flogs on the ground now.
'If the player gets tackled and dosent release the ball by foot or hand will be penalized'
There's 20 throws a game that go without been penalized.
In the back never gets paid anymore.
One umpire gives a player 20 seconds to release the ball while others ping the player going for the ball immediately.
Umpiring is driving people away from the game
 

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
10,523
17,874
Melbourne
Whichever way you measure it that's a huge increase in tackles, which personally I don't mind as I love tackles.

I don't mind tackling, I just get shitty with the number of players held before they have the ball.

Throws need to be reined in too, a more strict adjudication of the handball rules, and some consistency (yeah, dream on) is sorely needed.

And, FFS, call a ball up as the pack forms, the game flowed so so much better when they did that years ago.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
27,017
14,792
If it's too hot, get out of the kitchen.

Or is this remark from an experienced umpire a veiled criticism of the AFL hierarchy?

Sounds like an ump expressing the reality of the situation to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
27,017
14,792
I don't mind tackling, I just get shitty with the number of players held before they have the ball.

Throws need to be reined in too, a more strict adjudication of the handball rules, and some consistency (yeah, dream on) is sorely needed.

And, FFS, call a ball up as the pack forms, the game flowed so so much better when they did that years ago.

DS

yeah, except these days a ball-up can result in another ball-up, as players will get over to the contest. Holding is a tough one... nothing worse than a random hold being paid to a forward 50 metres off the ball.

I remember umps in the old days picking out a random free kick to a defender if there were too many ball ups in a muddy forward pocket.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
10,523
17,874
Melbourne
yeah, except these days a ball-up can result in another ball-up, as players will get over to the contest. Holding is a tough one... nothing worse than a random hold being paid to a forward 50 metres off the ball.

I remember umps in the old days picking out a random free kick to a defender if there were too many ball ups in a muddy forward pocket.

Aah, but the answer to the random hold free being paid, is to stop paying the random frees and pay every free that is observed by the umpires.

It is crystal clear that the umpires are not paying every infringement that they see, the number of players held at the centre bounce, even before the ball is bounced, is absurd. If you want the game to flow, allow the good rovers to go for the ball without being impeded by an illegal hold. Simples.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

BrisTiger24

Out: Chimp In: Camel
Oct 16, 2003
15,183
7,312
Brisbane
He has added a bit of mayo there but the number of tackles is much higher:

View attachment 12876

But you have to ask why tackles are higher. I'm not sure exactly how they count these but in the old days the umpires would call a stoppage once a pack started to form, now they leave it for half an hour. Plus, do they count the second player coming in to tackle as another tackle?

I reckon a fair amount of the issue here, as with a number of the other issues, is how they adjudicate the game now - letting a lot of infringements go to keep the free kick numbers down, not penalising holding the man most of the time etc.

This is a problem the AFL have brought upon themselves.

DS
But dropping off in the last few years in what has to be the SHocking effect...
 

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
27,017
14,792
Aah, but the answer to the random hold free being paid, is to stop paying the random frees and pay every free that is observed by the umpires.

No, I'm talking the good old days when the umps made up a free kick to break up congestion. And that was fine.

They should pay the first free seen, forget about every free. This is what they do in the round ball game - first free kick is paid, if someone breaks someone's leg after that then they get a red card but the previous free stands.
 

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
10,523
17,874
Melbourne
No, I'm talking the good old days when the umps made up a free kick to break up congestion. And that was fine.

They should pay the first free seen, forget about every free. This is what they do in the round ball game - first free kick is paid, if someone breaks someone's leg after that then they get a red card but the previous free stands.

Nah, those defensive clearing frees were all there ;). Actually, the funny thing about it is, since I do remember the old days, whenever I hear the whistle close to goal I expect a defensive clearing free, but these days it seems to go more to the forwards (except Jack and Tom, they get reamed).

Pay the first free seen, wow, that ain't difficult is it? Just seems very difficult for AFL umpires. It is the only way, then if the players get stroppy the umpire just says "I paid the first infringement I saw". Much simpler than the current approach where the umpires, under instruction to reduce the number of free kicks given, either wait until it is so ridiculous that they have to pay a free, or, they ball it up which creates more congestion than a quick free kick. Neither of the current strategies reduces the number of stoppages which is meant to be something they want, nor does it reduce the congestion, quite the contrary.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

St Kevin

Tiger Legend
Apr 1, 2014
7,178
6,136
I think the bigger issue is how long they take to throw the ball up following a tackle, largely due to the ruck nomination rule. This means more numbers flow around the ball, particularly defensively.

Eliminate the need for ruckmen to put their hands up like they're in primary school, allow two players to compete in the ruck (if a third jumps in, blow for a free kick) and the umpires could throw the ball up quicker and not allow congestion to build around the contest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

No left foot

Tiger Rookie
Aug 30, 2020
155
508
How do you then stop other mids from bodying the ruckman and stopping them getting at the ball?
Have 4 players from each team nominate before the game that they will contest in the ruck. No-one else permitted. Those 4 players are then indemnified from getting reported in any ruck contest, except against the opposing teams ruck. They are then clear to clock any shortarse who gets in their way at a ball up or boundary throw in.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
10,523
17,874
Melbourne
It would be illegal on a ruckman but it's not illegal to put body on another player around a stoppage.

And if you don't nominate then how do you tell?

The only way it could possibly work would be to change the rules so that no player was allowed to make contact with anyone around a stoppage, and that would be a very strange rule.

Hmm, ok, let's see what the actual rules say.

A shepherd is defined as follows:

Shepherd: the act of a Player using the body to push, bump or block an opposition Player who does not have possession of the football and who is no further than five metres away from the football.

So, we have a 5 metre radius for a start. Plus this rule still does not allow for pushing in the back which is illegal under a different section of the rules.

I seem to recall years ago you could not shepherd the ball, in other words you could only shepherd when a team mate had possession of the ball. I would also say that the above is a quite strange definition of a shepherd, shepherding is blocking, a push or a bump is a push or a bump. I suppose it does mean that players are limited from pushing and bumping when the ball is more than 5 metres away, but they don't actually enforce that and I certainly don't recall it being illegal to bump a player when the ball is more than 5 metres away years ago.

Holding is out since the definition of prohibited contact includes the following:

holds an opposition Player who is not in possession of the football;

The enforcement of that one is laughable.

While I am sympathetic to the reason behind having to nominate a ruck, it is a recipe for congestion. To some extent the amount of time it takes to call a ball up is the problem here, because they let the pack form and muck around for a while, in contrast to what used to be the case when a ball up was called when a pack was forming. They have created the problem and the fix creates yet more problems.

I would be interested to see how it would work if they called a ball up much quicker and threw the ball in the air also much quicker. That may not solve the problem, but we have to find a better solution than nominating a ruck.

Ever since they have implemented adjudication which is designed to "let the game flow" it has flowed worse than ever. The solutions used (don't pay all free kicks, allow packs too much time for a disposal, allow players to hold a player in pursuit of (but not possession of) the ball, etc) have contributed to the congestion problems. Then they try and jerry rig solutions to the subsequent problems, such as the requirement to nominate a ruck. It is a mess. They are making it hard for the umpires and the umpires are not adjudicating the rules very well either.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

St Kevin

Tiger Legend
Apr 1, 2014
7,178
6,136
So what happens when there's a stoppage and one midfielder bodies up to another but then one of them says I'm going up in the ruck? That would be a free kick.

Unless you radically change the rules there is no way it can work without clearly defining who the ruckman is in each contest.

No one says anything. The ball is thrown up or thrown in. Two players compete. If a third enters, it's a free kick.

It really is simple. You should consider Hocking's vacant role for meaningless overcomplication of something that was simple for basically the entirety of the game's existence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users