Ray Chamberlain is a c..............

[zippadeee]

The one that stands out besides the No 50 to lynch, The throw by Selwood and the high hit on Graham was when Ablett held the ball for a week without a call.
How about chamberlain recalling the bounce when it was easily in the circle.

 

[Mr Brightside]

I think Nichols has been the best umpire in the series, pity his linked to Razor, it may cost him a granny, in saying that it sounds like yesterday’s mob weren’t great

 

[zippadeee]

I think Nichols has been the best umpire in the series, pity his linked to Razor, it may cost him a granny, in saying that it sounds like yesterday’s mob weren’t great

They were fantastic. They didn’t play the crowd (apart from some holding the man in the goal square)
They bent Collingwood over in the middle part of the game.
I thought they were great.

 

[Sintiger]

No of frees does not equate to a watchable contest or not. Imagine Riewoldt gets pushed in the back going for a mark 6 times, but none of them get paid as frees because it makes it less watchable. As a Tiger, you'd be seething he was treated unfairly.
So long as the free is there, and it disadvantages the player, you pay it.
The numbers just happen to be what they'll be.

I never think the “if the free is there pay it” argument holds up. If every free that was technically there in a game was paid we would have about 200 frees a game.

What I want is umpires to use common sense in interpreting the rules so that the game flows and generally less frees helps that as long as they are consistent in that interpretation. Consistency is the key.

 

[Tenacious]

Razor an emergency for the GF which will be a relief for all players as you never knew what Razor was going to do next.

Does that mean he’s kitted up and sitting on the sidelines?
If so it’s still too close to the action.
Wouldn’t put it past him to impose himself on the game by making some sort of technical call from the boundary line - such as if there was a bit of argy bargy on the field and he claimed to have seen an incident.
And it’d be just our luck for one of the main umps to do a hammy in the first qtr.

 

[The_General]

I never think the “if the free is there pay it” argument holds up. If every free that was technically there in a game was paid we would have about 200 frees a game.

What I want is umpires to use common sense in interpreting the rules so that the game flows and generally less frees helps that as long as they are consistent in that interpretation. Consistency is the key.

You missed the bit where I said "and it disadvantages the player" . That's the key.

Again, we shouldn't be aiming for quotas. We should just ensure the actions don't disadvantage a side if there is an infringement.

 

[Sintiger]

You missed the bit where I said "and it disadvantages the player" . That's the key.

Again, we shouldn't be aiming for quotas. We should just ensure the actions don't disadvantage a side if there is an infringement.

I’m not trying to argue with you general. My point is nothing more than imo when a game has less free kicks it’s generally a better game to watch. That’s just an opinion of course

 

[DavidSSS]

I never think the “if the free is there pay it” argument holds up. If every free that was technically there in a game was paid we would have about 200 frees a game.

What I want is umpires to use common sense in interpreting the rules so that the game flows and generally less frees helps that as long as they are consistent in that interpretation. Consistency is the key.

How do you get consistency if you take the view that if the free is there you might, maybe, if you feel like it, pay the free?

Ridiculous argument. You get consistency by paying frees which are there and not paying frees which aren't there. The minute you start second guessing about whether a player was really disadvantaged or maybe the game should flow for a few minutes and I'll pay more later or, what exactly?

The reality is that the clubs are professional organisations, they will notice the frees which are paid all the time and those paid sometimes, the players will be taught to push the envelope in areas where there is inconsistency in the umpiring.

I do think we get a raw deal from the umpires. I reckon the club looks at the game style and have figured it is worth the penalty. For example, we often get pinged for holding the ball because we want to get the ball out of the pack in situations where other clubs are happy to hold it in. I figure our running surging style is such that it is worth the penalty we pay for this.

My problem is that I reckon it is not in line with the rules. We get pinged when we try to legally dispose of the ball from a tackle, opposition clubs don't get pinged when they try to hold it in when tackled. Which of these is an attempt to dispose of the ball illegally - neither actually. So we should not be conceding these free kicks any more than other teams.

DS

 

[TOT70]

The one that stands out besides the No 50 to lynch, The throw by Selwood and the high hit on Graham was when Ablett held the ball for a week without a call.
How about chamberlain recalling the bounce when it was easily in the circle.

Ablett actually stopped moving and looked at the umpire. He knew he was gone and had given up. Then he slowly realised that whistle wasn’t coming so he dribbled it onto the ground and kicked it away.

There were so many things wrong with that decision.

 

[Sintiger]

How do you get consistency if you take the view that if the free is there you might, maybe, if you feel like it, pay the free?

Ridiculous argument. You get consistency by paying frees which are there and not paying frees which aren't there. The minute you start second guessing about whether a player was really disadvantaged or maybe the game should flow for a few minutes and I'll pay more later or, what exactly?

The reality is that the clubs are professional organisations, they will notice the frees which are paid all the time and those paid sometimes, the players will be taught to push the envelope in areas where there is inconsistency in the umpiring.

I do think we get a raw deal from the umpires. I reckon the club looks at the game style and have figured it is worth the penalty. For example, we often get pinged for holding the ball because we want to get the ball out of the pack in situations where other clubs are happy to hold it in. I figure our running surging style is such that it is worth the penalty we pay for this.

My problem is that I reckon it is not in line with the rules. We get pinged when we try to legally dispose of the ball from a tackle, opposition clubs don't get pinged when they try to hold it in when tackled. Which of these is an attempt to dispose of the ball illegally - neither actually. So we should not be conceding these free kicks any more than other teams.

DS

I don’t know where to start here.

I’ll give you some examples. When a player is tackled I want a fairly liberal time to get rid of it but I want that consistently. When there is a marking contest I want to see an allowance for some contact being made rather than minor incidental contact being paid a free. I want to see an understanding that ruckman will grapple.

I want those and others adjudicated consistently during a game.

As for your ridiculous comment. I’ll let it go because it’s grand final week

 

[KnightersRevenge]

I don’t know where to start here.

I’ll give you some examples. When a player is tackled I want a fairly liberal time to get rid of it but I want that consistently. When there is a marking contest I want to see an allowance for some contact being made rather than minor incidental contact being paid a free. I want to see an understanding that ruckman will grapple.

I want those and others adjudicated consistently during a game.

As for your ridiculous comment. I’ll let it go because it’s grand final week

All pretty fair points I reckon. My simplest wish for how I want games umpired? Don't guess. If you "think" you "might" have seen high contact, don't blow you're whistle. If you "think" the player "may have" dragged it in, don't blow your whistle. In a game as fast and variable as AFL, that is asking a lot of the officials. I accept that. But this is the pinnacle of sport in our country and we should be expecting a level of ability or skill in the umps that we do in the players.

 

[tigertim]

All pretty fair points I reckon. My simplest wish for how I want games umpired? Don't guess. If you "think" you "might" have seen high contact, don't blow you're whistle. If you "think" the player "may have" dragged it in, don't blow your whistle. In a game as fast and variable as AFL, that is asking a lot of the officials. I accept that. But this is the pinnacle of sport in our country and we should be expecting a level of ability or skill in the umps that we do in the players.

Yep, pay the frees that you see , not what you think you see, don’t be over officious, be consistent.

 

[Coburgtiger]

How do you get consistency if you take the view that if the free is there you might, maybe, if you feel like it, pay the free?

Ridiculous argument. You get consistency by paying frees which are there and not paying frees which aren't there. The minute you start second guessing about whether a player was really disadvantaged or maybe the game should flow for a few minutes and I'll pay more later or, what exactly?

The reality is that the clubs are professional organisations, they will notice the frees which are paid all the time and those paid sometimes, the players will be taught to push the envelope in areas where there is inconsistency in the umpiring.

I do think we get a raw deal from the umpires. I reckon the club looks at the game style and have figured it is worth the penalty. For example, we often get pinged for holding the ball because we want to get the ball out of the pack in situations where other clubs are happy to hold it in. I figure our running surging style is such that it is worth the penalty we pay for this.

My problem is that I reckon it is not in line with the rules. We get pinged when we try to legally dispose of the ball from a tackle, opposition clubs don't get pinged when they try to hold it in when tackled. Which of these is an attempt to dispose of the ball illegally - neither actually. So we should not be conceding these free kicks any more than other teams.

DS

Try a fun game for yourself.

Freeze frame any midfield contest in a game of footy, and count the free kicks.

You'll invariably find a hold of the arm, a tug of the jumper, a block, or a push.

If you play back any pack mark in slow mo, you'll find blocks, holding, high contact, and finger tips touching the ball before it gets marked.

Don't get me started on Ruck contests. Every single Ruck contest either has every free or none. And they seem to always get that backwards.

Most players kicking out run 15 metres without bouncing, in fact, most players who go on blistering runs outstrip their 15 metres without bouncing.

Some of Edwards' greatest quick handballs are throws, alot of Dusty's don't argues have a finger tip on the throat, a lot of Graham's tackles drive a head into the ground.

If you really wanted to, you could blow your whistle during literally any contest in a game at random, and then find a legitimate free kick that's technically there.

It's a really stupid game in a lot of ways. The umpires are always gonna do it tough. But the best ones ignore the incidental, insignificant Frees they see (seeing you're going to not see 80% of them anyway). The worst ones are Razor Ray.

 

[tigerlove]

Does that mean he’s kitted up and sitting on the sidelines?
If so it’s still too close to the action.

Yes! He has the ability to put a spell on hi fellow umpires and the closer he is to the action the stronger the spell.

 

[tigerlove]

Try a fun game for yourself.

Freeze frame any midfield contest in a game of footy, and count the free kicks.

You'll invariably find a hold of the arm, a tug of the jumper, a block, or a push.

You're allowed to block, you're allowed to push. Even allowed to hold an arm until the ball becomes live. You can't pull a jumper. So easy, ease up on the real tiggy touch 50-50 calls.

If you play back any pack mark in slow mo, you'll find blocks, holding, high contact, and finger tips touching the ball before it gets marked.

Blocks is a hard one to judge. High contact should be paid every time. Holding? Too harshly judged, just let it go a bit and allow a stronger player to win a contest, Way too inconsistent because they just pluck them out on the odd occassion. Let them go. Finger tips, well unless it is very obvious since when have they stopped paying the mark? Just pay the mark.

Don't get me started on Ruck contests. Every single Ruck contest either has every free or none. And they seem to always get that backwards.

They get this one wrong badly. Far too tiggy-touch. Again unless it's an obvious head high, pulling of the arm, jumper pull just let the damn thing go.

Most players kicking out run 15 metres without bouncing, in fact, most players who go on blistering runs outstrip their 15 metres without bouncing.

Overall they are quite lenient on this and I think it works out well. I like that it's 15 metres but they only pay it if it is OBVIOUSLY much longer.

Some of Edwards' greatest quick handballs are throws, alot of Dusty's don't argues have a finger tip on the throat, a lot of Graham's tackles drive a head into the ground.

Traditionally they are throws but these days it seems as long as a fist is on it they let it go. Very difficult to judge as umps wil often be blind sided or handball is deep in a pack. Overall I think they handle this fine. Dusty's don't argues, I disagree that alot of them are on the throat but if it is pay the free, simple. Tackles have gone overboard a little. I say unless an absolutely obvious dangerous tackle let it go and let the tribunal make judgement afterwards. Far too many perfectly good tackles getting judged dangerous these days.

If you really wanted to, you could blow your whistle during literally any contest in a game at random, and then find a legitimate free kick that's technically there.

It's a really stupid game in a lot of ways. The umpires are always gonna do it tough. But the best ones ignore the incidental, insignificant Frees they see (seeing you're going to not see 80% of them anyway). The worst ones are Razor Ray.

It is. So many grey rules but in a way it also adds to the game of AFL. What other game can one club's supporters see the same incident so differently to the other club' supporters in so many instances in one game?

 

[Coburgtiger]

Exactly. It's not as simple as pay every free all the time. The game would be unwatchable if it were.

 

[Bullarto Tiger]

The umpires are always gonna do it tough. But the best ones ignore the incidental, insignificant Frees they see (seeing you're going to not see 80% of them anyway).

Agree that the best type of officiating is that which pays the definite/significant frees.
AFL umpiring is the hardest gig in town. Impossible to get it always right. Footballers don't always get it right, so it's unrealistic to think umpires will always get it right.
To see or make correct decisions on every occasion is expecting perfection in an imperfect game.
The flip side is that if every free for all infringements were paid then there wouldn't be a game worth watching. It would grind to a virtual standstill.
Far better that the umps let incidental matters slide while blowing the whistle on infringements that affect the contest and definitely impinge on a player going about their task.
Have this thought, given the level of concern being voiced, that the GF will be umpired this year with as little influence from umps as possible.

 

[Bullarto Tiger]

In the end, if the Tigers are dominant enough on Saturday then any bum umpiring decisions will be of little consequence to the end result.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Umpiring has been nowhere near as bad as the past two years. Our free kick differential is -4 since the bye.

It's taken them a while, but I think the umpires finally perceive us as a good side and have ceased the undue scrutiny of our players.

GWS on the other hand are the top team for frees against.

 

[bigwow]

Umpiring has been nowhere near as bad as the past two years. Our free kick differential is -4 since the bye.

It's taken them a while, but I think the umpires finally perceive us as a good side and have ceased the undue scrutiny of our players.

GWS on the other hand are the top team for frees against.

Mummy alone has had about 80 frees against this year.