-
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!
- Thread starter iLoVeNeWmAn
- Start date
While the Eagles may have had an extra player with the ump, gee Tom Barrass was our 23rd man. He had a shocker.
Thought in general that we had the rub of the green, but the big money decisions went horribly against us. Pretty sure it was Mollison who drifted down to award the putrid W.Rioli free before scuttling back to our forward line.
My understanding is that if the ball is out of bounds a kicking in danger free cannot be applied. Ball must be in play.
It was clearly over the line
Yeah I thought the others were pretty good too, but when you have 2 kicks taken off you within 15m for nothing and the studs up and the Rioli one in the last if feels like a shafting even when you have won the free kick count.
There were a number of our of zone frees given throughout the game too.
I could be wrong but it looked like caddy kicked it before the eagles hand arrived. How is that Caddy’s fault. Makes a smother kicking in danger
I thought the one against Vlastuin was the worst. If that's late then I give up.
Forgot about that one. Five absolute howlers in a game is too many - especially one way.
He did sneak down there for that one. It was a shocker.
The actual rules aren't important here TBR, you should know that by now
The studs up rule is to stop the toby greene style head kick, not 2 guys contesting a mark where a boot hits a butt.
Not rough at all. They are the ones interpreting and applying the rule. Whistle doesn’t blow itself.
Any others called on the weekend?
Greene's one also hit the player front on. Maybe just take the studs off the boot and we'll all be fine....
Spot on. The umpires that paid those frees have no feel for the game.
If, and this is a huge if given the gross inconsistency of the umpiring, the rules are interpreted as written, then it might be reasonable to cite the rules.
But what is the relevant rule here?
It looks to me like it is the rough conduct rule which reads as follows:
17.7.2 Free Kicks - Rough Conduct
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player when that Player engages in rough conduct against an opposition Player which in the circumstances is unreasonable, which includes but is not limited to:
(a) executing a dangerous tackle on an opposition Player;
(b) making forceful contact below the knees of an opposition Player or executing a forceful action towards the lower leg of an opposition Player, causing the opposition Player to take evasive action;
(c) sliding knees or feet first into an opposition Player;
(d) using boot studs in a manner likely to cause injury.
17.5.2 is also relevant but refers to the above and 17.3 does not refer to this - the studs rule refers to rough conduct not prohibited conduct.
Reiwoldt did not use boot studs in a manner to cause injury and, I should add, what a terrible rule, very badly written. Again, it asks the umpire to interpret what the player is doing. The player has to use their studs in a manner likely to cause injury, so, does incidental contact constitute using the studs, or is it incidental. Hence the room for interpretation. I can't see how Riewoldt's mark was using his boot studs in a manner likely to cause injury.
As for that free to Rioli which resulted in a goal, that was quite near me. It was paid as in the back, but Rioli didn't even get pushed forward, that was a legitimate tackle every time. No interpretation issue here, just a woeful decision.
Woeful decisions, especially like the Rioli decision, are completely unacceptable. These umpires are just not good enough, way too inconsistent. The AFL should stop fiddling with the rules and do something about the standard of umpiring. I won't be holding my breath, the AFL are incompetent.
DS
And the fact that the umpire is instructed, or believes he is instructed, to pay a free kick for that comes back on Hocking. The man is dangerous.
<
Welcome Liam Baker
|
Tasmania
>
