-
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
and that was close to the final margin...
so despite being outplayed in many aspects we still kept the margin under control - thanks defenders all day - and in last some desperate work in mid/ forwards that kept ball in neutral, without us having any sophistication in attack that might have converted possession to scores.
Melbourne 24 Richmond 17 Stephens Dalgleish Williamson - Dalgleish now joins the very likely column with Messr FleerUmpire Watch 2021 - End the Free Kick Farce
Carlton 25 Richmond 15 Foot Fleer Mollison
Hawthorn 22 Richmond 25 Fisher Brown Gavine
Sydney 25 Richmond 15 Power Dalgleish Johanson
Port 22 Richmond 12 Rosebury Deboy Hosking
St Kilda 23 Richmond 13 Stevic Gavine Fleer
For the umpire conspiracists - On a very small sample Gavine unlikely to be the culprit - Fleer very likely.
If someone wants to take this and run with it you are welcome.
Fleer -20
Dalgleish -17
no chips on shoulders - quite sure it drives the coaches and players even more knowing we get reamed by the umps each week. keep up the good work umps.
I see the chips on shoulders about umpiring haven't shrunk at all this season. It genuinely saddens me to see all the angst in this thread and how much it impacts on people's enjoyment of the game.
Denier.
I see the chips on shoulders about umpiring haven't shrunk at all this season. It genuinely saddens me to see all the angst in this thread and how much it impacts on people's enjoyment of the game.
Yes, relevant explanation, BR, and aware of. But, do you or we know if The Arc is included in the mikes too. The penalty on Shorty annoyed me as it seemed to be made instantly, as if there was no shadow of doubt, but you could hear someone say "Yer, pay it". But we had no idea who. As if someone was in a perfect position to decide, like above and beyond the field. You often see umps listening to their ear-phones and I have noticed many more late or belated decisions.
I'll happily say Shorty wasn't trying too hard keep the ball in, but I thought it was an unjustified decision as it was a wet ground and the ball half-slid away from him. He was sliding along the turf himself so not that possible to pick the ball up. Harsh adjudication. However, I will say that on that night, we also got a tough one back so I thought the umps applied this rule fairly consistently this match.
But they are often inconsistent with this rule like all others. Benefit of the doubt seems discarded now. Unfortunately, umps often show no experience of playing the game themselves. There are often howlers like in other games I watched. Like one where a defender dribbled the ball parallel to the b-line for about 30m, only for it to take a hard bounce right and over last 5m with a team-mate getting within 1/2 metres. Too often, you ask, what did they expect the player to do - when under enormous pressure to clear the ball from deep defence? Kick or HB straight to an opp player for a gimme goal-kick?
The more rule changes from the AFL under the influence of dubious officials like Shocking, the more:
- room for awful human error
- the more like basketball or netball, soccer. [I argue strongly that our game was not intended to give up easy possessions, or goals, or territory, like it automatically does now. So the TV coverage and sponsors have more ad breaks via supposedly increased scoring for them and the AFL to generate/recoup revenue from heavy losses of '20]
- the 'freeze/statue' rule is totally doing this. Impy in Hawks game just showed the nonsense of this one, where you can just go back 2m from the mark, then run straight by him for a 5/10m gain and kick the goal.
- we are all going to love it if more matches are decided by soft rules/interpretations ... and finals ... and premierships?
These changes are undermining AFL as the hard, tough, no-quarter-given game it always has been until recent years. For $$$$.
Last edited:
I see the chips on shoulders about umpiring haven't shrunk at all this season. It genuinely saddens me to see all the angst in this thread and how much it impacts on people's enjoyment of the game.
What genuinely saddens me is the way the ridiculous inconsistency of the umpiring impacts on people's enjoyment of the game. Not just Richmond supporters, you see it amongst a lot of supporters. It is very frustrating to watch, week after week, highly paid umpires giving decisions within 5 seconds of each other which are diametrically opposed interpretations of the rules.
Is it any wonder fans are frustrated?
DS
To some extent I agree and I am certainly not unbiased.
I try to relax and watch the game without being too critical but generally only last until about half time before the number of howlers get to me. The funny thing is that I'm often sitting there when we get an undeserved free and I'm still thinking WTF?
So, to really get a better perspective I sometimes watch games we are not playing in on the TV. I can't say I see more consistency in games I have no stake or bias in. I can't remember the game I watched a couple of weeks ago, it did not involve Richmond but the umpiring was atrocious, just different interpretations within a couple of seconds by the same umpire.
All I am asking for is a standard of umpiring which reflects this being a professional sport. It does seem to be way too much to ask. FFS they're getting worse.
DS
Over the past five years we've had to come to terms with the concept of a free kick against Richmond not necessarily being a free kick to Richmond when the roles are reversed. We largely and good-naturedly tolerated this while winning. You can expect this thread to escalate.
Yeah, some have, I sit in the negative camp tho. As others have said, for such a professional comp, adjudication is non existant when applied on a
consistency basis. If everything was created equal, there would be no disparity.
Yeah all fans feel they get screwed by the umps, I understand that,
and they tend to remember only the ones that go against.
when I watch games there are moments of "WTF, that's *smile*" and moments of "yeah that was soft I'll take that"
but when you constantly get a disproportionate "WTF's" over "I'll take that's", over many years,
and the numbers back it up, year after year, and proves your not just imagining it
then it pretty much supports your gut feel that we are being screwed by the umps
Which decisions in the Melbourne game do we think the umpires got wrong?
I must admit, I didn't think it was a badly umpired game.
In my eyes, there were two clear mistakes; both unfortunately to Melbourne's benefit.
The free kick against Pickett for his spoil on McDonald wasn't there. A glancing blow to the upper bicep does not constitute chopping of the arms. We need to recalibrate how that rule is adjudicated. Too many soft free kicks are being awarded against players trying to make a genuine spoil and executing it quite fairly.
The 'second shot at goal' free kick awarded to Oliver was cringeworthy. Is there a more infuriating sight in the game than an antagonist being confronted by an opponent, only to then flop to the ground and receive the benefit of a free kick? It's an awful part of our game and akin to a dive in the box by a soccer player. That umpires happily frank the behaviour is galling. I think it's against the spirit of the game and I'd like to see it penalised by the MRO.
Both were called by Williamson, who had an average night.
I doubt either of these free kicks would be awarded in finals, when we enjoy the company of the best umpires and sides like Melbourne just may find the game is a little tougher than they found it in round 5.
Did anyone else see specific decisions (or non decisions) to complain about?
I must admit, I didn't think it was a badly umpired game.
In my eyes, there were two clear mistakes; both unfortunately to Melbourne's benefit.
The free kick against Pickett for his spoil on McDonald wasn't there. A glancing blow to the upper bicep does not constitute chopping of the arms. We need to recalibrate how that rule is adjudicated. Too many soft free kicks are being awarded against players trying to make a genuine spoil and executing it quite fairly.
The 'second shot at goal' free kick awarded to Oliver was cringeworthy. Is there a more infuriating sight in the game than an antagonist being confronted by an opponent, only to then flop to the ground and receive the benefit of a free kick? It's an awful part of our game and akin to a dive in the box by a soccer player. That umpires happily frank the behaviour is galling. I think it's against the spirit of the game and I'd like to see it penalised by the MRO.
Both were called by Williamson, who had an average night.
I doubt either of these free kicks would be awarded in finals, when we enjoy the company of the best umpires and sides like Melbourne just may find the game is a little tougher than they found it in round 5.
Did anyone else see specific decisions (or non decisions) to complain about?
Pickets putting his knee to one of our players head on the ground same scenario as Lynch last year not even a mention.
Which decisions? Not including all the throws and "Holding the Man" frees not paid the 3 that stand out were the, well, one was a HTM.
1. McIntosh was mauled inside the 50 in the 1st quarter. Grabbed without it, pulled to the ground and the held down. Plain as day. Not a hard free to pay. "Play on" was the call.
2. The *smile* free paid against Pickett. Seeing as he literally didn't infringe that means the umpire "guessed". Never guess. Pay only what you see.
3. It was Pickett (Melb) who infringed on Baker. He elbowed him in the head. Twice.
Other than that the one that always bugs me is the off-the-ball holding inside our forward 50. The "third umpire" was instituted specifically to stop it. He was supposed to be not watching the play as much watching for infringements against forwards. I know it has "evolved" but that was why the 3rd ump was brought in.
And I would agree that the free kick differential doesn't tell the whole story. 5 years, or there abouts, of being consistently and sometimes wildly on the wrong end of that, does need to be addressed.
1. McIntosh was mauled inside the 50 in the 1st quarter. Grabbed without it, pulled to the ground and the held down. Plain as day. Not a hard free to pay. "Play on" was the call.
2. The *smile* free paid against Pickett. Seeing as he literally didn't infringe that means the umpire "guessed". Never guess. Pay only what you see.
3. It was Pickett (Melb) who infringed on Baker. He elbowed him in the head. Twice.
Other than that the one that always bugs me is the off-the-ball holding inside our forward 50. The "third umpire" was instituted specifically to stop it. He was supposed to be not watching the play as much watching for infringements against forwards. I know it has "evolved" but that was why the 3rd ump was brought in.
And I would agree that the free kick differential doesn't tell the whole story. 5 years, or there abouts, of being consistently and sometimes wildly on the wrong end of that, does need to be addressed.
