Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!

[MD Jazz]

18.26 - Adams gathers loose ball, lifts arms up as Jack tackles him. Doesn't get handpass away and throws it. No free.

 

[MD Jazz]

17.07 - Daniher flies again. Not clear whether he actually makes contact with the ball. Although you think he had to. No free.

 

[Barkdog]

Ditto the second one. Your photo shows perfectly that a metre out the Brisbane player is set and his level doesn't change, his head is level with Baker's shoulder then and it is level when they collide. Baker didn't go low enough in the tackle.

Yeh from the photos I dont interpret that at all. From a metre out McCluggage is leading with his head. Essentially driving at Baker looking for high contact. What's Baker to do there? He lowers himself in the tackle as you say, he leaves himself open to copping a shoulder to the head or clash of heads.

 

[MD Jazz]

Firstly @MD Jazz sincerely well done for taking the time. It takes a lot of time and effort to do that sort of analysis and it is so much more valuable to the discussion than just blanket statements without justification.

FWIW here is my take on the ones you've raised:

The long tackle on Dustin and Rioli's tackle look very similar in those photos but you haven't shown that Rioli throws the Lions player to the ground after your last photo. That's why it was a free kick. Zorko is being held while trying to get the ball which is very different and again correct.

The first Riewoldt one is hard to argue as a free. I can't see how the second one can be definitively called holding based on that vision.

I had the RCD hold and high in my count, both clearly missed. The one where they are both holding, when it goes on RCD grabs his arm which is where the free comes from I think.

The Baker tackles are a result of his poor technique. In the first one he should be going low and behind the player to tackle him, or sitting off the corridor side to chop off the handball or tackle if he turns inside. Every coach in the competition would tell him to never go towards the head of the player over the ball.

Ditto the second one. Your photo shows perfectly that a metre out the Brisbane player is set and his level doesn't change, his head is level with Baker's shoulder then and it is level when they collide. Baker didn't go low enough in the tackle.

As for Baker's holding the ball, that's a clear fend of the tackler to me. As holding the ball as holding the ball can ever be.

I think you've shown the frees against Ralphsmith and Aarts pretty clearly, I still don't know what Aarts was doing with the 50.

The Daniher one depends on your definition of an unreasonable attempt, I'm in the it was reasonable camp.

I'm curious as to why there's nothing Brisbane's way in your analysis, were you not looking for them or didn't see any?

For example, after I did mine I had it pointed out to me via PM that Riewoldt's first goal should have been a free to Brisbane for holding as he grabs a handful of jumper in the contest, so there must be a few missed their way as well.

Adams grabs Reiwoldts arm in both hands as they approach the contest. Why is that not a free? It is according to the rules.
18.5.2 Free Kicks - Marking Contests A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick in a Marking contest against a Player where the Player:
(a) holds or blocks an opposition Player

In the second one Starcevich holds Jacks arm down with both hands so he can only contest with one hand. Why is that not a free? Again a free according to the rules.

I agree the Rioli one was a free, and Zorko, they are technically there but so is tghe dusty one. Why didn't Dusty get a free?

Baker doesn't tackle McCarthy - McCarthy runs into him. Baker stands there. Why is that a free?

The one of McCluggage is perfect, McCluggage deliberately goes head first into him to try and draw a free. Baker does not get him high at all? Where does he contact him above the shoulder? No free.

Baker - is it a fend or trying to free his arm? Did he have prior? If he had prior so to did Lyons. So they are either both frees or both play on.

RCD-Lyons both hold each other. Yet you agree with the free to Lyons? Cameron & Ralphsmith the same. Yet both are correct for you?

Daniher - they always pay a free against where the attempt interferes with an opponent and the player flying doesn't touch the ball. Not here though.

 

[MD Jazz]

Yeh from the photos I dont interpret that at all. From a metre out McCluggage is leading with his head. Essentially driving at Baker looking for high contact. What's Baker to do there? He lowers himself in the tackle as you say, he leaves himself open to copping a shoulder to the head or clash of heads.

Its amazing what TBR sees with only one eye open. Neither should be a free, both times the player with the ball is leading with the head looking for a free. Players are looking for head contact and umpires are falling for it.

Below is a Matthieson special - dip the head into the tackling arm to draw a free. Should that sort of play be rewarded?


lay be rewarded?

 

[MD Jazz]

The Robinson tackle on Dusty is a clear example of being judged differently. Baker is penalised twice for high tackles when the Bris player in both instances looks to create high contact. Dusty doesn't try and stage and tries to make a play and is penalised. Robinson jumps as he thinks Dusty will initially handpass over him. That makes his initial contact over the shoulder and high and it should be penalised but isn't. This is worse than the Baker frees yet again goes against us.

 

[Harry]

Yeh from the photos I dont interpret that at all. From a metre out McCluggage is leading with his head. Essentially driving at Baker looking for high contact. What's Baker to do there? He lowers himself in the tackle as you say, he leaves himself open to copping a shoulder to the head or clash of heads.

yeah agree. If baker goes lower then they clash heads.

 

[MD Jazz]

A beauty at 5.20 left in the second. Why is Jack called to play on when he doesn't move off his line.?

He does well and kicks to Aarts who marks it and could arguably get 50. But of course doesn't.

 

[MD Jazz]

I'm agreeing with the first one on Riewoldt, the second one I can't see how you can say there is definitely a hold from that angle when the camera is on the wrong side to see.

You can't see because Reiwoldt goes up one handed!!! His other is being held in two hands by Starcevich.

 

[Redford]

1.13 - McCluggage runs into Baker and draws a high free. See photos.

View attachment 12386View attachment 12387View attachment 12388

That's the second one where Baker has had someone bend their knees and run into him but.....FREE KICK !!!

 

[MD Jazz]

I love how you call me one eyed and yet you have just done an analysis of umpiring with no mention at all of anything to do with the opposition missing a free, and today you have suggested two of the most obvious free kicks you could ever find (Balta high on Daniher and Baker's holding the ball) were 'incidental contact' and 'no prior' play on.

18.5.2 Free Kicks - Marking Contests A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick in a Marking contest against a Player where the Player:
(a) holds or blocks an opposition Player;
(b) unduly pushes or bumps an opposition Player;
(c) deliberately interferes with the arms of an opposition Player;
(d) makes contact to an opposition Player from front-on and whose sole objective is not to contest or spoil a Mark; or
(e) makes an unrealistic attempt to contest or spoil a Mark which interferes with an opposition Player.

18.5.3 Permitted Contact Incidental contact in a Marking contest will be permitted if the Player’s sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark.

Look at the photos. Balta in great position. Balta hits ball. He does not make contact with the arms. He then makes contact to Daniher.

Why can't you argue that is incidental contact in the marking contest as he has already completed the spoil?

Daniher stays down for a few seconds after the contact and then realises he's not getting the free and jumps up.

 

[MD Jazz]

TBR - You are welcome to go through and find the controversial frees that were paid against Bris or that were missed for Bris. Other than the Daniher one you mention and the Pickett throw I'm yet to see one. Please point them out.

We seem to be umpired to a different standard.

 

[MD Jazz]

I think Dustin didn't get a free for exactly the reason you described with Rioli. Didn't know the ball had gone and didn't go on with the tackle. Same decision as Rioli if he hadn't gone on to throw him on the ground.

This is where I really question your impartiality and analysis. You say Martin doesn't get a free because he is not taken to ground and Rioli is penalised because he does take the other player to ground?

18.3 PROHIBITED CONTACT 18.3.1 Spirit and Intention A Player who makes the football their sole objective shall be provided every opportunity to do so. 18.3.2 Free Kicks - Prohibited Contact A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player when that Player makes any of the following Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player:
(d) holds an opposition Player who is not in possession of the football;

Martin has to get a free, regardless of whether he is tackled to the ground or not. McInnerney, like Rioli, doesn't realise the ball is gone and continues to hold Martin in a tackle. Yes he doesn't bring Martin to ground like Rioli did to Bailey but he still has hold of him in a tackle. Why is that not holding the man in your world?

 

[MD Jazz]

The RCD one, if you go on past when they are both holding there is a moment when RCD grabs the arm of the Brisbane guy.

Again, what are you watching. Here is the complete image set. At what point does Lyons let go of RCD's jumper? Never. At what point does RCD grab his arm and deserve to get a free awarded against him? Yet Lyon gets a free for holding? How can you watch it and only see a free for Lyons?

 

[Mr Brightside]

Is there an executive summary of this.....

Gil’s just perusing over it as we speak

 

[The Mole]

Again, what are you watching. Here is the complete image set. At what point does Lyons let go of RCD's jumper? Never. At what point does RCD grab his arm and deserve to get a free awarded against him? Yet Lyon gets a free for holding? How can you watch it and only see a free for Lyons?

View attachment 12427View attachment 12428View attachment 12429View attachment 12430View attachment 12431View attachment 12432View attachment 12433

Extremely hard to argue with all those images MDJazz.

 

[zippadeee]

Bend over time is coming this Sundey Afternoon at Giants Stadium
Haussen
Hosking
Toner
Adelaide's best 3 players

 

[Redford]

Gil’s just perusing over it as we speak

No wonder he looks tired.

 

[jb03]

Some seriously good work there @MD Jazz

 

[kyuss]

Hers's an interesting one. I've listed below the teams we've played so far's free kicks against average for the year so far, and how many they conceded against us. I find it amazing that in all but two games teams conceded less than their season average, and in some cases well below season average. Love to hear peoples theories on how the team's who play the best team of the last 4 years seem to be able to interfere less than they normally would.

Carlton - Ave. 20 v Richmond 15

Hawthorn - Ave. 20.8 v Richmond 25

Sydney - Ave. 19.1 v Richmond 15

Port - Ave. 20.2 v Richmond 12

St.Kilda - Ave. 18.4 v Richmond 14

Melbourne - Ave 19.6 v Richmond 17

Doggies - Ave. 17.2 v Richmond 21

Cats - Ave. 18.7 v Richmond 11

GWS - Ave. 19.9 v Richmond 12

Lions - Ave. 21.5 v Richmond 16