-
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
Can’t say the same for Channel 7. Despite three replays they were adamant Jack had pushed the bomber defender in the back and from the replay (and surprisingly the ump) the push was in the side.
And why weren’t we paid a 50 when the bombers played put the ball on the ground rather than give it to the richmond player who was standing in front of him? Ump said it was alright? Umps again showing discretion on what was a black and white decision?
Exactly, the umpires arbitrarily decide not to pay a majority of the black and white rules a majority of the time someone breaks one. There's a hundred small examples of it each week.
How do they determine which ones they randomly ignore and which ones they pay?
It's purely subjective and therefore prone to bias
What about the tackle on Heppell? He gets perfectly tackled, drops the ball then drops his knees and the Richmond player falls in to his back. Free kick to Heppell and he goals.
How many goals from frees did each side get?
How many goals from frees did each side get?
That just peeved me orff big time...who the *smile* paid that bull sheet free kick?!?
Who do you reckon, O'Gorman and he was glowing with delight.
We need to get the cheers squad to sing “Rudolph the red nosed reindeer” every time he screws us over.
I'll have to watch it closer, it looked like a sneaky piece of staging my Heppell - but not necessarily by pulling the arm like Vlas claimed at the time.
I think Heppell planted his feet and pivoted his body weight after he felt pressure. I don't notice this action often.
This meant Vlas was off balance hanging over Heppell's hip (planted as a pole in the ground). The hip basically tunnelled Vlas just enough to make him fall over, as he wasn't expecting Heppell to plant a foot.
Vlas went over the hip, Heppell turned, and then he fell straight down in his back
I'm not sure if he pulled Vlas by the arm or if it was just a trick in body weight - but it was definitely manufactured by Heppell and therefore against the spirit of the game
If it was my call, I'd be giving Heppell a warning for bringing the game into disrepute.
I'd fine him if he continued to manufacture similar situations (especially if he disproportionately receives frees for in the back compared to other mids, which is data that's kept in-house so only they would know...)
Pretty easy to stamp this soccer crap out of the game IMO.
Warn, fine, and suspend players after reviewing the footage.
E Weird night with the umpires last night. In the third quarter they paid us 6 frees in a row. Unheard of! Some of them ere even soft . Then in the last quarter they went back into normal mode. Some of the bad decisions have been highlighted by others. The one that got me was in the last quarter with the MRJ perfect tackle on the Essenbum defender trying to run it out. Decision to ball up when clear HTB in front of goal was pathetic. Did not affect the outcome but was atrocious
I reckon the free was there, was similar to 1 I think Cotch got in the centre square BUT I hate this rule. It rewards players who can force the tackler to over balance.
On top of this, what is the actual purpose of the rule? To protect the players ribs right. When you look at the majority of ITB frees there is very little risk to the players ribs. Sure pay the ones that are excessive in force but most of these frees are cheap and should be rewarding the tackler.
Whats more, the biggest issue in footy right now is concussion right, this rule has the exact opposite impact of what the AFL wants. How many times do you hear the commentators, say "he turned him well". Well turning him exposes the weakest part of the head (the temple) to potentially hit the ground.
The ITB rule for all but seriously aggressive slams in the ground, just has to be removed.
Well I read the BB thread for laughs. Basically umpiring in third quarter outrageous and biased and turned the game.
I have always thought In the Back was a rule because when you are pushed in the back you are being unfairly disadvantaged. It goes way way back, I don't think it was put in for any reason relating to injuries. I reckon it was made an infringement as allowing a push in the back would make the game a bit ridiculous. Bumping has always been allowed but pushing less so, I reckon pushing in the side is more prevalent now but would need to watch old games to see if this really is the case. Bumping has always been allowed, pushing less so.
DS
DS
Depends where you are talking.
ITB in a marking contest I totally agree, but a lot of ITB's are paid in the process of tackling where a player falls forward and pulls the tackler down on top of them. There is no push in any of that, just a players weight falling onto their back (which could damage ribs). If they are paying a push, then they need their eyes tested.
I have no issue with pushes anywhere else, but this whole focus of paying ITB when you fall into their back in the process of tackling needs to change.
Highlighted the relevant bit.
This is exactly the point, how is it push in the back if there is no push? Well, it isn't. Flopping forward hasn't always been a free kick, really don't know why it became a free.
DS
Spot on David. It was for a push only. Not a landing action or a dragging action or a tackling action. It's another simple one the games needs to get right and it is simple.if it's a push pay it. If it's one of the others forget about it, players will stop with these strategies as soon as there is no reward.
I guess technically when the tackler lands they push into the opponents back, but agree the umps need to do better at working out who and what caused the fall, or the rules need to be clearer.
Somewhere along the line the rule has changed from a PITB to just ITB for some reason. Totally agree with what you say and I really hate the amount that players go unrewarded for good tackles because they incidentally fall into the back because they drop their knees in most cases.
