-
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
In a close game you can often look back on decisions that made a difference. Today wasn't one of those. Can't be bothered pointing out the howlers.
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Just the same old pedantic frees that were given whenever a player calls for it or when a dumpire feels like giving one.
Umpiring had no impact on the result. We played really poorly and will be interesting to see how we react as a group.
The one decision I still don't understand was when a North player (in the second quarter) had taken a mark or a free and in kicking the ball back into play hit the point post on the full. Field umpire Bannister (who is not a very good umpire) decided that the ball should be thrown in from beside the point post. Made no sense to me - I thought it was clearly out on the full and therefore our free. Any thoughts from others ............ ?
Go Tigers
T44
The one decision I still don't understand was when a North player (in the second quarter) had taken a mark or a free and in kicking the ball back into play hit the point post on the full. Field umpire Bannister (who is not a very good umpire) decided that the ball should be thrown in from beside the point post. Made no sense to me - I thought it was clearly out on the full and therefore our free. Any thoughts from others ............ ?
Go Tigers
T44
he was not in play when he kicked it so not out on the full. It can only be out on the full when kicked from on field (I think 
)
)
Tiger44 said:
Everyone near me was completely mystified.
Just before or after that there was a bounce in North's goal square. Goldstein grabbed the ball out of the ruck and was immediately tackled and dispossessed - play-on called and North got a goal from it. Appeared to be a textbook free.
joegarra said:he was not in play when he kicked it so not out on the full. It can only be out on the full when kicked from on field (I think
Similar thing happened in another game (pies vs blooz? can't quite recall) where the player was on the wing and kicked it from outside the boundary and it stayed out of bounds (it didn't come into the field of play then back out....yep, it was a shocker of a kick). Same call.....throw in.... I don't really agree with the interpretation on it, becuase it's a bad kick that shoul be penailise, but at least there's consistency on it.
The umps love the shinboners, that's for sure. I think they lead the free kick count for the year??
Certainly didn't affect the result though but frustrating nonetheless.
Certainly didn't affect the result though but frustrating nonetheless.
Tiger44 said:
Yes..
Absolutely ridiculous interpretation.
From memory, it was from a mark, not a kick in? With that the case, the ball is "in play" but the player is given the ability to move back from the mark to kick the ball.
Just plain stupid.
Rule 16.5.1 (b)
(b) If a Player taking their Kick from outside the Boundary Line
(i) fails to bring the football into play;
(ii) attempts to play on outside the boundary line; or
(iii) does not bring the football into play in
accordance with 16.5.1 (a) then the football shall
be deemed to be Out of Bounds and the boundary
Umpire shall throw the football back into play
at the spot where the original Mark or Free Kick
took place.
(b) If a Player taking their Kick from outside the Boundary Line
(i) fails to bring the football into play;
(ii) attempts to play on outside the boundary line; or
(iii) does not bring the football into play in
accordance with 16.5.1 (a) then the football shall
be deemed to be Out of Bounds and the boundary
Umpire shall throw the football back into play
at the spot where the original Mark or Free Kick
took place.
In my opinion the ball was in play as the mark was 5 metres (or so) inside the field of play. Slightly different from a free for out on the full where the mark is the boundary line so the ball needs to be brought into play. Similarly for a kick to travel the required distance the point of the mark should be the starting point, not where the player kicks it from - this is often interpreted incorrectly imho.
T44
T44
Regardless of whether or not the rule or the interpretation was the factor, it still seems plain stupid.
If the kick goes out in the full, you should be duly penalised.
What if you are shooting for goal and try kicking a banana or Stevie J hook from outside the line?
If the kick goes out in the full, you should be duly penalised.
What if you are shooting for goal and try kicking a banana or Stevie J hook from outside the line?
They just showed the Hansen kick on Fox. Kicked the ball from behind the line, between goal and behind post. Not sure if the ruling was correct, but I don't think it should've been a free to us.
Sitting next to the cheer squad, so it was right in front of us. If, as we are told over and over, the ball isn't out until it's completely over the line then when the ball hit the SIDE of the post it must have been in. Therefore, free kick not throw in.