Umpire farce - must stop! | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • If you are having trouble logging in to the forum please contact [email protected] // When reseting your password or awaiting confirmation please check that your email is correct and also your junk/spam emails.
  • IMPORTANT! Our inbox is full of email errors from members who have not updated their emails, please follow the instructions on how to update here
  • 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 - must stop!

BillyJean17

Tiger Champion
Jul 27, 2009
2,626
416
melbourne
Okay, two questions.

1. Why wasn't the Kamdyn incident a free kick? It doesn't matter if it's accidental, as accidental high contact is still a free kick in every other situation excluding marking contests, which this wasn't. Right?

2. If you win the ball and contribute to receiving high contact by a tackler (aka "the Selwood rule"), then doesn't that mean prior opportunity and holding the ball?

If so, the Papley free kick was an example of this and needs to be stamped out. These guys create the high contact by looking at an opposition player before they get the ball, grabbing the ball, then propelling their body and head towards the opposition player to intentionally create high contact that otherwise wouldn't have happened. It's wrong, and it rewards players for attracting head knocks, which will lead to increased probability of CTE in retirement, and so should be treated as deadly serious - but it's ignored. Am I missing something here?
Papley is an absolute past master at dropping the knees to draw a free , a couple of his teammates arent bad either
 

mrposhman

Tiger Legend
Oct 6, 2013
9,572
5,727
Frees in 2nd half was 6 to 14. I think I missed the squaring up bit.

I'd love to see the 3rd quarter. Reckon we got reamed by the umps in that quarter. Every time we looked like coming back into it, we seemed to get a poor decision against. That quarter was so important after being 40 points down at half time, we need to drop that lead to 20-25 to stand any chance and the umps seemed to be intent to snuff that out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

zippadeee

Tiger Legend
Oct 8, 2004
35,257
10,619
What about when heeney dropped that mark in FP that was paid and goaled, lamentable decision
It wasn't paid as a mark, but Pickett wasn't looking at the ball and held Heeney.
That was there, but once again we never get those paid for us.
Alot of the decisions were right in the context of the rules but lynch and Jack never get those paid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

BillyJean17

Tiger Champion
Jul 27, 2009
2,626
416
melbourne
It wasn't paid as a mark, but Pickett wasn't looking at the ball and held Heeney.
That was there, but once again we never get those paid for us.
Alot of the decisions were right in the context of the rules but lynch and Jack never get those paid.
Agree with that , and that was my point they had a hair trigger that was applied differently in our f50
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

BillyJean17

Tiger Champion
Jul 27, 2009
2,626
416
melbourne
I'd love to see the 3rd quarter. Reckon we got reamed by the umps in that quarter. Every time we looked like coming back into it, we seemed to get a poor decision against. That quarter was so important after being 40 points down at half time, we need to drop that lead to 20-25 to stand any chance and the umps seemed to be intent to snuff that out.
Yep the *smile* umpiring meant there’d be no Comeback
 

King Kong

Tiger Champion
Aug 26, 2016
2,704
1,192
The umpiring was the most biased I have seen in a long time. After 5 years of getting shafted week in week out that is saying something
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

MD Jazz

Tiger Legend
Feb 3, 2017
6,233
3,301
So if you want a free kick all you have to do is run over a player bending over picking up the ball. The dud umps will pay a "taking the legs" free 9 out of 10 times.

Also if you want to run with the ball 30 meters without bouncing just take the kick in from a behind. The umpires are too busy rehearsing their stand stand routine in their heads to blow the whistle.

And if you kick to a team mate 8 meters away don't worry the ump will pay the mark.
Don’t forget if you can’t handball don’t worry you can throw it now. As long as the ball is in motion it’s all good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

TigerMasochist

Walks softly carries a big stick.
Jul 13, 2003
20,183
3,316
I remember it coming in and that it was the Rohan incident that was the catalyst, but Goodes got away with it for years. It was kind of ironic that the incident that brought the rule in involved one of his teammates.
Wasn't there also an incident where Carrotseller got slid into n near got decrapitated?
As with all player safety rules AFL, they start out with good intent, then get bastardised by incompetence. The below the knees ruling was originally designed to stop players sliding in uncontrolled at opponents n taking out players by smashing legs. Now players can't even bend over while trying to control the loose pill if it means an opponent charging in from the opposite direction crashes over the top. Too bad if the player bent over and playing the ball gets his sacred site crushed, it's all his own fault.
 

zippadeee

Tiger Legend
Oct 8, 2004
35,257
10,619
Take a chill pill people if you think we got reamed on satedey, just wait to see the port game
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users

BrisTiger24

Chimp's Love of the Tiger
Oct 16, 2003
12,990
2,431
Brisbane
Is throwing the ball now allowed?
Yep tackling is going to fade out of the game at this rate. Clearly they are instructed to keep the play flowing and that means allowing any disposal of the ball when tackled and plenty of time to get the ball out. Some tackles spin 3 times and there is no free paid