Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute! | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • 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!

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
10,525
17,880
Melbourne
One of the big problems with the holding the man/holding the ball rule is getting the balance right. I'll actually agree with TBR because the last thing we want is for 2 players to be going for the ball but you don't want to be first at the ball, you want to be second at the ball so you can be the tackler. I would err more on the side of the player who is going for the ball rather than going for the tackle.

Spook is talking some sense with his analysis but forgetting that they no longer seem to pay holding the man any more. Look at when 2 players are going for the ball, the player less likely to get the ball, the player who is behind or second to the ball, is grabbing at the other player, is impeding the other player's approach to the ball. This is either holding the man or shepherding the ball - both should be a free kick. Watch old games where there was no prior opportunity, the second player to the ball is very careful not to impede the player who is trying to get the ball, because if he isn't they will pay holding the man very quickly. The only legal way to impede a player going for the ball is to bump them, and if you bump them in the back it is also a free.

Is prior opportunity a response to not paying holding the man? I don't know, but the way they allow players to hold and impede when neither player is in possession has caused a hell of a lot of problems.

I was stunned when Cotchin got that free at the centre bounce for holding the man. That happens at every centre bounce in every game. It is holding the man every day of the week, they just don't pay it and it is a blight on the game. If they started paying holding the man to all the mids who get held at the bounce it would stop, immediately. The rules don't need changing on this, they have always been the same: just pay the bloody free.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
10,525
17,880
Melbourne
That's true but it should have been paid holding the ball. He dives on it and doesn't get it out.

Really? What prior opportunity does a player who dives on the ball have if they are immediately tackled?

Maybe they should stand back and wait for another player to attempt to gain possession of the ball and tackle?

I don't think that is what we want, we want players to be after the ball, not the free kick from a tackle.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Baloo

Delisted Free Agent
Nov 8, 2005
44,115
18,926
One of the big problems with the holding the man/holding the ball rule is getting the balance right. I'll actually agree with TBR because the last thing we want is for 2 players to be going for the ball but you don't want to be first at the ball, you want to be second at the ball so you can be the tackler. I would err more on the side of the player who is going for the ball rather than going for the tackle.

That's a line trotted out by the coaches all the time. In the instances where players are arriving at the same time, instead of waiting, the other option is to go all Richmond on the ball and tap, slap, kick off the ground, whatever in your forward direction.

There are ways and means and they were doing it for years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

leon

Tiger Legend
Apr 6, 2014
8,906
4,407
It "spills out" straight to a teammate an awful lot.
Teams practice this, along with the 'as an opponent had hands on me, I just happened to accidentally release the ball to a team-mate; it just flew out of my hands due to the contact ...' To conceal a throw.

Seen players from certain teams get away with this a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

123cups

Tiger Champion
May 1, 2016
3,099
4,076
So basically, to check if I understand this correctly, "HTB" only applies if the player:

1. Had prior - which means they had time to dispose of the ball before being tackled (~2 seconds have passed while in space)

2. If they've waived their prior by:
- attempting to fend off
- attempting to drop the head / bend the knees (The Selwood rule)
- diving on the ball (we don't want players forcing a ball-up)

3. No genuine attempt (doesn't matter if they had no prior)

That's all it is, I think.

If someone tackles you a second after you get the ball, you're allowed to turn 180 degrees and drop the ball on the ground towards your teammate.

Which means to win a free kick for HTB:

- Tackle them quickly: The opposition has to duck / dive onto the ball / attempt a fend off... and fail to give a clean disposal.
- Or you have to wait about 2 seconds before tackling them, so they won't have prior. We tackle quickly, so we rarely give them prior.

The only rule that enrages me is the lack of prior being waived for the Selwood rule. I reckon umpires have ignored it in almost 100% of the situations I've seen it happen. You can't bend your knees and turn into your opponent with your shoulder dipped while raising your arm... that's automatic HTB, not a free kick for too high. Unless I'm wrong and it's back to the drawing board for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

crackertiger

Swan street 2017
Jan 4, 2003
3,223
483
melbourne
One sure way to fix up Selwood is to make sure when ducks for a free his head takes a proper smashing. Surely he is due.. It will stop his cheating behaviour.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

King Kong

Tiger Legend
Aug 26, 2016
6,127
5,321
One sure way to fix up Selwood is to make sure when ducks for a free his head takes a proper smashing. Surely he is due.. It will stop his cheating behaviour.
Just give him a Dangerfield forearm. It will see him off and importantly the player won't miss any weeks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

TigerMasochist

Walks softly carries a big stick.
Jul 13, 2003
25,571
11,449
Just give him a Dangerfield forearm. It will see him off and importantly the player won't miss any weeks.
Guarantee if a Tiger player nails a Moggie or probably anyone else in this manner it'd be straight to the tribunal n lucky to get off with only four weeks.
 

acatman1

Tiger Superstar
Sep 18, 2016
1,119
352
One sure way to fix up Selwood is to make sure when ducks for a free his head takes a proper smashing. Surely he is due.. It will stop his cheating behaviour.
Well despite 250 games ( or whatever ) by selwood, history shows he isnt in the top 10 for frees, also now ( probably dur to media etc), he has to have his head ripped off nowadays for a high tackle. So many nowadays have taken his mantle
 

spook

Kick the f*ckin' goal
Jun 18, 2007
21,917
26,429
Melbourne
Well despite 250 games ( or whatever ) by selwood, history shows he isnt in the top 10 for frees, also now ( probably dur to media etc), he has to have his head ripped off nowadays for a high tackle. So many nowadays have taken his mantle
History also shows umpires used to quite often pay 100+ free kicks a game. Selwood is miles in front for frees compared to any modern player.

But yes, the likes of Crumples Macrae have learned well from the master.
 

tommystigers

Don't Boo! It is hurtful to the inept and corrupt.
Oct 6, 2004
4,443
2,334
Not paying the stand 50’s tonight. Ratguts on the wing after an out on the full got told to stand on the line. Didn’t move the one metre to the line and then moved two metres inward without play on being called. One of several times Geelong have moved before play on called.
Either enforce the rule or get rid of it. Can see us copping one later in the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users