Umpiring

[peterh_oz]

Originally posted by ugg
Just watched the first couple of minutes on tape to try and decipher those Brisbane free kicks given early on. Bloody disgraceful. The first one against Hall was a joke, he gave a little nudge to Michael as they going over the line. And still can't figure out the reversal given against O'Keefe.

Worst!
Umpiring!
Ever!

Anyway on a lighter note, anyone recognise those 'hoons' shown on TV giving it to the umpires.

The reversal was actually, if I'm remembering the right incident, a holding-the-man decision (very soft mind you) in front of me, which was further "back"to Brisbane, so therefore had to be paid "forward" to where the ball was. Was paid by the end-zone umpire, whereas the mark was paid by the "central" umpire. Once the hold was paid, it WAS correct to take it off us where the mark had been paid (ie where the ball was). Wether the holding warranted a free can be debated for ages. I think it was holding, it was a week ago & its now 3.30am. If I could be bothered I'd check the tape, but I can't be bothered.

[peterh_oz]

Originally posted by Nico
Stats for the game - Sydney 17 frees, Brisbane 12 frees.

I wonder what the Lions supporters thought of the umpiring.

My worst decision was not a free, it was the disallowed mark to Schneider in the dying moments of the 3rd qtr. The replay clearly showed that the ball did not hit the ground, yet the ump was less than 10 metres from the spot and on the correct angle.

NFI.

It had to be watched almost on freeze-frame to paythe mark though. When you find a way for me to carry a tv-studio around with me when I'm umpiring, and have instant replays plugged directly into my brain-waves for split-second analysis (so as not to hold up the game), let me know. I'll be interested to trial them in my games. Until then, pick up a whistle and try it yourself.

As someone once said, next time you are watching a game on tv, stand at the BACK of your loungeroom, and jog on the spot while watching and try to get EVERY decision right (live - not on replay!). Remember - you can make 99 correct decisions (including play-on etc) but the 100th is the one you'll be remembered for.

[peterh_oz]

Originally posted by robbieando
Also the Schneider mark wasn't a mark, because you can't mark the ball between your legs

Yes you can. Law 14.1

A Mark is taken if, in the opinion of the Field Umpire, a Player catches or takescontrol of the football:-

a. within the playing surface, and
b. after it has been kicked by another Player a distance of at least 15m, and
c. which has not touched the ground or been touched by another Player during the period when the football was Kicked until it was caught or controlled by the Player.

Nowhere does it say "caught in the hands" etc. Nothing stops you catching it in your legs/feet/armpits or wherever. As long as the act of catching in the legs & juggling can't be deemed a kick.

Although 1.1 Definitions define a "Kick or Kicking: in relation to disposing of the football, means making contact with the fotball with any part of the Player's leg below the knee" I would argue that juggling via your foot to mark the ball is not DISPOSING of the ball (in the same way that handpassing to yourself while running (similar to a solo in Gaelic) is not deemed a disposal and you can be pinged for running too far.

Don't you love our game - 2 umps with different views of a simple "catch" hehehehehe

[liz]

Originally posted by peterh_oz
I think it was holding, it was a week ago & its now 3.30am. If I could be bothered I'd check the tape, but I can't be bothered.

Not sure its actually captured on tape - though that is on the assumption that it was an "off-the-ball" incident after Pebbles took the mark rather than something in the (lead up to) the marking contest.

You would think that with a player taking a set shot from a decent angle that it would have to be a clear infringement from another attacking team player - like a clear and strong push - rather than just a hold that has no influence on what is about to transpire.

[peterh_oz]

Originally posted by j s
This still frame would seem conclusive

You reckon? I can't tell if the bottom end of the ball is on the ground or not. Allowing for the curvature of the ground (for drainage) I would suggest that the 3rd ump (4th?) can't decide so it is thrown back to the umpire on the field. Who would have to say "not out" (benefit of the doubt to the batsman).

[j s]

Originally posted by peterh_oz
You reckon? I can't tell if the bottom end of the ball is on the ground or not. Allowing for the curvature of the ground (for drainage) I would suggest that the 3rd ump (4th?) can't decide so it is thrown back to the umpire on the field. Who would have to say "not out" (benefit of the doubt to the batsman).

In motion you can see it bounce - definitely NOT a mark IMHO (much as I would have liked it to be). The umpire viewpoint would have been similar to the camera while the CS was looking from behind.

[Reggi]

Having watched the replay the umpiring other than the first few minutes wasn't that bad.

Schneider was stiff to have a 50 against him in the first few minutes.

It was a mark - but you'd be lucky to that paid - he should have got the free anyway as Power was clearly in has back

[dimelb]

Am I mistaken, or does the clock stop when the ball goes out of bounds? If so, how could Schneids be wasting time?

[peterh_oz]

Originally posted by dimelb
Am I mistaken, or does the clock stop when the ball goes out of bounds? If so, how could Schneids be wasting time?

Yes the clock stops, but he's still wasting time because he is delaying Brisbane & allowing our defence to set-up etc. No actual match time was wasted but it is still deemed time wasting. Otherwise every OOB could be kicked to the top of the grandstand etc to delay.