Swans chat Umpiring: the good, the bad and the ugly

[Markwebbos]

Here it is, a thread all about umpiring.

Go nuts!!

I reckon it will give the Tippett-thread™? a run for it’s money

[KSAS]

There are 2 types of people in footy my friend. Those with the footy in their hands and those who blow the whistle.

[bloodspirit]

Here it is, a thread all about umpiring.

Go nuts!!

I reckon it will give the Tippett-thread™? a run for it’s money

May your dream of chat regarding umpiring being primarily focused in this thread be realised.

[Matty10]

May your dream of chat regarding umpiring being primarily focused in this thread be realised.

I think Markwebbos might have to give it a bump come game day to keep it kicking along.

In regards to umpiring, I regard the view that they make no difference to a game’s outcome as being ridiculous. They might not be the primary reason for a win or loss in the vast majority of games, but the power of a single error (howler, if you will) in a tight contest can make all the difference. It has played out that way this year on more than one occasion.

If they made no difference, as some people suggest, we would simply not have them.

[Bangalore Swans]

I’m in here for solutions.

What about an umpiring review system for the coaches:

I would propose 2 reviews per half. The coach pushes a button and tells the bunker what decision to review. At the next mark or stoppage the decision is reviewed and an outcome given.

An example would be Luke Beverage challenging that McCartin push in the back in the 1st quarter. The review would have given the Bulldogs the easy shot at goal.

The coaches get a total of two reviews a half and they only get two regardless of the outcome.

[Matty10]

What about an umpiring review system for the coaches:

You’ve mentioned this before. It could work, but I think it would just add to the frustration (like it often does in the NFL).

Giving boundary umpires the ability to communicate more effectively with the controlling umpire (using mic or flags) is another option. The problem with is that you simply have another voice from another angle (potentially bringing in more subjectivity).

Not sure how to fix the problem. Umpiring is a hard job. My biggest gripe is when they guess (i.e. just assume a player infringed without actually seeing the infringement).

I’m not sure what the resting or non-controlling umpires have been doing lately, but there are far too many blocking or shepherding infringements that are not being called when the ball is kicked inside 50. It’s almost like they are too concerned with the play downfield and ignore what’s in front of them.

Maybe it really is just a training issue (in general, not a rule-of-the-week intrusion - which pisses me off no end). Would full time umpires fix this?

[707]

I want to refer the two frees that ended in the Dogs kicking two goals reviewed, both umpire number 14 whistles. Bunker responds with incorrect whistle!

I think what frustrates everyone is paying very minor infringements that should be just play on, plus when one side gets a good run both ways on these minor infringements.

What about the one highlighted on OTC where the ump paid high contact but the recipient had lost his feet and slipped his head into an almost stationary player, umpire was completely wrong in interpretation.

How about the umps start pinging the plague of throwing that's crept into our game since ......... 2016!

[Sandridge]

Some interesting free kick statistics from 2016 from https://afltables.com/afl/stats/frees.html#2016

In 2016, the Western Bulldogs played 26 games.
They won the free kick count 20 times.
They drew the free kick count twice.
They lost the free kick count 4 times.
They won the free kick count in all four finals they played.
Their free kick differential for their 4 finals games was Plus 31.
Their free kick differential for the whole season was Plus 112.

In 2016, the Sydney Swans played 26 games.
We won the free kick count 4 times.
We drew the free kick count 3 times.
We lost the free kick count 19 times.
We lost the free kick count in all four finals we played.
Our free kick differential for the 4 finals games was Minus 23.
Our free kick differential for the whole season was Minus 51.

[Matty10]

What about the one highlighted on OTC where the ump paid high contact but the recipient had lost his feet and slipped his head into an almost stationary player, umpire was completely wrong in interpretation.

I thought it was the other way around, and the umpire got it right. Didn’t he run in saying “you slipped, you slipped“ as a way of justifying why the player didn’t get the free - or was there another instance of the same thing with a different outcome?

[crackedactor 01]

I want to refer the two frees that ended in the Dogs kicking two goals reviewed, both umpire number 14 whistles. Bunker responds with incorrect whistle!

I think what frustrates everyone is paying very minor infringements that should be just play on, plus when one side gets a good run both ways on these minor infringements.

What about the one highlighted on OTC where the ump paid high contact but the recipient had lost his feet and slipped his head into an almost stationary player, umpire was completely wrong in interpretation.

How about the umps start pinging the plague of throwing that's crept into our game since ......... 2016!

What really concerns me is the constant status quo of umpiring. Since that horrible day that I spent over thousand dollars watching the 2016 GF I have kept track of the umpiring. We always get screwed over by free kicks by Hawthorn and Bulldogs. We usually get the better umpiring when we play Essendon or the Giants. If they is no bias why are the end results are nearly always the same?

[stevoswan]

Re: coach decision reviews, I don't trust the AFL to review anything. Goal reviews should be a warning to all on the dangers of more reviews. The umpires just have to become fully professional and face more scrutiny and consequences for poor performances. I'm not sure what form that could take in the AFL.....as the scrutiny could still be Vic-centric, like everything else.

In the VFL days, poor umpiring performances would be punished with a move to one of the country leagues for a week or two for penance before returning to the big time in Melbourne.....leading to the phrase "He'll be up the country next week!" when referring to an umpire who was having a bad day. Alas, this wouldn't work in a national league.

One thing would be to stop the continual knee-jerk tinkering from the 'Rules Committee' which is confusing not only fans but the umpires as well..... and is adding even more grey areas to the game. It would be a challenge for the umpires to keep up.

If only there was a definitive and 100% uncheatable "integrity and honesty test" available to all high level umpires and only those who get a 100% pass become AFL umpires.....that would be a start. But even then, mistakes would still be made. In a game where most rules are interpretive, human frailties will come into play and mistakes, deliberate or not, will be made.

It's impossible to know exactly how to remedy this blight of crap/biased AFL umpiring.....considering the stranglehold Victoria has on the make up of the league.

[stevoswan]

I thought it was the other way around, and the umpire got it right. Didn’t he run in saying “you slipped, you slipped“ as a way of justifying why the player didn’t get the free - or was there another instance of the same thing with a different outcome?

Correct....the other instance (which was what 707 was probably referring to) was where the umpire told the offending player "He slipped, he slipped and you caught him high"......it was laughable and the opposite decision of the identical later situation you talked of. His own explanation exposed himself as being wrong. I saw both and when I saw the second correct interpretation, I screamed "what about the other night.....it was the opposite!". I just shook my head in disbelief and then disappointment.....at the sorry state of current AFL umpiring.

[Nico]

When Shuey dropped the knees against us and was not awarded the free I thought, finally. But then Hunter got away with it against us. He blatantly dropped the knees when our player was about to make contact, almost sliding sideways. George Hewett has been a serial offender but appears to have got it out of his game.

Selwood is also the serial offender. With all the issues with concussion I don't get why players want to put themselves into a head high tackle.

Is a very tough one for umpires to interpret because of the head high rules, but if they start paying a free for HTB it will stop.

[longmile]

If we have an umpiring containment thread can we have a praise Warner, diss Rowbottom containment thread too?

[dejavoodoo44]

When Shuey dropped the knees against us and was not awarded the free I thought, finally. But then Hunter got away with it against us. He blatantly dropped the knees when our player was about to make contact, almost sliding sideways. George Hewett has been a serial offender but appears to have got it out of his game.

Selwood is also the serial offender. With all the issues with concussion I don't get why players want to put themselves into a head high tackle.

Is a very tough one for umpires to interpret because of the head high rules, but if they start paying a free for HTB it will stop.

With the Selwood style of milking a high contact free, the initial contact is usually around chest/forearm level. Selwood and his imitators, then push their arms outwards and drop their body. This means that while contact to the head is made, it's usually a glancing blow: so there's little chance of receiving the sort of forceful blow, that would cause the violent whiplash that leads to concussion.

To me, it's a totally cynical method used by some players, to take advantage of a rule that was designed to protect all players. And I'm just a little bit surprised, that more players don't think to themselves, "Well, stuff ya, I'm going to hit you properly, next time."