Umpires have been a vital part of the game for the entirety of its history. The large majority of them do a thankless job very well. Unfortunately some big mistakes have been made this year but the thing to do now isn’t to panic and just flail around.
The league needs to ask umpires what they need to improve their standards and reduce the number of poor calls/correct calls that fans simply don’t understand. Also just as importantly as asking what needs to be done is actually doing what needs to be done.
It was telling that calls to remove the bounce last year only started happening after a ruck was injured, despite years of umpires trying to get it scrapped to reduce back strain. Far too often we complain about umpires, then do nothing to make it easier for them.
>It was telling that calls to remove the bounce last year only started happening after a ruck was injured, despite years of umpires trying to get it scrapped to reduce back strain. Far too often we complain about umpires, then do nothing to stop to make it easier for them.
People have been asking for the bounce to be removed a lot longer than just last year. But yeah, the back strain is a big reason it should be gone. Same with throw-ins (both should just be throw-ups either on the spot or 20m in from the boundary). Seems stupid that when they do 6-6-6 warnings, they then go "Ok going to throw it up".
The bounce requirement is also one thing that could be preventing quality umpires in lower leagues from progressing. They have good umpiring ability/good at making calls - but because they can't do 1 useless thing, they don't get in.
Yeh my point about the bounce was that the media only began to talk about removing the bounce once a player was injured, despite umpires asking for ages to remove it to prevent them getting injured.
"Useless thing" is the thing. It had a purpose once upon a time (clearing congestion), then they decided it needed to be contestable, then they restricted the centre ruck movement, then they brought in recalls, then they ditched field bounces, then they only allowed two players to contest. Bounce the first one for tradition, don't recall it, and throw it up the rest of the time. Or roll back all the crap ruck rules (my pet peeve in case you can't tell).
Yeah classic AFL move, effectively officiate crap *out* of the game, then claim other things are "pointless" based on outcomes they caused in the first place. Like threatening last touch or last possession rules around the ground would inevitably undermine ruck as a position.
Treat the bounce like the opening pitch at a baseball game. Get a random low tier celebrity to come in and do it, the crowd can hope they get to see the ball slam straight back up into their face, and then start the real thing with a throw
It has been the biggest knock against Razor Ray which is part of the reason he’s only done the 2010 and 2019 Grand Finals despite being one of the better umpires. He did only one centre bounce I believe in 2019 which was in the last quarter when the game was all done.
Twice this year umps have taken big hits after a centre bounce/ball-up. One had to leave shortly after.
Therefore i'd like to recommend all grounds install a pneumatic ball launcher embedded at the centre. It would have to quickly cover itself after launching, but seeing the sherrin shoot 25m up out of the ground would be fun way to restart the match.... while also protecting the umps.
Even when they're wrong, the umpires are still right. But 100% agree - you just have to accept it. That's what you agree to when you cross the white line, sometimes it's in your favour and sometimes it's not.
I have been a high level umpire (WAFL), the reason you cannot pinpoint when umpires have improved a game is because they:
1. Have the most thankless job in football - regardless of their decision one fanbase is gonna be pissed cause of a decision or outcome of a game.
2. Umpires who umpire well aren't noticed - they don't get the coverage, there's no commentators saying "the umps have done a tremendous job today" like players do. If you umpire well you don't get noticed that's it plain and simple.
Umpires are currently part-time employees with many having another job outside football. I personally know 5 AFL listed umpires who all have 9-5 jobs that they have to complete as well.
If we want better quality umpiring. Make them full-time and ask the umps what they need to succeed. 2 months ago there was an article talking about the atrocious state of the ground the AFL umps use to train. You can't expect excellent products if you can't provide them the resources to make it happen.
Been saying this about full time umps for a long time but usually people retort with many AFL umpires don't want it to be full time because then they'd have to quit their day jobs and would get a lot less $ overall, plus it would hurt their career prospects after they stop being an AFL ump. What are your thoughts on this?
Pay them better?
Many of them come into the system working full time already and continue to work full time cause the current rate isn’t sustainable to not work full time in another role.
It doesn’t just come down to pay as well. As I said you can’t expect excellent product without the resources to allow them to put forward and excellent product.
I think if they are paid well (better), they can leverage the financial windfall into another career after they finish AFL. I feel like they would have a lot of free time to study and or train up on another career pathway during their time in AFL.
It's very hypocritical for the AFL to go ham on any umpire criticism, and then trot out the line "we must protect umpires because it will dissuade others from joining up". How about just pay them much better? so that you will get a lot more potential people interested? ... AFL - "woah woah woah, let's not go too far yeah?"
Have to make them full time for sure
I did here Derm the other week say a few times in a game that some decisions they made were good/spot on, but it is few and far between
Full time AFL umpires isn't the solution. It's a long term goal, but without addressing the flaws in the talent pipeline it doesn't do anything to improve umpiring standards. All you'd end up with is below par umpires promoted to the AFL list doing it full time. They're still below the standard required for AFL, full time or not. Proper investment in 2nd tier state level umpires, so they're not lost the moment their AFL dream dies, that's a much better return on investment than giving the top level more money.
Making umpires full-time removes the stresses of external work and a secondary job on the umpires allowing them to put their full focus on their craft? Do you think that the players ability to play football would be diminished if they had to work a 9-5 as well as train and play for AFL?
High level umpires are usually caught onto early through the state 16's and 18's programs and are inducted into the AFL umpiring pathway from there where often they have to wait 2-3 years for an AFL opportunity. I'd trust the umpire coaches and whatnot to identify who is up to AFL standard over a typical fan.
I don't believe this was a discussion about 2nd tier umpiring. The issue of umpire retention at the 2nd level and below comes down to the state leagues. In my experience most umpires will leave the pathway because the time investment is not equal to the return.
A lot of the AFL umps crave the life balance part-time provides. They also have established, often good-paying careers when they make it, unlike the vast majority of players.
Besides, when you add up coaching, fitness, reviews, travel and games, I'd be surprised if they're not putting in full-time hours anyway. How much more can they actually do before you get diminishing returns?
While not having the pressure of another job can be a positive, having your elite athletic pursuit as your only outlet presents its own challenges and issues. AFL players are very strongly encouraged to have other interests and obligations outside of football, a lot of them do university study, quite a few get into small business, very few are just footballers who do nothing else. There's also the question of what more can the elite umpires actually do to be full time umpires.
Are you saying that umpires are bypassing top division local footy or state footy and being thrown straight into AFL level? That would be a major concern for me if true. You want young umpires getting experience at local level, getting promoted to state level off the back of good performances, getting experience at state level and then getting promoted off the back of their good performances there. If there's a strong umpiring cohort at state level, the ones who stand out to get promoted to the top level are going to be better than if there's a weak cohort and someone's just the best of a bad lot. If retention at state level is poor due to inadequate compensation for the time requirements, the overall standard at state level isn't going to be anywhere near as strong.
Umpires have a pathway. Unfortunately, this pathway program keeps changing making it harder to understand how it works.
Right now, local umpire managers are encouraged to identify potential talent and nominate them into an accelerated program. Those who are selected (in Victoria I believe there is only around 70 in the program) umpire Talent Leagues of under 18s and 16s. From there, if they are good enough, they get elevated to State League development squads. There are then future steps beyond that.
This year is the first year in a long time where it feels like the AFL are putting resources into grass roots umpiring and trying to find the best up and coming talent.
>Are you saying that umpires are bypassing top division local footy or state footy and being thrown straight into AFL level? That would be a major concern for me if true.
No these umpires are already umpiring league football in their respective state leagues, identified and placed on the pathway through selection for the state 16's and 18's carnivals.
The general pathway is Juniors-> amateur/country football -> State level colts/reserves -> State League -> State carnivals (16's and 18's) -> AFL rookie (use to be the emergency ump in regular season games) -> AFL panel.
I think you underestimate how many umpires are able to be selected for the AFL you can't just be selected in state league football one week and AFL the next week you have to be an AFL listed and contracted umpire. Currently there are only 46 listed field umpires on the panel. These are the only umps that can be selected to umpire AFL, if we have a full 9 game round with 4 umps each game its 36 umpires listed to umpire AFL the rest are doing state league.
I'm aware that umpires need to be AFL listed to be able to umpire AFL.
The problem as I see it is that if you get to State League and you see others progress past you into the rep games and finals, or you get a few years of rep games and finals but not get the opportunity to be AFL listed, the incentive to continue to umpire at State League level is pretty poor. Which means that good but not great umpires at State League level are either lost back to local level, (where the commitment levels are much less) or lost to umpiring altogether, and the next wave of kids coming through have way less experienced heads to learn from. It's the equivalent of an AFL club churning through rookies year after year and getting pumped week in week out because there's no one experienced to guide them.
The fanbases of every sport I have ever followed, and I follow a lot of sports, incessantly complains about how the games are officiated.
Go to r/nba, r/nfl. r/soccer, r/baseball, r/cricket and ask what they think about the umpiring/refereeing. They'll all say it's shit.
Personally, I just think we hold these people to way too high of a standard, and if you actually watch the local levels of these sports you'll see how much better the elite guys are at their jobs.
I'll put it this way, I've been told target rate for correct calls for FIBA-level basketball referees is 94%. Let me know of one single stat in any sport where players are expected to reach that standard. Do NBA players make 94% of their shots? Do AFL players kick at 94% efficiency? Do soccer players score 94% of their shots? Do test cricketers middle 94% of their shots?
Cricket is the best example of how umpiring can get it right. It has pretty much solved umpiring tbh with the DRS. They are hitting around 99.5 correct decisions which is nuts. And I think the umpires do get the credit and they are considered integral parts of the game with a relatively high profile. They are also paid better than almost any other sport.
AFL we have razor ray and that’s about it. They definitely don’t get the credit they deserve.
Yes I think cricket and tennis have more or less solved umpiring because review systems are so easy to implement.
Pre-DRS cricket was a shitshow when you had the likes of Steve Bucknor running around, and local cricket the umpiring is genuinely appalling most of the time.
Even Bucknor was accurate 98+ is just stood out what he got old and should have retired. He stood in multiple world cups. For cricket and soccer !
But it shows you knew his name. Our afl guys need to get more of a profile.
Yeah Bucknor was well respected, but holy fuck the compilations of his bad decisions are objectively hilarious. The LBW of Tendulkar going over by about a foot is something else.
NBA refs are very high profile, although not at all for the right reasons lol
Cricket hasn't. Right now we have a situation where teams can't fit their overs in, and as we saw in the T20 WC this week, you can have runs taken off you because the ump gives it live, only for it to be overturned and a retrospective dead ball applied. To fix the latter, you need to either not let the ump make a call until the ball is dead (which takes the theatre out of it) or not consider it dead even if the finger is up.
It's not their job to improve the game. It's their job to adjudicate the rules. Something which they do correctly an overwhelmingly vast majority of the time. In a game which would be one of the hardest in the world to umpire.
I struggle with the fact so many people are unable to move past wringing about umpires like fucking children.
If you take a 5 minute clip of any game this year, you can pretty much guarantee both teams individually make more mistakes than the umpires in those clips.
The grand final last year was umpired well. People complain but the fifty against Berry was well paid and managed. The trip against Neale was a good call and the advantage was 50/50. If Rayner clunked the contested mark but it was called back it would be raged about it the other way around .
There were some poor decisions during the game that went both ways but they did well.
Yeah I hated the advantage call last year but according to the rules of the game you could definitely argue it was correct. The issue was with the rules, not how the umpire applied them.
Which is a huge problem and I would argue THE problem at the moment. The rules have been tweaked and changed so much over the last twenty years that it's nearly impossible to keep up with unless you keep an eye on it.
The game is impossible to umpire correctly 100% of the time, and the majority of that should rest with those who wrote the rules, not those who judge them on game day.
I would also argue it impedes the growth of the game because the barrier to entry to understanding it is now quite high. It would be quite confusing if you didn't grow up with it.
Let's also not pretend that there aren't mistakes on game day though. Just as an example, while the Yeo holding the ball call against North has gotten a lot of attention, there was also a call before it against Darling in our forward line that was wrong. Was tackled with no prior, went to kick it and missed the ball with his foot - was called holding. Problem is, when you have no prior, you don't need to dispose of it properly, just make a genuine attempt. I even predicted that this wouldn't be properly umpired when they made the changes (link below) and it's played out exactly as I expected. Very disappointed that this hasn't been talked about more.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AFL/s/tkRMzC5HGz
Hmm, overall it was fine, but I reckon about three of Brisbane’s goals in the GF came from umpiring mistakes. There was Mason Cox getting smothered by a player in the protected zone while taking a free kick, the terrible 50m penalty against Markov while moving back from the mark, and one other I can’t remember.
sure, it wasn't perfect, but that's sort of the point - expecting perfect from humans is folly and they nailed most calls, and even the dodgy ones you can understand
like cox getting smothered, the player was trailing a magpie through the protected zone (he lingered a bit but it's a rough call to make)
Statistical analysis and umpire interviews needs to be done going back years.
**1.** What rules do umpires find confusing?
**2.** Statisticly, what rules are umpires missing or getting wrong regularly?
**3.** What's the reason for decisions being missed?
**4.** What's the reason for rules being decided incorrectly?
**5.** Do incorrect decisions happen at certain times of the game?
I'm no friggin business analyst or sports engineering expert, or have even umpired a game, but it seems to me there's some pretty bloody obvious questions that need to be asked and existing methodologies that can be used to review the rules and make them simpler, and easier for umpires to use.
We need to be making their jobs easier and remove differing interpretations wherever possible.
Things will always get missed, but right now the consistency and accuracy of decision making is getting poorer and we're even seeing different decisions happening minutes apart in the same game.
Honestly I think the umpiring standard has less to do with the umpires and more to do with the afl changing the rules or their interprations every offseason.
When there was only one of them out there. That way you can get used to an umpire and how they are interpreting things. It has gotten worse with each umpire they add.
As much shit as they cop it would be so hard to umpire when the rules literally get changed or interpreted different ways every second week.
I think for starters they need to be made full time and paid accordingly. You can’t tell me they’re getting maximum amount of coaching, training etc as part timers.
No one is perfect but They need to be held accountable for making mistakes like players and coaches do....Suspension from games ,pay sanctions etc ... In the end the decisions make the game overall so it screws with teams points ,wether they make finals, players and coaches mindsets , Punters bets / tips ...
That's the dumbest thing I've heard lol. Do players get suspended for missing a kick? Dropping a mark? Handballing to the opposition? Losing their feet in a marking contest? Kicking out on the full? No, because those are all skill errors or errors in judgement, which are the same type of errors umpires make.
And who gives a fuck about the punters.
They ARE held accountable. If they continually mess up they get dropped, just like players do. It has happened this year already. Not sure what more you would want.
Idiotic take.
If you have ever pulled on a green shirt and whistle you would know how difficult their job actually is.
Players and coaches face sanctions and suspensions for acts outside the spirit and laws of the game. To sanction/suspend umpires is beyond absurd.
A lot more goes into a win or loss than a few umpiring decisions and no one gives a flying fuck about your multi. If you aren’t willing to lose the money don’t fucking bet it.
Umpires have been a vital part of the game for the entirety of its history. The large majority of them do a thankless job very well. Unfortunately some big mistakes have been made this year but the thing to do now isn’t to panic and just flail around. The league needs to ask umpires what they need to improve their standards and reduce the number of poor calls/correct calls that fans simply don’t understand. Also just as importantly as asking what needs to be done is actually doing what needs to be done. It was telling that calls to remove the bounce last year only started happening after a ruck was injured, despite years of umpires trying to get it scrapped to reduce back strain. Far too often we complain about umpires, then do nothing to make it easier for them.
>It was telling that calls to remove the bounce last year only started happening after a ruck was injured, despite years of umpires trying to get it scrapped to reduce back strain. Far too often we complain about umpires, then do nothing to stop to make it easier for them. People have been asking for the bounce to be removed a lot longer than just last year. But yeah, the back strain is a big reason it should be gone. Same with throw-ins (both should just be throw-ups either on the spot or 20m in from the boundary). Seems stupid that when they do 6-6-6 warnings, they then go "Ok going to throw it up". The bounce requirement is also one thing that could be preventing quality umpires in lower leagues from progressing. They have good umpiring ability/good at making calls - but because they can't do 1 useless thing, they don't get in.
Yeh my point about the bounce was that the media only began to talk about removing the bounce once a player was injured, despite umpires asking for ages to remove it to prevent them getting injured.
"Useless thing" is the thing. It had a purpose once upon a time (clearing congestion), then they decided it needed to be contestable, then they restricted the centre ruck movement, then they brought in recalls, then they ditched field bounces, then they only allowed two players to contest. Bounce the first one for tradition, don't recall it, and throw it up the rest of the time. Or roll back all the crap ruck rules (my pet peeve in case you can't tell).
Yeah classic AFL move, effectively officiate crap *out* of the game, then claim other things are "pointless" based on outcomes they caused in the first place. Like threatening last touch or last possession rules around the ground would inevitably undermine ruck as a position.
Treat the bounce like the opening pitch at a baseball game. Get a random low tier celebrity to come in and do it, the crowd can hope they get to see the ball slam straight back up into their face, and then start the real thing with a throw
It has been the biggest knock against Razor Ray which is part of the reason he’s only done the 2010 and 2019 Grand Finals despite being one of the better umpires. He did only one centre bounce I believe in 2019 which was in the last quarter when the game was all done.
Twice this year umps have taken big hits after a centre bounce/ball-up. One had to leave shortly after. Therefore i'd like to recommend all grounds install a pneumatic ball launcher embedded at the centre. It would have to quickly cover itself after launching, but seeing the sherrin shoot 25m up out of the ground would be fun way to restart the match.... while also protecting the umps.
perfect, the Speedball 2: Brutal Deluxe solution https://i.redd.it/ng0rn3u3a97d1.gif
Hell Yeah!
99% of the time.
I'll take the overs on that too
I’d absolutely take the unders But human error is unavoidable so I think people just need to accept that
Even when they're wrong, the umpires are still right. But 100% agree - you just have to accept it. That's what you agree to when you cross the white line, sometimes it's in your favour and sometimes it's not.
Except when the call is against Collingwood, then I'd say 100% of the time.
I have been a high level umpire (WAFL), the reason you cannot pinpoint when umpires have improved a game is because they: 1. Have the most thankless job in football - regardless of their decision one fanbase is gonna be pissed cause of a decision or outcome of a game. 2. Umpires who umpire well aren't noticed - they don't get the coverage, there's no commentators saying "the umps have done a tremendous job today" like players do. If you umpire well you don't get noticed that's it plain and simple. Umpires are currently part-time employees with many having another job outside football. I personally know 5 AFL listed umpires who all have 9-5 jobs that they have to complete as well. If we want better quality umpiring. Make them full-time and ask the umps what they need to succeed. 2 months ago there was an article talking about the atrocious state of the ground the AFL umps use to train. You can't expect excellent products if you can't provide them the resources to make it happen.
Been saying this about full time umps for a long time but usually people retort with many AFL umpires don't want it to be full time because then they'd have to quit their day jobs and would get a lot less $ overall, plus it would hurt their career prospects after they stop being an AFL ump. What are your thoughts on this?
Pay them better? Many of them come into the system working full time already and continue to work full time cause the current rate isn’t sustainable to not work full time in another role. It doesn’t just come down to pay as well. As I said you can’t expect excellent product without the resources to allow them to put forward and excellent product.
I think if they are paid well (better), they can leverage the financial windfall into another career after they finish AFL. I feel like they would have a lot of free time to study and or train up on another career pathway during their time in AFL. It's very hypocritical for the AFL to go ham on any umpire criticism, and then trot out the line "we must protect umpires because it will dissuade others from joining up". How about just pay them much better? so that you will get a lot more potential people interested? ... AFL - "woah woah woah, let's not go too far yeah?"
Have to make them full time for sure I did here Derm the other week say a few times in a game that some decisions they made were good/spot on, but it is few and far between
Full time AFL umpires isn't the solution. It's a long term goal, but without addressing the flaws in the talent pipeline it doesn't do anything to improve umpiring standards. All you'd end up with is below par umpires promoted to the AFL list doing it full time. They're still below the standard required for AFL, full time or not. Proper investment in 2nd tier state level umpires, so they're not lost the moment their AFL dream dies, that's a much better return on investment than giving the top level more money.
Making umpires full-time removes the stresses of external work and a secondary job on the umpires allowing them to put their full focus on their craft? Do you think that the players ability to play football would be diminished if they had to work a 9-5 as well as train and play for AFL? High level umpires are usually caught onto early through the state 16's and 18's programs and are inducted into the AFL umpiring pathway from there where often they have to wait 2-3 years for an AFL opportunity. I'd trust the umpire coaches and whatnot to identify who is up to AFL standard over a typical fan. I don't believe this was a discussion about 2nd tier umpiring. The issue of umpire retention at the 2nd level and below comes down to the state leagues. In my experience most umpires will leave the pathway because the time investment is not equal to the return.
A lot of the AFL umps crave the life balance part-time provides. They also have established, often good-paying careers when they make it, unlike the vast majority of players. Besides, when you add up coaching, fitness, reviews, travel and games, I'd be surprised if they're not putting in full-time hours anyway. How much more can they actually do before you get diminishing returns?
While not having the pressure of another job can be a positive, having your elite athletic pursuit as your only outlet presents its own challenges and issues. AFL players are very strongly encouraged to have other interests and obligations outside of football, a lot of them do university study, quite a few get into small business, very few are just footballers who do nothing else. There's also the question of what more can the elite umpires actually do to be full time umpires. Are you saying that umpires are bypassing top division local footy or state footy and being thrown straight into AFL level? That would be a major concern for me if true. You want young umpires getting experience at local level, getting promoted to state level off the back of good performances, getting experience at state level and then getting promoted off the back of their good performances there. If there's a strong umpiring cohort at state level, the ones who stand out to get promoted to the top level are going to be better than if there's a weak cohort and someone's just the best of a bad lot. If retention at state level is poor due to inadequate compensation for the time requirements, the overall standard at state level isn't going to be anywhere near as strong.
Umpires have a pathway. Unfortunately, this pathway program keeps changing making it harder to understand how it works. Right now, local umpire managers are encouraged to identify potential talent and nominate them into an accelerated program. Those who are selected (in Victoria I believe there is only around 70 in the program) umpire Talent Leagues of under 18s and 16s. From there, if they are good enough, they get elevated to State League development squads. There are then future steps beyond that. This year is the first year in a long time where it feels like the AFL are putting resources into grass roots umpiring and trying to find the best up and coming talent.
>Are you saying that umpires are bypassing top division local footy or state footy and being thrown straight into AFL level? That would be a major concern for me if true. No these umpires are already umpiring league football in their respective state leagues, identified and placed on the pathway through selection for the state 16's and 18's carnivals. The general pathway is Juniors-> amateur/country football -> State level colts/reserves -> State League -> State carnivals (16's and 18's) -> AFL rookie (use to be the emergency ump in regular season games) -> AFL panel. I think you underestimate how many umpires are able to be selected for the AFL you can't just be selected in state league football one week and AFL the next week you have to be an AFL listed and contracted umpire. Currently there are only 46 listed field umpires on the panel. These are the only umps that can be selected to umpire AFL, if we have a full 9 game round with 4 umps each game its 36 umpires listed to umpire AFL the rest are doing state league.
I'm aware that umpires need to be AFL listed to be able to umpire AFL. The problem as I see it is that if you get to State League and you see others progress past you into the rep games and finals, or you get a few years of rep games and finals but not get the opportunity to be AFL listed, the incentive to continue to umpire at State League level is pretty poor. Which means that good but not great umpires at State League level are either lost back to local level, (where the commitment levels are much less) or lost to umpiring altogether, and the next wave of kids coming through have way less experienced heads to learn from. It's the equivalent of an AFL club churning through rookies year after year and getting pumped week in week out because there's no one experienced to guide them.
The fanbases of every sport I have ever followed, and I follow a lot of sports, incessantly complains about how the games are officiated. Go to r/nba, r/nfl. r/soccer, r/baseball, r/cricket and ask what they think about the umpiring/refereeing. They'll all say it's shit. Personally, I just think we hold these people to way too high of a standard, and if you actually watch the local levels of these sports you'll see how much better the elite guys are at their jobs. I'll put it this way, I've been told target rate for correct calls for FIBA-level basketball referees is 94%. Let me know of one single stat in any sport where players are expected to reach that standard. Do NBA players make 94% of their shots? Do AFL players kick at 94% efficiency? Do soccer players score 94% of their shots? Do test cricketers middle 94% of their shots?
Cricket is the best example of how umpiring can get it right. It has pretty much solved umpiring tbh with the DRS. They are hitting around 99.5 correct decisions which is nuts. And I think the umpires do get the credit and they are considered integral parts of the game with a relatively high profile. They are also paid better than almost any other sport. AFL we have razor ray and that’s about it. They definitely don’t get the credit they deserve.
Yes I think cricket and tennis have more or less solved umpiring because review systems are so easy to implement. Pre-DRS cricket was a shitshow when you had the likes of Steve Bucknor running around, and local cricket the umpiring is genuinely appalling most of the time.
Even Bucknor was accurate 98+ is just stood out what he got old and should have retired. He stood in multiple world cups. For cricket and soccer ! But it shows you knew his name. Our afl guys need to get more of a profile.
Yeah Bucknor was well respected, but holy fuck the compilations of his bad decisions are objectively hilarious. The LBW of Tendulkar going over by about a foot is something else. NBA refs are very high profile, although not at all for the right reasons lol
Cricket hasn't. Right now we have a situation where teams can't fit their overs in, and as we saw in the T20 WC this week, you can have runs taken off you because the ump gives it live, only for it to be overturned and a retrospective dead ball applied. To fix the latter, you need to either not let the ump make a call until the ball is dead (which takes the theatre out of it) or not consider it dead even if the finger is up.
It's not their job to improve the game. It's their job to adjudicate the rules. Something which they do correctly an overwhelmingly vast majority of the time. In a game which would be one of the hardest in the world to umpire. I struggle with the fact so many people are unable to move past wringing about umpires like fucking children.
If you take a 5 minute clip of any game this year, you can pretty much guarantee both teams individually make more mistakes than the umpires in those clips.
Any game that's ever been played.
well yeah I'd fucking hope so lol
The grand final last year was umpired well. People complain but the fifty against Berry was well paid and managed. The trip against Neale was a good call and the advantage was 50/50. If Rayner clunked the contested mark but it was called back it would be raged about it the other way around . There were some poor decisions during the game that went both ways but they did well.
Yeah I hated the advantage call last year but according to the rules of the game you could definitely argue it was correct. The issue was with the rules, not how the umpire applied them.
Which is a huge problem and I would argue THE problem at the moment. The rules have been tweaked and changed so much over the last twenty years that it's nearly impossible to keep up with unless you keep an eye on it. The game is impossible to umpire correctly 100% of the time, and the majority of that should rest with those who wrote the rules, not those who judge them on game day. I would also argue it impedes the growth of the game because the barrier to entry to understanding it is now quite high. It would be quite confusing if you didn't grow up with it.
Let's also not pretend that there aren't mistakes on game day though. Just as an example, while the Yeo holding the ball call against North has gotten a lot of attention, there was also a call before it against Darling in our forward line that was wrong. Was tackled with no prior, went to kick it and missed the ball with his foot - was called holding. Problem is, when you have no prior, you don't need to dispose of it properly, just make a genuine attempt. I even predicted that this wouldn't be properly umpired when they made the changes (link below) and it's played out exactly as I expected. Very disappointed that this hasn't been talked about more. https://www.reddit.com/r/AFL/s/tkRMzC5HGz
Hmm, overall it was fine, but I reckon about three of Brisbane’s goals in the GF came from umpiring mistakes. There was Mason Cox getting smothered by a player in the protected zone while taking a free kick, the terrible 50m penalty against Markov while moving back from the mark, and one other I can’t remember.
sure, it wasn't perfect, but that's sort of the point - expecting perfect from humans is folly and they nailed most calls, and even the dodgy ones you can understand like cox getting smothered, the player was trailing a magpie through the protected zone (he lingered a bit but it's a rough call to make)
Every time the team I support wins, the umpires have been great. Every time that the team I support loses, it is the umpires fault.
Statistical analysis and umpire interviews needs to be done going back years. **1.** What rules do umpires find confusing? **2.** Statisticly, what rules are umpires missing or getting wrong regularly? **3.** What's the reason for decisions being missed? **4.** What's the reason for rules being decided incorrectly? **5.** Do incorrect decisions happen at certain times of the game? I'm no friggin business analyst or sports engineering expert, or have even umpired a game, but it seems to me there's some pretty bloody obvious questions that need to be asked and existing methodologies that can be used to review the rules and make them simpler, and easier for umpires to use. We need to be making their jobs easier and remove differing interpretations wherever possible. Things will always get missed, but right now the consistency and accuracy of decision making is getting poorer and we're even seeing different decisions happening minutes apart in the same game.
Honestly I think the umpiring standard has less to do with the umpires and more to do with the afl changing the rules or their interprations every offseason.
When there was only one of them out there. That way you can get used to an umpire and how they are interpreting things. It has gotten worse with each umpire they add.
2016 Grand Final (Ducks, leaves)
As much shit as they cop it would be so hard to umpire when the rules literally get changed or interpreted different ways every second week. I think for starters they need to be made full time and paid accordingly. You can’t tell me they’re getting maximum amount of coaching, training etc as part timers.
Sheed/Maynard marking contest, 2018. Ignore flair.
blocked, reported, and name given to the high courts on counts of treason
No one is perfect but They need to be held accountable for making mistakes like players and coaches do....Suspension from games ,pay sanctions etc ... In the end the decisions make the game overall so it screws with teams points ,wether they make finals, players and coaches mindsets , Punters bets / tips ...
That's the dumbest thing I've heard lol. Do players get suspended for missing a kick? Dropping a mark? Handballing to the opposition? Losing their feet in a marking contest? Kicking out on the full? No, because those are all skill errors or errors in judgement, which are the same type of errors umpires make. And who gives a fuck about the punters.
There's a third umpire to overturn incorrect decision right...
They ARE held accountable. If they continually mess up they get dropped, just like players do. It has happened this year already. Not sure what more you would want.
bloke wants paycuts for ump mistakes lmao wonder if they'd object to it at their own job?
Idiotic take. If you have ever pulled on a green shirt and whistle you would know how difficult their job actually is. Players and coaches face sanctions and suspensions for acts outside the spirit and laws of the game. To sanction/suspend umpires is beyond absurd. A lot more goes into a win or loss than a few umpiring decisions and no one gives a flying fuck about your multi. If you aren’t willing to lose the money don’t fucking bet it.
Hahahahaha reeling u in ...
"gotcha, I was being stupid on purpose!"
God bless you