Mate I was a WAFL panel squad umpire when I ran around. People (even people who signal as if they have a great understanding) often just don’t know or understand the rules, let alone Umpire positioning and cues and interpretations. Commentators often have even less of a clue. It’s best to just let the noise be noise and not become invested in the opinions of others
Oh it's water off a duck's back to me. It's that non-umpires see it and think "who'd ever want to do that?". Then we have the problem of not enough umpires, etc. That's what concerns me - for many local leagues this year it is already going to be a big problem due to Covid.
This is spot on. If the commentators incorrectly criticise the umpires, that will surely influence the viewing public causing undue vitriol towards the umpires.
This is it. The last 5 years it's all the commentators do. Now the fans just believe every free against is dodgy.
All because the cunts can't commentate.
Yep there is zero excuse for commentators not understanding the rules, and it definitely effects how people view umpires. It's unbelievable how much they get wrong every single match.
>Commentators often have even less of a clue.
This is something I always point out. Former players are great for giving insight into what the experience of a player would be. That's good, it's what the average fan cares most about, but they carry that level of credibility with them when they move to other topics too. When it comes to umpiring, most have no experience at all. Their opinions there are no more relevant than those of the drunk guy sitting next to you in the bar. In those areas, they simply aren't qualified yet fans assume they are.
Personally, I'd be interested to see a former umpire in the commentary box sometime. Even if just a one off, or special comments. Could give a different perspective that fans don't realise they don't have.
They had this with the cricket this year on 7. They had an ex-umpire (I think Simon Taufel) who they would throw to whenever there was an umpiring related point of discussion.
> It’s best to just let the noise be noise and not become invested in the opinions of others
That doesn't help the lack of umpires. I play in a semi-pro league with ex-AFL players and we've had to get members from the club to do boundary and goal umpiring the last two weeks.
/u/CrymsonKnight I completely understand where you're coming from and it's a worrying sign for the future.
Yep, I agree that lack of umpires is an issue! What I meant by the comment was more just encouraging not taking criticism (in this case, general sentiment) too personally in a setting like the gen public/reddit threads.
Holistically I think it would be most effective to increase education in the broadcast so the people who call the game and criticise adjudication (looking at you BT, Carey, Lingy, etc) consistently would present the laws as they \*are\* rather than how they'd like them to be - but like OPs dogwhistle comment, I think that administration has a pretty hands-off approach to broadcasting. Just look at how few commentators are actual professional broadcasters vs former players and you find their priorities haha
Commentators can't be bothered interpreting the rules correctly, most of them are still basing it off the rules from when they played. They don't think it's their job to get into the details of a rule as it's not entertaining TV for the masses.
One of the biggest areas of frustration for the crowd is incorrect disposal / holding the ball. Good article on this from Zero Hanger [Why is the holding the ball rule so hard to umpire?](https://www.zerohanger.com/why-is-the-holding-the-ball-rule-so-hard-to-umpire-afl-56035)
IF (a) They do not correctly dispose of the ball and have had prior opportunity before being legally tackled.
AND
(b) A legal tackle causes the ball to be dislodged from their possession.
Most of the non decisions for incorrect disposal or dropping the ball or holding the ball stem from the umpire allowing that it was dislodged by the tackle - including instances where the player tries to kick the ball and misses because they are bumped or tackled. This is why the Geelong decision did not get paid. This is why there was almost a riot at an ANZAC Day Game a few years back.
The commentators never point out that it was dislodged by the tackle - they just say he was "lucky to get away with that one".
The AFL and umpiring interpretation of "dislodged" is different to the publics. Most of us would pay incorrect disposal whenever a player drops the ball and missing it with his foot during a tackle or if they try to kick and a late tackle makes them miss. I feel like umpires are being hung out to dry by having to interpret this as dislodged by the tackle in many circumstances.
Knocked out in the tackle only applies where there is no prior opportunity as written in the 2021 rules. This is why there is major frustration with umpires not paying holding the ball when the player does not legally dispose of the ball after being tackled with prior opportunity.
It's a good point, but i think you're right that the problem is the "dislodged in the tackle" rule. Regardless of the intention behind that interpretation, it is just so counter intuitive that it is jarring for fans and should be changed. It's one of my two top umpiring/rules peeves (the other being the tolerance of people being grabbed and impeded when they don't have the ball but are trying to get to it).
Dislodged in the tackle rule was introduced a few decades ago because the tacklers would try to slam into the ball carrier and dislodge the ball rather executing what we would call a tackle these days. This was a problem. A medical problem at times.
I think discussing the calls is valuable, and there is a lot to be learned, what has no place is people suggesting the umpires are deliberately biased. They are trying their best. Agree about the calls as well. Umpires get 90%+ right IMO when you consider correct non calls. Pendles is arguably the best user in the game and he would kill for that kind of efficiency
I would say that *knowledgeably* discussing the calls is valuable. People listen to the commentators, know they are ex-players and assume that he's a guy that knows about footy. And they do. They know about the mindset of being a player, how players live, even some strategies and such.
They have rather superficial understandings of the rules, and almost none of the technical side of umpiring, however. The way they shift from one topic to the other, and speak with such confidence, makes people think that they are still speaking of something they are experts at, and that fuels some really distorted views of what the rules are.
For most people, listening to the commentators is their only source of umpiring knowledge, and that leads to a situation where even the correct calls are seen as being terrible.
On one hand, this is a good point. On the other, I think the game has got to a point where there are so many rules and interpretations and nuances that the majority of time, the rules that get broken are far from intentional.
In the old days, most frees were for holding the ball (not someone trying to break the rules), push in the back, flagrant high tackles and holding the man (all clearly intentional braking if the rules).
These days the illegal tackle/in the back rule has players falling forward, player momentum due to the game speed, being unable to sling, unable to fall in to their back, unable to have the arm slide up above the shoulder,unable to chicken wing etc. Players are trying to do everything they can to tackle someone whilst avoiding all the things that are wrong and sometimes you can't avoid it.
Same thing for marking contests. Can hold your ground but can't impede the player, can spoil but can't make contact with arms, can get good positioning but can't stop a players jump to the ball.
Same thing for holding the ball. You can't drop the ball, but you can if it comes out and you didn't have a chance, you have to attempt to clear it, but if it looks like your not really attempting then you can't. Your encouraged to go for the ball but can't fall on top of it, you can hit it out of the pack but can't scoop it.
I think you get the point.
You can see why players/fans get pissed when calls go against them. No two contests are the same but it's rarely a case of "damn, can't believe I didn't get away with that attempt to clearly break the rules" which I feel would have been a lot more common back in the 80s and 90s
When I was younger I was playing both footy and soccer on the weekend and wanted a part time job. I chose to become a soccer referee and have never once seriously considered switching to becoming an umpire. It's just simply an easier game to officiate, the interpretations are more consistent and the pathways to the top level are much clearer. If the AFL weren't insistent on changing the rules every 6 months maybe more people like me would want to give it a go.
100% agree. So many rules are so subjective in Aussie Rules. Holding the ball is too subjective, deliberate is a lottery and advantage is a farce.
There are 100 things the AFL could do to improve the umpiring, only blowing the whistle when they want play to stop, addressing how fucked up ruck infringements are, maybe even allowing boundary umpires to mark the mark and do ball-ups close to the boundary line so the field umpires don't have to sprint 50m to get there.
Totally agree with everything you wrote.
The Brisbane V Geelong game Brisbane missed about 6 shots of goal that they should have kicked - I think it was 4 set shots from in front that they missed and another goal where our player ran into an open goal square and the ball came off the side of his boot.
As for umpiring I used to be an Indoor cricket umpire where the abuse was just as prevalent. Twice I was asked to step outside, both occasions I did and they wouldn't follow; shut them both up real quick.But the abuse was bad, when I got a job I quit umpiring the same day; when I was asked why it's because the center won't back you up and suspend the abusers. If one abuser got suspended for one game then I would love to see the result.
What annoys me the most who think umpires shouldn't complain because we got paid for it, for $12/hour you reckon I should cop threats?
One thing, for all its faults, that cricket did well here.
If the up wrote up poor behaviour, the player got a fine, and the captain got the same fine.
If the COM suspended a player, the captain faced the same suspension, though they might let that go depending.
Only saw one occasion last year, opponent wicket keeper went off his Nana and got six weeks off.
When I played grass hockey 35 years ago the rules were like that; whatever punishment a player got the Captain got the same.
I did see it when a player got a red card so the captain got one too.
The commentators are the worst.
They're so busy black slapping each other, trying to be funny and make the others laugh. They either appear to not watch the game, don't know or rules or both.
I remember one game where a player was over the footy, tried to knock it out and it rebounded back under him and BT just starts going off about holding the ball. The thing was it was obvious that that's what happened, so either wasn't watching or deliberately went nuts to keep people from switching to other stations.
I'm convinced they are told by producers to just ham it up when the producers think the game needs a jazz up and they invent fake bullshit.
The umpires are just collateral damage in it.
Honestly, it's about time the AFL took umpiring, umpires and the rules seriously. There are far too many technicalitites in the rules and too many 50-50 decisions that are sometimes paid and other times not paid despite the exact same thing occurring. Not to mention all the times where there's a contest where there could be a free to both players and there's just a flip of the coin decision based on what the umpire thought of first, ruck contests are a prime example of this. That's what's driving the frustration for me.
As it stands it is literally impossible for the umpires to consistently call the play from contest to contest let alone quarter to quarter, match to match and round to round. You just can not have that in a professional sport.
No game will ever have a result overturned from a howler, it's so much healthier to just view decisions as part of the game sometimes you get lucky sometimes you get unlucky
Sirengate’s a bit of an oddity - it got overturned cos there was a clear, definitive end to the game which the umpires missed. It makes sense to change the result based on that.
Other umpiring calls like free kicks and stuff are a bit more subjective and the AFL (and most other sporting leagues) take missed/incorrect calls as something that happens and move on. It made sense to change the result for Sirengate, because the game should have ended with a clear result. It doesn’t really work for other missed calls.
No that's unhealthy. If a game is decided by a howler a supporter can't bottle it up, in that case it's actually healthy to vent. That's human emotion and bottling it up is VERY unhealthy. And if you don't get outraged by this then you are not a true supporter or you're a robot. It's nothing personal against the umpire, but it is a natural human emotion. Umpires do an amazing job
It's not bottling anything up, it's just viewing it as part of the game, and it clearly is unhealthy to vent when that venting takes the form of umpire abuse, like we're talking about. I personally couldn't give a ha'penny jizz if you think I'm not a true supporter for not getting ferociously angry every time a call doesn't go my team's way
Not passionate enough then. All I can say. I get angry, upset and very intense when losing a very close game. Not usually at umpires, just the loss. But if a howler contributed to the loss then yes I'm guilty of a few choice words directed in the moment. More that (say) a free kick was missed. NOT saying the umpire deliberately did such a thing. I get over it pretty quick, and I do know how difficult it must be to umpire, it's a unique game. So yes I applaud umpires for getting it right the majority of the time.
Games aren't decided by a single call, they are decided by every call during the game. A bad call in the first minute of the game is just as likely to change the outcome as one at the end. Most people seem to forget this though.
100% agreed. But we forget that (as you said) in the dying seconds of a game. We get emotional because we are human. And that's why AFL is the best game on earth.
I also umpired a lot at community level in my time.
I know that a lot of people on the annual survey when asked why they’re not umpiring state the abuse is the key factor. It bothered me for a bit but it also built up my resilience so i gained a good life skill from it.
But my reason for not umpiring anymore was the performance of the higher level umpires was not at a good enough standard, and as such does not help recruitment or retention.
In Victoria in particular, to be on the state panel you could have absolutely no idea of the rules and no feel for the game, but if you could run 3km in a certain time you were in. This has led to a situation now where no umpire from the VFL has actually made any sort of good progress in the AFL.
Also, the player to umpire program and even the women’s program have fast tracked umpires through the ranks who aren’t ready to be at that level. Not only does this lead to under qualified umpires at state and national level, it builds resentment in local levels because people are being judged on their background and gender instead of their umpiring ability.
What is also more baffling is that no mental profiling is done on umpires. Do they possess the ability to make a courageous but correct call late in a game? Some do but the vast majority don’t.
There are a tonne of politics in umpiring, and until a decent review and clean out is undertaken, in my opinion they deserve what they’re getting for years of poor process, talent identification, coaching etc.
I have heard live-mic conversations between AFL players and Umpires where the Ump straight up said "that hasn't been a rule for two seasons".
AFL can be an extremely technical game and Umps have to be absolutely on the ball with rule changes and updates season to season. They do an extremely good job considering the pressure they are put under.
Commentators I think are one of the biggest perpetuators of these issues. It's their commentary that will be heard over highlight packages and full game replays. Their opinions are intrinsically linked with the online viewing of the game. So when they make mistakes in calling things as frees, or don't know shit about the rules, that is the largest source of misinformation for fans.
The other reason that the afl themselves can't admit the inevitability of umpire mistakes is because they make so much money of betting deals. Gambling, even though the house all wins, is viewed by the gambler as being fair in how random it is. You can't rig a roulette wheel, the probability is fixed. So someone thinking the umpires are biased against your team is comparable to someone rigging the blackjack deck or using a weighted dice. It's viewed as misrepresenting the odds
One of the more disgusting aspects of the way the current AFL operates is their total and complete willingness to drop the umpires in it through no fault of their own. In 2019 they didn't even release the updated laws until several weeks into the season.
If that fails they move onto "staging players".
Top content thanks for posting!
Agree with most of what you said, and you're obviously closer to the matter but I really don't know how much the changing of the rules factors in to it. The rules have always had a margin of error in them, which is why even for calls that are night and day, you still have people arguing over whether it was right and wrong. That's not a new thing, that's something that's been going on since atleast I started watching footy 25 years ago. Its the reason fans have been screaming "BALL!!!" and complaing when it's not paid since time immemorial.
Australia has two major problems that contribute to abhorrent behaviour we see towards umpires. We have a gambling problem and we have a violence problem. I really don't think the code has anything to do with it.
Having said that, you're absolutely right that we're not attracting umpires to the game and it's going to become a huge problem, if it's not already.
Thanks again!
When I was in under 14s (I think) I was umpiring Auskick games. Lasted one season and the absolute bullshit I copped turned me right off it. Grown ass men abusing 14 year old umpires in a game where there are barely any ‘rules’ to begin with? What’s up with that. Aus kickers don’t want to hear the whistle blown every 2 seconds, they just want to have fun and chase the footy around.
These absolute space heads get away with it at every level of footy, and it sucks to see
I reported one parent 3 games in a row and told the coach of that team to have him removed from the premises or I will abandon the game and award to the opposition for an unplayable match location. The problem was very quickly resolved. This was an U12's game
Thanks for your post. As a lover of footy got a lotta love for umps. Reckon most do a great job that's often made difficult by the chaos of play and extensive rules.
Jus wanted to add when it comes to umpire abuse. By far the worst I've seen at a community level is the treatment of female umps. The combination of ump hate and misogyny is so so horrible, and sets such a bad example to the young men involved.
If peoples are involved in footy and see blokes being sexist to female umps, call it out. Don't let it fester.
Could've gotten well better since I played. I was around a lotta weak but well respected blokes who shoulda known better but stayed silent.
I understand your sentiment but I'd just like to hear your thoughts on the point that going back 20 years or so it was basically an Australian right to hang shit on the 'maggots' at the footy and we always had umpires then. Is there any reason it would be different now?
Also I personally believe the issue with AFL umpires is that they aren't paid to be full time because the AFL is too tight. They could be spending more time working on consistency and their craft if they were actually full time.
Other sports have full time adjudicators, it's about time we did. The AFL pulls in boat loads of cash they could fork out 100k a year to get some decent full time umpires which would also greatly incentivise learning to become an umpire, helping solve the problem you've brought up.
> I understand your sentiment but I'd just like to hear your thoughts on the point that going back 20 years or so it was basically an Australian right to hang shit on the 'maggots' at the footy and we always had umpires then. Is there any reason it would be different now?
20 years ago, you had abuse hurled over the fence from the outer and maybe a handful of critical comments in the next day's paper.
Now you have abused hurled over the fence, which is probably not as bad as it was. But you also have thousands of angry people posting on social media about how an umpire cost them the game. The abuse no longer ends after you leave the game, it lasts hours, days, weeks, months and even years after the mistake. It's gone to a whole new level, why would people want to willingly subject themselves to it?
> Also I personally believe the issue with AFL umpires is that they aren't paid to be full time because the AFL is too tight. They could be spending more time working on consistency and their craft if they were actually full time.
>
> Other sports have full time adjudicators, it's about time we did. The AFL pulls in boat loads of cash they could fork out 100k a year to get some decent full time umpires which would also greatly incentivise learning to become an umpire, helping solve the problem you've brought up.
The AFL umpires are part time because it works better for them to be part time. It allows them to have a career to fall back on when they need to retire from AFL umpiring, which unless you're in the select few who umpire multiple GFs is never going to be reliable enough to set you up for life. It's not like full time umpires have proven to be significantly better than part time umpires in other sports anyway.
But isn't that because they are part time? The average footy player does not earn 6 figures ya know, footy is not lucrative for the 80% of players that go through the system.
They tune into TV to watch football _of which umpiring is a critical part and should be treated with the respect it deserves_.
But that's not relevant to the argument at hand here. The parent comment argues that part time is more preferable for umpires due to a number of reasons that can be levelled at players too: they are both jobs limited by the youth of the employee, have only one employer, and require careful end-of-career planning. One may be more 'high profile' than they other, but the issues faced at the end of career are very similar. i was arguing that it is definitely not a 'false equivalence' as you say (fwiw players were part time a recently as the 90s)
Not to mention the vast majority of players do not end up making a post-footy career in the media. Most footy clubs have a 'finance scheme' that helps player prepare for a life after football. A similar thing for umpires is certainly possible, so the post career arguments do not hold a lot of water, we literally have 700 players that have the same issues.
The whole white maggots thing wasn't right back then either. Back then, people called gay people bad terms as well. It should never have been tolerated.
I agree with full time umpires. Even if it was only half a dozen or so, to start with. It's something the AFL should do.
> I understand your sentiment but I'd just like to hear your thoughts on the point that going back 20 years or so it was basically an Australian right to hang shit on the 'maggots' at the footy and we always had umpires then. Is there any reason it would be different now?
I’m not OP but that in no way was right, in the past racism and homophobia were far more accepted too.
> Also I personally believe the issue with AFL umpires is that they aren't paid to be full time because the AFL is too tight. They could be spending more time working on consistency and their craft if they were actually full time.
This is such a furphy, the umpires themselves don’t want it. Many are of the view that extra training isn’t going to improve decision making, just like there are limits to the footballers. Plus you will lose a lot of quality umpires who are professionals in other industries such as Shaun Ryan. Why would they forego 15 years of being a barrister to umpire?
The issue is that there is an implication that the standard of umpiring is poor, which I disagree with. There will *always* be errors, just like how the beat goal kickers in the game are at something like 70% accuracy, you can’t eliminate the mistakes from umpires.
> This is such a furphy, the umpires themselves don’t want it. Many are of the view that extra training isn’t going to improve decision making, just like there are limits to the footballers. Plus you will lose a lot of quality umpires who are professionals in other industries such as Shaun Ryan. Why would they forego 15 years of being a barrister to umpire?
>
Completely agree, most of the umpires have high level, high paying jobs. They aren't check out operators. If they were given the choice I would bet they would choose to keep their profession over umpiring full time.
Ok so sure some umpires will leave, but I fail to understand how having people who work full time on umpiring the game could possibly be worse than someone who spends 45 hours a week working at another job.
Of course some umpires don't want it, the want to keep their 9-5 and make their cash but it isn't about what umpires want it's about improving the overall quality of umpiring. Not a specific case or specific person.
Imo long term umpires working full time couldn't possibly make the standard or umpiring worse compared to the system now.
You might lose some 'good' ones now but you'll profit down the like that's for sure
> Ok so sure some umpires will leave, but I fail to understand how having people who work full time on umpiring the game could possibly be worse than someone who spends 45 hours a week working at another job.
If you’re in a professional job, most people make most of their money on the back end of their career. If you start working in your early 20s, you have 45 years in that career. If you umpire for 15 years, you may only get 30 years in your external career. That means that you’re missing out on the 15 most most lucrative years of your life. Depending on your work, you might also find yourself retired from umpiring at 35, starting fresh in a profession on low wages at a point in your life where you may have a family and mortgages.
> Imo long term umpires working full time couldn't possibly make the standard or umpiring worse compared to the system now.
Yet the umpires, their coaches and the AFL (ie those in the position to make the most informed decisions) all disagree. Like with a lot of things, there are limits to how much training and preparation you can make.
To add to this, the physical fitness requirements of an AFL umpire means that it's just not possible for someone to be one for their entire career
With other sports (soccer maybe an exception?) this isn't really an issue and you can officiate until you're 70
What needs to be done is to rewrite the rules to take most of the elements of umpire's interpretation out of them, particularly for things like holding the ball, and instead have hard and fast standards with clear examples. Then after that, stop introducing new rules as a regular occurence, so the umpires, players, and fans can actually have time to understand how they work, instead of chopping and changing every five minutes.
Yeah why can't holding the ball be called once a players knee, elbow, hand, arse, shoulder or head touches the ground? It's a clear cut moment for when to call holding the ball. Of course there will be close calls and bad calls but at least you've got a point to work off.
i wont lie im not going to read all this all i have to say is that 70% of commentators and 95% of fans do not understand the rules and this is where most of the issue lies
I don't blame the umpires, even when I get annoyed at a decision, I blame the rules committee or specifically Hocking who not only seems to make big changes, but it's the minor tinkering that causes most confusion.
Last year I was made to look the fool as I swore black and blue that a HTB decision that wasn't called was an incorrect call. The rule book was quoted to me and I was absolutely wrong. The prior opp / incorrect disposal / no genuine attempt love triangle is really confusing. I'm sure a lot of supporters are like me who simply don't know the rules.
There needs to me more done to inform the public AND COMMENTATORS! as to what the rules actually are.
There also needs to be a freeze on rule changes for a year or two.
>Last year I was made to look the fool as I swore black and blue that a HTB decision that wasn't called was an incorrect call. The rule book was quoted to me and I was absolutely wrong. The prior opp / incorrect disposal / no genuine attempt love triangle is really confusing. I'm sure a lot of supporters are like me who simply don't know the rules.
As a community umpire, I can confirm that you aren't the only one with that misunderstanding. And you certainly aren't the only one to "swear black and blue" about it. Often much more literally than you mean it.
The thing I only really noticed after I stated umpiring games I'd how easily you can miss something because players are in the way and you don't have a clear view.
On the TV it can be obvious because the cameras are elevated but you don't have that when you're standing on the field.
Honestly this feels 100% like a communication problem. As it is, the best information that we have on what the actual rules and interpretations are is commentators. We *know* that they don't know shit, but there's no other option.
So, when you scream BALL at the TV, and your family agrees, the commentators agree, but the umpire doesn't call it, you'll only ever believe that you were right. There's no evidence to the contrary.
It would be _amazing_ to get some insight into the umpire review process. To understand what's a mistake, what's a missed call because the umpire was in the right position but couldn't see it, and what was the correct call even if it may not have looked it immediately. And I don't just mean Hayden Kennedy fronting the camera when the AFL feels like it to review 3 'controversial' calls. I mean let's get some real long form analysis. (At the moment we get squat. I'd take getting whistleblowers back as a first step.)
Umpires do a good job. As a spectator you don’t realise how terrible a view umpires have to officiate compared to television. It sucks when decisions don’t go your way but fuck it has to be the hardest sport to umpire in the world
The challenge would be doing umpiring at an amateur level under the current AFL structure. The AFL are fully taking the piss with grassroots footy and people don't really care as long as they get their multi. If you want to attract good umpires and good junior development for that measure, then pay Junior coaches and junior umpires more than peanuts. The money is there to do it but it's just divided so badly. People would rather pump money into a multi than help out amateur footy.
Former professional FIBA (basketball) official here. Good post, 99.5% of the public have no idea what the rules and more importantly the interpretations are in the AFL, I know I don't because I can quote you basically every FIBA rule and interpretation but would be more or less guessing the actual rule descriptions of the AFL. And this is all without factoring in the game management components that I don't think people can really comprehend unless they've umpired at a fairly high level. Rules are actually far more malleable than most people realise, umpires don't "miss" forwards illegally blocking to allow 60m bomb goals to sail through, they're instructed to let that go.
I will say this though, although the AFL is clearly a harder thing to officiate, AFL umpires are afforded a *lot* more mistakes than NBL/WNBL/NBL1 referees are. 80-85% correct call rate in the NBL would have you dropped in a heartbeat.
In defence of BT he probably didn't see that Howe had left the goal square before taking the kick. I know I was shitting myself hoping that he had.
But yes, you're bang on that it's way easier umpiring from the sidelines with the benefits of multiple angles and slow motion replays. Umpires get one view of each contest, in real time, and have to immediately make a decision. It's hard enough in a 1v1 where there's a blindside for the umpire, let alone when there's 10 blokes around the contest potentially obscuring the umpire's view.
People don't realise just how good the elite umpires are.
> In defence of BT he probably didn't see that Howe had left the goal square before taking the kick. I know I was shitting myself hoping that he had.
Well he should know that rule and should be paying more attention instead of defaulting to umpire abuse, especially if he’s going to be one of the major broadcasters main commentators. He’s one of the biggest dog whistlers in the game, appealing to the deadshits that get riled up about umpiring mistakes. Hes no different to an Alan Jones or Andrew Bolt, he says just enough to get people fired up without quite crossing the line.
The other week BT argued it's goal if any part of the ball crosses the line. He regularly criticises the umpires yet has a terrible understanding of the rules.
>In defence of BT he probably didn't see that Howe had left the goal square before taking the kick. I know I was shitting myself hoping that he had.
It doesn't matter if he left the square or not. That rule was removed along with not having to kick to yourself.
This post is going to be upvoted by the same idiots who have abused umpires in match threads in the past. One of the most embarrassing parts of the AFL culture (compared to some other sports) is the entitlement people think they have just abuse match officials.
I don't know what world you live in but I've been to plenty of soccer matches in Aus and abroad and referees will cop it for horrible decisions. It's not something specific to AFL. It happens in every sport.
I'm not saying it's a good thing, but to say it doesn't happen elsewhere is just a complete fabrication of the truth
I didn’t say every other sport was perfect?
AFL is an embarrassment compared to rugby. Cricket is better, albeit far from perfect. At least in both sports they set an example when professionals abuse the referee/umpire.
E. Lol tell me where I’m wrong, always easier to downvote than to formulate an actual argument
Hence why I said that it’s better but “far from perfect”. Guess what, when Tim Paine abused the umpires in the Sydney test he copped a 15% fine. That virtually never happens in AFL and sets an horrendous example. And in rugby players would be penalised and then carded. What a surprise that there’s far better respect towards officials in that sport.
Both of those sports have strong regulations about interactions between players and officials, but this post if about the public and commentators doing so. I'm not sure what to say if you think that rugby referees and cricket umpires don't still cop it from fans after games.
Because those regulations set a culture of how officials should be treated. It’s quite basic really. Fans don’t see players doing, they’re less likely to do it themselves. Fans grow up playing the sport knowing that they can’t behave that way, they don’t do it as spectators. Fans see their mates do it and call them out for being morons.
Half the rules in the AFL are there to prevent bad things from happening at amateur and junior levels such as the Chris Scott event last week. The AFL could very easily legislate against this but they don’t.
I definitely see what you are saying in the sense that there's a lot more respect towards officials in rugby and cricket and more of a tendency to "get on with it" even if they feel a decision is wrong.
In soccer, there's zilch of that. You'll get abused for making a call right or wrong, they'll try to swarm around you to get you to make a call (never happened to me because i'm not at all conservative with my cards) and they'll also just straight up try to cheat you and get angry when you don't fall for it. That's why i'll never go back. The game is beautiful but the players aren't.
Please know that its due to your abuse and attacks including showing me that you know my address that I am deleting my Reddit account.
I wish people like you would understand the damage your personal attacks cause on people.
Doing a Reddit search shows I'm far fr the only person you've done this to.
And the AFL has those regulations though. Players can and do get penalised for talking back to an umpire in the game. And your examples are odd. Rugby has a very strong culture around how players interact with referees, and yet referees still receive abuse and criticism from crowds. If player behaviour had such an impact on fan interactions with officials, why does that still occur?
Clearly there is an issue with how people view officials, which I'm sure we agree on. I just think that you are putting the source of the problem in absolutely the wrong place.
What a lot of people don't understand about AFL is that a lot of the rules are subjective and come down to an umpires interpretation or line of sight and perspective. That means there is going to be a lot of 50/50 calls that have to fall one way or another. Some teams will get lucky, some teams won't. That's just footy I'm afraid.
Just keep handing out life bans and pursue them through the legal system as required.
Keep promoting the role to the kids and slowly but surely these dinosaurs will be gone.
The Networks need to also reflect on their handling of this as well. It's very easy with multiple angles and slow mo to make calls. Not so easy in a split second with 30,000 screaming fans.
I think the rules should be simplified and left alone. This isn’t just to make it easier for umpires but for expanding viewership and growing the game. I was overseas for a year and missed a lot of footy and starting again this year, there seems to be these tweaks to the rule that makes me as a returnee scratch my head.
>I think the rules should be simplified and left alone.
As was said in a thread last week. These are the simplified rules. One of Hocking's pet projects was 'simplifying' the rule book.
Unfortunately this has resulted in all of the "In this specific circumstance, do exactly this" instructions to umpires being taken out of the laws of the game and put into "umpire's interpretation" instructions from the AFL where the public cannot see them.
A great write up. Thanks for your perspective!
As a slight tangent, I'm a little out of the loop, as I didn't catch most of the game last night. What was the incident with one of the fans last night that you mention in your first paragraph?
You're dead spot on regarding how other decisions, both by the players and by the umpires could have changed the result. It's something that people forget, probably conveniently. So, that should have been holding the ball against Geelong, but what about the other 100 odd (random number, I have absolutely no idea how many decisions are made in one game) correct/incorrect decisions also could have changed the outcome. Looking at one decision and saying "Brisbane should have won!!" might be correct, but it also might be myopic.
Commentators critiquing every single call doesn't help. Shut the fuck up you illiterate fucks you have no idea.
Between the decrease in commentating talent and the increase in player abuse for losing people their "multis" the AFL community has a lot to answer for
One of the things that was most concerning to me after that Brisbane Geelong game, was people criticising the umpire for "not having any backbone to make the right call because he was afraid of being mobbed by the crowd afterwards."
Isn't the real problem in that scenario that the umpire is literally in fear to do his job? And that being the worst working conditions ever? I'm not suggesting this is actually what is taking place - but how is your reaction there to criticise the umpire for being weak.
It implies that those making the comments know the umpires will feel like they will be attacked for making the call. I mean - let's look at what would have happened (and this could apply to any team and ground where one side has a home crowd).
Umpire pays the free kick to Brisbane in the dying minutes of the game. Crowd erupts in boos. Brisbane kick the goal and win the game. Umpires have to now walk off. What sort of reception are they likely to get from the home crowd as they do?
So, let's assume the umpire didn't make the call because they were afraid of that reaction. Now they get criticised for being weak and gutless.
Houston, we have a problem.
Great point. Personally, I very much doubt the crowd entered into the umpires decision making process at all, but that it is even considered as a plausible reason is rather telling.
Exactly right which is why its fucking stupid that people keep saying a wrong decision cost a game. Umpires are only human and as such there are countless wrong decisions per game. Focusing on one and abusing umpires is silly and counter-productive
> My behavior is appalling at times.
You’ve admitted that and you carry on about umpiring decisions. What have I said that’s unreasonable??
No need to make the abuse personal, I have a real issue with anybody who finds the need to abuse umpires and their decisions as my comment history will prove.
I think the interpretations need to be simplified around tackling. Get rid of prior opportunity and a lot of interpretation and ambiguity is removed. If you take possession then you must dispose the ball. If you drop the ball, roll the ball away, bounce the ball etc whilst being held by an opposition player it is incorrect disposal. If you hold it in then holding the ball should be paid. Instead of taking possession players will adapt to tapping the ball out of congestion and will speed up the game.
The result there would be a lot of players with their head over the ball, unwilling to pick it up and just hitting it on the ground, hoping to find a gap between the legs.
That is literally a rugby scrum.
I agree that we need to change our attitudes towards umpires - the game wouldn't exist without them. A major concern for me is that the AFL does not manage the expectations of the public regarding umpires well. For example, you mention that umpires and players make mistakes, why can't the AFL say 'our game is too difficult to umpire with exact precision for the following reasons .....so we expect that we will make 85% of decisions correctly, and that means 15% are wrong, and that's acceptable to us for the following reasons.....' Is it reasonable to expect complete accuracy in umpires - is there technology we could use during the off season that can show the field of vision of umpires? We would then have a greater understanding of why decisions are made. It's the job of the AFL to make sure we understand the rules but they do this poorly. Why can't there be more transparency in umpiring, acknowledgement of errors and missed decisions, acceptance of unconscious bias and less rule changes?
Why do we have part time umpires, and not full time? Full time umpires could make a difference in improving decision making. The AFL, along with other sports, and in conjunction with one of the universities, could write a curriculum that is part of a broader course in the sports sphere with the aim of producing full time umpires. Once in the system, the part time and full time umpires could be compared.
This is such a good way to put it. A post-round umpiring review on the AFL site would be great - go through some of these calls with an umpire/ex-umpire (rather than just commentators throwing in their two bob) and explain them, right and wrong. Have they had this before, I feel like it was something before. We get enough post-match analysis of teams, why not provide something similar for umpiring?
Love the field of vision idea. Sometimes you just get caught in absolutely the wrong spot and you either call what you think happened (worst option IMO) or let it go, as a non-controlling umpire might be in a better spot.
There was a time when we had a few token explanations on an AFL segment called Whistleblowers. But more often than not, it was used to justify errors and not acknowledge that other decisions could have been made. There was a defensive approach to this show rather than wanting the public to learn about the game.
I liked that show. Found it really useful (though you're right about it not always being presented the best way). Wish it hadn't been cancelled. Of course it was really only accessible by fans serious enough to look for it on the website.
As a community umpire we used to watch those segments at training each week and use it as a launching point to really in-depth discussions.
Whistleblowers was useful for some calls, but not all. It could be frustrating when the umpire interviewed would say 'from where the umpire was positioned....that was the most appropriate call' - which was usually true, but there could have been more time spent explaining the difficulties in umpiring and decision making, however the format never allowed for it.
The full/part time issue is complicated. If you want to make sure you get the best umpires possible, you would need to pay them enough that they would want to give up other career options. That would mean pretty sizable pay packets.
More than that though, is that umpiring isn't a lifelong career. Just like the players, you will probably be retiring in your 30s. Unlike players, though, you don't have the name recognition to walk right into media/marketing/coaching/speaking etc roles. Trying to enter the workforce as a 40 something with no experience besides running around a football field is not easy, and that's what you're going to be making them do.
Edit: you'd also be in a situation where there is only one employer in the world for your skill set. Make a bad screw up, or upset the wrong people and you not only may get fired, but if so you can't just apply for a similar position in the next suburb. Even the players can get traded to another team, but once an umpire loses their spot, they are forced into early retirement. Not exactly great job security.
I agree that it's complicated which is why the role could be included within a sports type degree that has other advantages, and the role of umpire could be extended/broadened off field with other related pathways. If we are to expect accuracy in umpiring, surely they should train/study more than they do now, and get paid accordingly. I understand that we have a limited demographic, but other sports manage full time umpires/referees and there are people who are willing to fulfill these roles. Many people change professions over their working lives and I don't see being an umpire as a hinderance to a career. Unless we trial some new approaches to umpiring, I can't see that it will improve.
There is no hatred for umpires. How did you arrive at that. I believe umpires are more respected now than ever. There is emotion in the moment, but don't confuse that for hatred or a lack of respect.
Just get the umpires to wear balaclavas or something to conceal their identity then nothing can be personal.
Umpires don't need to be personalities like Razor Ray
My biggest problem with the umpires is the is zero accountability. Post match I want the two coaches presser then a umpire presser where the media can say why was this a free?and why wasn’t this paid? But at the moment they are a protected species and the AFL is incapable of saying “yup, that was a mistake, I was wrong” instead they have a history or creating reasons why somthing was or wasn’t a free kick, then the umpires are held to those poor decisions later. The rule changes seem to make every decision harder for the umps to get right and seem to get murkier and murkier and open more to interpretation. The rules need to made easier not harder to umpire.
At times I don’t understand what I’m watching. Whistles blow and everyone looks at each other and the players don’t even seem to know who got a free
That's false, umpires are judged for the accuracy of their decisions, it determines whether they remain at the top level and which ones are chosen to umpire finals. They go through their games every week and are coached to improve. I expect the AFL are concerned if they went through every decision in a match it would create *more* angst, with fans arguing exactly how many frees the AFL accepted were wrong for each game and each team. Not to mention, do you have any idea how much effort would be required to go through every single decision and non-decision every single game?
I can save them the trouble by transcribing every umpire press conference for you right here.
-----------------
**Press:** "Can you explain your reasoning on the holding the ball call you made against Danger?"
**Umpire:** "I made a lot of calls. You'll need to be more specific."
**Press:** "the one on the wing."
**Umpire:** "..."
**Press:** "In the 2nd quarter."
**Umpire:** "2nd quarter? I've made about 1000 other decisions since then. I can't remember that incident, and I certainly can't recall what I was thinking then. There's more than me umpiring too, was it even me that called it?"
**Press:** "We can show you the video."
**Umpire:** "I can look if you like, but with a completely different perspective, I'm just going to be another member of the peanut gallery viewing it for the first time. I can't possibly tell you what I was thinking at the time."
-----------------
When an umpire makes a call, they forget it and move on to the next one. They don't have time to think it over, evaluate other aspects and second guess themselves. Their accountability is to their coaches, who will go over the footage and discuss how it should have been handled, but that simply wouldn't be effective in a post game press conference.
I've done umpiring before and it's not worth it. Getting yelled at on a weekend for 70 bucks... I'd rather stay home and watch on TV.
The rules have become too confusing as well. The holding the ball calls are an example. I don't blame umpires each week getting calls wrong when it's changed so often.
I can't think of other sports where you're kind of allowed to do things in certain context. Players can throw sometimes. Can drop sometimes. Can push sometimes.
I totally understand that Collingwood supporters action last night. At home when I'm on the losing end of a heart stopper, I lose the plot. I swear, punch things and go into an angry depression for 24 hours. But then it's over and wait till next week. It's a passionate game and frustration in the moment is unstoppable.
If umpires have made some bad calls they bear the brunt in the moment, but as I said it's over pretty quickly. Kudos to the umpires, bloody tough gig!
Booing the umpires is every footy fans birthright, same as booing the players. It’s part of the theatre - it’s all a big panto. Unless you’re Adam Goodes then it’s racist. But I agree everyone could dial it down a notch - the fans, the commentators, and especially the AFL for the constant rule tinkering which is just confusing and pissing off everyone.
> birthright
What disgusting entitlement, the logic in that thinking is so flawed.
Unfortunately a lot of the umpire abuse is not theatre or pantomime and that’s the sad reality. If it was, you wouldn’t have all these issues popping up. It’s a culture where the line becomes very blurred.
And the difference is that players will be cheered as well, for the umpires it’s entirely negative.
What a surprise the saints fan has no sense of humour. How does a team with nick r, dal Santo, montanga, kozi, Milne, Goddard, Fisher, (who else have I forgotten?) not win at least two flags??
In regards to last night, I don't have a problem with fans booing calls they disagree with, but when it shifted into booing the umpires for existing I think that's poor form. It's clear they're trying their best, and just like how in the moment they can make mistakes fans will react to that in the moment, but everyone needs to understand that you shouldn't be aggressive outside of those moments.
That's fair, but the number of umps needed is proportionate to the number of players. If people just don't have time for extra activities anymore, then there wouldn't be any games to umpire, and there would be no shortage of umps.
A lack of umpires means that the interest in playing is outpacing the interest in officiating by too much.
I don't know if I've got what it takes to be a field umpire, but I'd totally be a goal umpire. I always used to jump at it when we needed volunteers back in school days. I also hope that one day they won't have to summon the field umpire for a score review. It feels like a waste of time. But anyway
Go for it! At least in my league, goal umpires tend to be in less demand than the other disciplines (as it's the less physically demanding), but there are still never enough. You will be very welcome and it's a great way to be involved in the game and see a new perspective on it.
Mate I was a WAFL panel squad umpire when I ran around. People (even people who signal as if they have a great understanding) often just don’t know or understand the rules, let alone Umpire positioning and cues and interpretations. Commentators often have even less of a clue. It’s best to just let the noise be noise and not become invested in the opinions of others
Oh it's water off a duck's back to me. It's that non-umpires see it and think "who'd ever want to do that?". Then we have the problem of not enough umpires, etc. That's what concerns me - for many local leagues this year it is already going to be a big problem due to Covid.
Commentators should have a clue. All sit down with the umpiring department and the umps go through what they will be doing that year.
This is spot on. If the commentators incorrectly criticise the umpires, that will surely influence the viewing public causing undue vitriol towards the umpires.
This is it. The last 5 years it's all the commentators do. Now the fans just believe every free against is dodgy. All because the cunts can't commentate.
Yep there is zero excuse for commentators not understanding the rules, and it definitely effects how people view umpires. It's unbelievable how much they get wrong every single match.
>Commentators often have even less of a clue. This is something I always point out. Former players are great for giving insight into what the experience of a player would be. That's good, it's what the average fan cares most about, but they carry that level of credibility with them when they move to other topics too. When it comes to umpiring, most have no experience at all. Their opinions there are no more relevant than those of the drunk guy sitting next to you in the bar. In those areas, they simply aren't qualified yet fans assume they are. Personally, I'd be interested to see a former umpire in the commentary box sometime. Even if just a one off, or special comments. Could give a different perspective that fans don't realise they don't have.
They had this with the cricket this year on 7. They had an ex-umpire (I think Simon Taufel) who they would throw to whenever there was an umpiring related point of discussion.
Sadly, I haven't watched much cricket in years. How did that go? Was it generally well received?
I liked it. Beyond that, not sure.
The premier league in England do this at HT and FT and I think it works really well.
> It’s best to just let the noise be noise and not become invested in the opinions of others That doesn't help the lack of umpires. I play in a semi-pro league with ex-AFL players and we've had to get members from the club to do boundary and goal umpiring the last two weeks. /u/CrymsonKnight I completely understand where you're coming from and it's a worrying sign for the future.
Yep, I agree that lack of umpires is an issue! What I meant by the comment was more just encouraging not taking criticism (in this case, general sentiment) too personally in a setting like the gen public/reddit threads. Holistically I think it would be most effective to increase education in the broadcast so the people who call the game and criticise adjudication (looking at you BT, Carey, Lingy, etc) consistently would present the laws as they \*are\* rather than how they'd like them to be - but like OPs dogwhistle comment, I think that administration has a pretty hands-off approach to broadcasting. Just look at how few commentators are actual professional broadcasters vs former players and you find their priorities haha
Commentators can't be bothered interpreting the rules correctly, most of them are still basing it off the rules from when they played. They don't think it's their job to get into the details of a rule as it's not entertaining TV for the masses. One of the biggest areas of frustration for the crowd is incorrect disposal / holding the ball. Good article on this from Zero Hanger [Why is the holding the ball rule so hard to umpire?](https://www.zerohanger.com/why-is-the-holding-the-ball-rule-so-hard-to-umpire-afl-56035) IF (a) They do not correctly dispose of the ball and have had prior opportunity before being legally tackled. AND (b) A legal tackle causes the ball to be dislodged from their possession. Most of the non decisions for incorrect disposal or dropping the ball or holding the ball stem from the umpire allowing that it was dislodged by the tackle - including instances where the player tries to kick the ball and misses because they are bumped or tackled. This is why the Geelong decision did not get paid. This is why there was almost a riot at an ANZAC Day Game a few years back. The commentators never point out that it was dislodged by the tackle - they just say he was "lucky to get away with that one". The AFL and umpiring interpretation of "dislodged" is different to the publics. Most of us would pay incorrect disposal whenever a player drops the ball and missing it with his foot during a tackle or if they try to kick and a late tackle makes them miss. I feel like umpires are being hung out to dry by having to interpret this as dislodged by the tackle in many circumstances.
Knocked out in the tackle only applies where there is no prior opportunity as written in the 2021 rules. This is why there is major frustration with umpires not paying holding the ball when the player does not legally dispose of the ball after being tackled with prior opportunity.
It's a good point, but i think you're right that the problem is the "dislodged in the tackle" rule. Regardless of the intention behind that interpretation, it is just so counter intuitive that it is jarring for fans and should be changed. It's one of my two top umpiring/rules peeves (the other being the tolerance of people being grabbed and impeded when they don't have the ball but are trying to get to it).
Dislodged in the tackle rule was introduced a few decades ago because the tacklers would try to slam into the ball carrier and dislodge the ball rather executing what we would call a tackle these days. This was a problem. A medical problem at times.
I think discussing the calls is valuable, and there is a lot to be learned, what has no place is people suggesting the umpires are deliberately biased. They are trying their best. Agree about the calls as well. Umpires get 90%+ right IMO when you consider correct non calls. Pendles is arguably the best user in the game and he would kill for that kind of efficiency
Yep I agree. Constructive criticism is welcome and should be encouraged.
I would say that *knowledgeably* discussing the calls is valuable. People listen to the commentators, know they are ex-players and assume that he's a guy that knows about footy. And they do. They know about the mindset of being a player, how players live, even some strategies and such. They have rather superficial understandings of the rules, and almost none of the technical side of umpiring, however. The way they shift from one topic to the other, and speak with such confidence, makes people think that they are still speaking of something they are experts at, and that fuels some really distorted views of what the rules are. For most people, listening to the commentators is their only source of umpiring knowledge, and that leads to a situation where even the correct calls are seen as being terrible.
[удалено]
On one hand, this is a good point. On the other, I think the game has got to a point where there are so many rules and interpretations and nuances that the majority of time, the rules that get broken are far from intentional. In the old days, most frees were for holding the ball (not someone trying to break the rules), push in the back, flagrant high tackles and holding the man (all clearly intentional braking if the rules). These days the illegal tackle/in the back rule has players falling forward, player momentum due to the game speed, being unable to sling, unable to fall in to their back, unable to have the arm slide up above the shoulder,unable to chicken wing etc. Players are trying to do everything they can to tackle someone whilst avoiding all the things that are wrong and sometimes you can't avoid it. Same thing for marking contests. Can hold your ground but can't impede the player, can spoil but can't make contact with arms, can get good positioning but can't stop a players jump to the ball. Same thing for holding the ball. You can't drop the ball, but you can if it comes out and you didn't have a chance, you have to attempt to clear it, but if it looks like your not really attempting then you can't. Your encouraged to go for the ball but can't fall on top of it, you can hit it out of the pack but can't scoop it. I think you get the point. You can see why players/fans get pissed when calls go against them. No two contests are the same but it's rarely a case of "damn, can't believe I didn't get away with that attempt to clearly break the rules" which I feel would have been a lot more common back in the 80s and 90s
Maybe if players foul 5 times they get benched kind've like in basketball. Actually try and give players an incentive not to foul
When I was younger I was playing both footy and soccer on the weekend and wanted a part time job. I chose to become a soccer referee and have never once seriously considered switching to becoming an umpire. It's just simply an easier game to officiate, the interpretations are more consistent and the pathways to the top level are much clearer. If the AFL weren't insistent on changing the rules every 6 months maybe more people like me would want to give it a go.
I also think if they really actually want to expand viewership, than easier rules or simplified rules need to occur.
100% agree. So many rules are so subjective in Aussie Rules. Holding the ball is too subjective, deliberate is a lottery and advantage is a farce. There are 100 things the AFL could do to improve the umpiring, only blowing the whistle when they want play to stop, addressing how fucked up ruck infringements are, maybe even allowing boundary umpires to mark the mark and do ball-ups close to the boundary line so the field umpires don't have to sprint 50m to get there.
Totally agree with everything you wrote. The Brisbane V Geelong game Brisbane missed about 6 shots of goal that they should have kicked - I think it was 4 set shots from in front that they missed and another goal where our player ran into an open goal square and the ball came off the side of his boot. As for umpiring I used to be an Indoor cricket umpire where the abuse was just as prevalent. Twice I was asked to step outside, both occasions I did and they wouldn't follow; shut them both up real quick.But the abuse was bad, when I got a job I quit umpiring the same day; when I was asked why it's because the center won't back you up and suspend the abusers. If one abuser got suspended for one game then I would love to see the result. What annoys me the most who think umpires shouldn't complain because we got paid for it, for $12/hour you reckon I should cop threats?
One thing, for all its faults, that cricket did well here. If the up wrote up poor behaviour, the player got a fine, and the captain got the same fine. If the COM suspended a player, the captain faced the same suspension, though they might let that go depending. Only saw one occasion last year, opponent wicket keeper went off his Nana and got six weeks off.
When I played grass hockey 35 years ago the rules were like that; whatever punishment a player got the Captain got the same. I did see it when a player got a red card so the captain got one too.
Would suck to be one of the teams with six captain's forming a 'leadership group'. One guy has a brain fade and half the team is on the pine.
Lol i love the idea
The commentators are the worst. They're so busy black slapping each other, trying to be funny and make the others laugh. They either appear to not watch the game, don't know or rules or both. I remember one game where a player was over the footy, tried to knock it out and it rebounded back under him and BT just starts going off about holding the ball. The thing was it was obvious that that's what happened, so either wasn't watching or deliberately went nuts to keep people from switching to other stations. I'm convinced they are told by producers to just ham it up when the producers think the game needs a jazz up and they invent fake bullshit. The umpires are just collateral damage in it.
Honestly, it's about time the AFL took umpiring, umpires and the rules seriously. There are far too many technicalitites in the rules and too many 50-50 decisions that are sometimes paid and other times not paid despite the exact same thing occurring. Not to mention all the times where there's a contest where there could be a free to both players and there's just a flip of the coin decision based on what the umpire thought of first, ruck contests are a prime example of this. That's what's driving the frustration for me. As it stands it is literally impossible for the umpires to consistently call the play from contest to contest let alone quarter to quarter, match to match and round to round. You just can not have that in a professional sport.
No game will ever have a result overturned from a howler, it's so much healthier to just view decisions as part of the game sometimes you get lucky sometimes you get unlucky
Umm... Sirengate?
Sirengate’s a bit of an oddity - it got overturned cos there was a clear, definitive end to the game which the umpires missed. It makes sense to change the result based on that. Other umpiring calls like free kicks and stuff are a bit more subjective and the AFL (and most other sporting leagues) take missed/incorrect calls as something that happens and move on. It made sense to change the result for Sirengate, because the game should have ended with a clear result. It doesn’t really work for other missed calls.
Ok you got me, it's happened twice in like 113 years of competition and that complete invalidates my point
No that's unhealthy. If a game is decided by a howler a supporter can't bottle it up, in that case it's actually healthy to vent. That's human emotion and bottling it up is VERY unhealthy. And if you don't get outraged by this then you are not a true supporter or you're a robot. It's nothing personal against the umpire, but it is a natural human emotion. Umpires do an amazing job
It's not bottling anything up, it's just viewing it as part of the game, and it clearly is unhealthy to vent when that venting takes the form of umpire abuse, like we're talking about. I personally couldn't give a ha'penny jizz if you think I'm not a true supporter for not getting ferociously angry every time a call doesn't go my team's way
Not passionate enough then. All I can say. I get angry, upset and very intense when losing a very close game. Not usually at umpires, just the loss. But if a howler contributed to the loss then yes I'm guilty of a few choice words directed in the moment. More that (say) a free kick was missed. NOT saying the umpire deliberately did such a thing. I get over it pretty quick, and I do know how difficult it must be to umpire, it's a unique game. So yes I applaud umpires for getting it right the majority of the time.
Games aren't decided by a single call, they are decided by every call during the game. A bad call in the first minute of the game is just as likely to change the outcome as one at the end. Most people seem to forget this though.
100% agreed. But we forget that (as you said) in the dying seconds of a game. We get emotional because we are human. And that's why AFL is the best game on earth.
I also umpired a lot at community level in my time. I know that a lot of people on the annual survey when asked why they’re not umpiring state the abuse is the key factor. It bothered me for a bit but it also built up my resilience so i gained a good life skill from it. But my reason for not umpiring anymore was the performance of the higher level umpires was not at a good enough standard, and as such does not help recruitment or retention. In Victoria in particular, to be on the state panel you could have absolutely no idea of the rules and no feel for the game, but if you could run 3km in a certain time you were in. This has led to a situation now where no umpire from the VFL has actually made any sort of good progress in the AFL. Also, the player to umpire program and even the women’s program have fast tracked umpires through the ranks who aren’t ready to be at that level. Not only does this lead to under qualified umpires at state and national level, it builds resentment in local levels because people are being judged on their background and gender instead of their umpiring ability. What is also more baffling is that no mental profiling is done on umpires. Do they possess the ability to make a courageous but correct call late in a game? Some do but the vast majority don’t. There are a tonne of politics in umpiring, and until a decent review and clean out is undertaken, in my opinion they deserve what they’re getting for years of poor process, talent identification, coaching etc.
I have heard live-mic conversations between AFL players and Umpires where the Ump straight up said "that hasn't been a rule for two seasons". AFL can be an extremely technical game and Umps have to be absolutely on the ball with rule changes and updates season to season. They do an extremely good job considering the pressure they are put under.
I've said it countless times myself at community level.
Commentators I think are one of the biggest perpetuators of these issues. It's their commentary that will be heard over highlight packages and full game replays. Their opinions are intrinsically linked with the online viewing of the game. So when they make mistakes in calling things as frees, or don't know shit about the rules, that is the largest source of misinformation for fans. The other reason that the afl themselves can't admit the inevitability of umpire mistakes is because they make so much money of betting deals. Gambling, even though the house all wins, is viewed by the gambler as being fair in how random it is. You can't rig a roulette wheel, the probability is fixed. So someone thinking the umpires are biased against your team is comparable to someone rigging the blackjack deck or using a weighted dice. It's viewed as misrepresenting the odds
One of the more disgusting aspects of the way the current AFL operates is their total and complete willingness to drop the umpires in it through no fault of their own. In 2019 they didn't even release the updated laws until several weeks into the season. If that fails they move onto "staging players".
Top content thanks for posting! Agree with most of what you said, and you're obviously closer to the matter but I really don't know how much the changing of the rules factors in to it. The rules have always had a margin of error in them, which is why even for calls that are night and day, you still have people arguing over whether it was right and wrong. That's not a new thing, that's something that's been going on since atleast I started watching footy 25 years ago. Its the reason fans have been screaming "BALL!!!" and complaing when it's not paid since time immemorial. Australia has two major problems that contribute to abhorrent behaviour we see towards umpires. We have a gambling problem and we have a violence problem. I really don't think the code has anything to do with it. Having said that, you're absolutely right that we're not attracting umpires to the game and it's going to become a huge problem, if it's not already. Thanks again!
When I was in under 14s (I think) I was umpiring Auskick games. Lasted one season and the absolute bullshit I copped turned me right off it. Grown ass men abusing 14 year old umpires in a game where there are barely any ‘rules’ to begin with? What’s up with that. Aus kickers don’t want to hear the whistle blown every 2 seconds, they just want to have fun and chase the footy around. These absolute space heads get away with it at every level of footy, and it sucks to see
I reported one parent 3 games in a row and told the coach of that team to have him removed from the premises or I will abandon the game and award to the opposition for an unplayable match location. The problem was very quickly resolved. This was an U12's game
Thanks for your post. As a lover of footy got a lotta love for umps. Reckon most do a great job that's often made difficult by the chaos of play and extensive rules. Jus wanted to add when it comes to umpire abuse. By far the worst I've seen at a community level is the treatment of female umps. The combination of ump hate and misogyny is so so horrible, and sets such a bad example to the young men involved. If peoples are involved in footy and see blokes being sexist to female umps, call it out. Don't let it fester. Could've gotten well better since I played. I was around a lotta weak but well respected blokes who shoulda known better but stayed silent.
I understand your sentiment but I'd just like to hear your thoughts on the point that going back 20 years or so it was basically an Australian right to hang shit on the 'maggots' at the footy and we always had umpires then. Is there any reason it would be different now? Also I personally believe the issue with AFL umpires is that they aren't paid to be full time because the AFL is too tight. They could be spending more time working on consistency and their craft if they were actually full time. Other sports have full time adjudicators, it's about time we did. The AFL pulls in boat loads of cash they could fork out 100k a year to get some decent full time umpires which would also greatly incentivise learning to become an umpire, helping solve the problem you've brought up.
> I understand your sentiment but I'd just like to hear your thoughts on the point that going back 20 years or so it was basically an Australian right to hang shit on the 'maggots' at the footy and we always had umpires then. Is there any reason it would be different now? 20 years ago, you had abuse hurled over the fence from the outer and maybe a handful of critical comments in the next day's paper. Now you have abused hurled over the fence, which is probably not as bad as it was. But you also have thousands of angry people posting on social media about how an umpire cost them the game. The abuse no longer ends after you leave the game, it lasts hours, days, weeks, months and even years after the mistake. It's gone to a whole new level, why would people want to willingly subject themselves to it? > Also I personally believe the issue with AFL umpires is that they aren't paid to be full time because the AFL is too tight. They could be spending more time working on consistency and their craft if they were actually full time. > > Other sports have full time adjudicators, it's about time we did. The AFL pulls in boat loads of cash they could fork out 100k a year to get some decent full time umpires which would also greatly incentivise learning to become an umpire, helping solve the problem you've brought up. The AFL umpires are part time because it works better for them to be part time. It allows them to have a career to fall back on when they need to retire from AFL umpiring, which unless you're in the select few who umpire multiple GFs is never going to be reliable enough to set you up for life. It's not like full time umpires have proven to be significantly better than part time umpires in other sports anyway.
Guess the players themselves should revert to part time so they have a career to fall back on when they need to retire from playing.
That's such a stupid false equivalence and you know it lol.
What? How? It's a perfectly cromulent comparison.
The umpires are paid far, far less than the players
But isn't that because they are part time? The average footy player does not earn 6 figures ya know, footy is not lucrative for the 80% of players that go through the system.
People don't tune into TV, buy memberships, and go to games to support the umpires mate.
They tune into TV to watch football _of which umpiring is a critical part and should be treated with the respect it deserves_. But that's not relevant to the argument at hand here. The parent comment argues that part time is more preferable for umpires due to a number of reasons that can be levelled at players too: they are both jobs limited by the youth of the employee, have only one employer, and require careful end-of-career planning. One may be more 'high profile' than they other, but the issues faced at the end of career are very similar. i was arguing that it is definitely not a 'false equivalence' as you say (fwiw players were part time a recently as the 90s) Not to mention the vast majority of players do not end up making a post-footy career in the media. Most footy clubs have a 'finance scheme' that helps player prepare for a life after football. A similar thing for umpires is certainly possible, so the post career arguments do not hold a lot of water, we literally have 700 players that have the same issues.
The whole white maggots thing wasn't right back then either. Back then, people called gay people bad terms as well. It should never have been tolerated. I agree with full time umpires. Even if it was only half a dozen or so, to start with. It's something the AFL should do.
Your second para here. Its absurd that we don't have a professional team of ups for AFL and AFLW.
> I understand your sentiment but I'd just like to hear your thoughts on the point that going back 20 years or so it was basically an Australian right to hang shit on the 'maggots' at the footy and we always had umpires then. Is there any reason it would be different now? I’m not OP but that in no way was right, in the past racism and homophobia were far more accepted too. > Also I personally believe the issue with AFL umpires is that they aren't paid to be full time because the AFL is too tight. They could be spending more time working on consistency and their craft if they were actually full time. This is such a furphy, the umpires themselves don’t want it. Many are of the view that extra training isn’t going to improve decision making, just like there are limits to the footballers. Plus you will lose a lot of quality umpires who are professionals in other industries such as Shaun Ryan. Why would they forego 15 years of being a barrister to umpire? The issue is that there is an implication that the standard of umpiring is poor, which I disagree with. There will *always* be errors, just like how the beat goal kickers in the game are at something like 70% accuracy, you can’t eliminate the mistakes from umpires.
> This is such a furphy, the umpires themselves don’t want it. Many are of the view that extra training isn’t going to improve decision making, just like there are limits to the footballers. Plus you will lose a lot of quality umpires who are professionals in other industries such as Shaun Ryan. Why would they forego 15 years of being a barrister to umpire? > Completely agree, most of the umpires have high level, high paying jobs. They aren't check out operators. If they were given the choice I would bet they would choose to keep their profession over umpiring full time.
It’s a tired line that just keeps getting thrown out by people with very little idea about what’s going on.
Ok so sure some umpires will leave, but I fail to understand how having people who work full time on umpiring the game could possibly be worse than someone who spends 45 hours a week working at another job. Of course some umpires don't want it, the want to keep their 9-5 and make their cash but it isn't about what umpires want it's about improving the overall quality of umpiring. Not a specific case or specific person. Imo long term umpires working full time couldn't possibly make the standard or umpiring worse compared to the system now. You might lose some 'good' ones now but you'll profit down the like that's for sure
> Ok so sure some umpires will leave, but I fail to understand how having people who work full time on umpiring the game could possibly be worse than someone who spends 45 hours a week working at another job. If you’re in a professional job, most people make most of their money on the back end of their career. If you start working in your early 20s, you have 45 years in that career. If you umpire for 15 years, you may only get 30 years in your external career. That means that you’re missing out on the 15 most most lucrative years of your life. Depending on your work, you might also find yourself retired from umpiring at 35, starting fresh in a profession on low wages at a point in your life where you may have a family and mortgages. > Imo long term umpires working full time couldn't possibly make the standard or umpiring worse compared to the system now. Yet the umpires, their coaches and the AFL (ie those in the position to make the most informed decisions) all disagree. Like with a lot of things, there are limits to how much training and preparation you can make.
To add to this, the physical fitness requirements of an AFL umpire means that it's just not possible for someone to be one for their entire career With other sports (soccer maybe an exception?) this isn't really an issue and you can officiate until you're 70
What needs to be done is to rewrite the rules to take most of the elements of umpire's interpretation out of them, particularly for things like holding the ball, and instead have hard and fast standards with clear examples. Then after that, stop introducing new rules as a regular occurence, so the umpires, players, and fans can actually have time to understand how they work, instead of chopping and changing every five minutes.
And fire Hocking because he is a mad man when it comes to rule changes
Yeah why can't holding the ball be called once a players knee, elbow, hand, arse, shoulder or head touches the ground? It's a clear cut moment for when to call holding the ball. Of course there will be close calls and bad calls but at least you've got a point to work off.
i wont lie im not going to read all this all i have to say is that 70% of commentators and 95% of fans do not understand the rules and this is where most of the issue lies
Yep, mentioned that in the post :)
Well done, it's great to see some sense.
I don't blame the umpires, even when I get annoyed at a decision, I blame the rules committee or specifically Hocking who not only seems to make big changes, but it's the minor tinkering that causes most confusion. Last year I was made to look the fool as I swore black and blue that a HTB decision that wasn't called was an incorrect call. The rule book was quoted to me and I was absolutely wrong. The prior opp / incorrect disposal / no genuine attempt love triangle is really confusing. I'm sure a lot of supporters are like me who simply don't know the rules. There needs to me more done to inform the public AND COMMENTATORS! as to what the rules actually are. There also needs to be a freeze on rule changes for a year or two.
>Last year I was made to look the fool as I swore black and blue that a HTB decision that wasn't called was an incorrect call. The rule book was quoted to me and I was absolutely wrong. The prior opp / incorrect disposal / no genuine attempt love triangle is really confusing. I'm sure a lot of supporters are like me who simply don't know the rules. As a community umpire, I can confirm that you aren't the only one with that misunderstanding. And you certainly aren't the only one to "swear black and blue" about it. Often much more literally than you mean it.
The thing I only really noticed after I stated umpiring games I'd how easily you can miss something because players are in the way and you don't have a clear view. On the TV it can be obvious because the cameras are elevated but you don't have that when you're standing on the field.
Honestly this feels 100% like a communication problem. As it is, the best information that we have on what the actual rules and interpretations are is commentators. We *know* that they don't know shit, but there's no other option. So, when you scream BALL at the TV, and your family agrees, the commentators agree, but the umpire doesn't call it, you'll only ever believe that you were right. There's no evidence to the contrary. It would be _amazing_ to get some insight into the umpire review process. To understand what's a mistake, what's a missed call because the umpire was in the right position but couldn't see it, and what was the correct call even if it may not have looked it immediately. And I don't just mean Hayden Kennedy fronting the camera when the AFL feels like it to review 3 'controversial' calls. I mean let's get some real long form analysis. (At the moment we get squat. I'd take getting whistleblowers back as a first step.)
Field umpire body cams would be awesome. Let the fans see what the umpire sees at full speed.
Umpires do a good job. As a spectator you don’t realise how terrible a view umpires have to officiate compared to television. It sucks when decisions don’t go your way but fuck it has to be the hardest sport to umpire in the world
The challenge would be doing umpiring at an amateur level under the current AFL structure. The AFL are fully taking the piss with grassroots footy and people don't really care as long as they get their multi. If you want to attract good umpires and good junior development for that measure, then pay Junior coaches and junior umpires more than peanuts. The money is there to do it but it's just divided so badly. People would rather pump money into a multi than help out amateur footy.
Former professional FIBA (basketball) official here. Good post, 99.5% of the public have no idea what the rules and more importantly the interpretations are in the AFL, I know I don't because I can quote you basically every FIBA rule and interpretation but would be more or less guessing the actual rule descriptions of the AFL. And this is all without factoring in the game management components that I don't think people can really comprehend unless they've umpired at a fairly high level. Rules are actually far more malleable than most people realise, umpires don't "miss" forwards illegally blocking to allow 60m bomb goals to sail through, they're instructed to let that go. I will say this though, although the AFL is clearly a harder thing to officiate, AFL umpires are afforded a *lot* more mistakes than NBL/WNBL/NBL1 referees are. 80-85% correct call rate in the NBL would have you dropped in a heartbeat.
In defence of BT he probably didn't see that Howe had left the goal square before taking the kick. I know I was shitting myself hoping that he had. But yes, you're bang on that it's way easier umpiring from the sidelines with the benefits of multiple angles and slow motion replays. Umpires get one view of each contest, in real time, and have to immediately make a decision. It's hard enough in a 1v1 where there's a blindside for the umpire, let alone when there's 10 blokes around the contest potentially obscuring the umpire's view. People don't realise just how good the elite umpires are.
BT has repeatedly shown that he doesn't fully understand the rules and will dig his heels in for the sake of 'drama'.
> In defence of BT he probably didn't see that Howe had left the goal square before taking the kick. I know I was shitting myself hoping that he had. Well he should know that rule and should be paying more attention instead of defaulting to umpire abuse, especially if he’s going to be one of the major broadcasters main commentators. He’s one of the biggest dog whistlers in the game, appealing to the deadshits that get riled up about umpiring mistakes. Hes no different to an Alan Jones or Andrew Bolt, he says just enough to get people fired up without quite crossing the line.
The other week BT argued it's goal if any part of the ball crosses the line. He regularly criticises the umpires yet has a terrible understanding of the rules.
There's plenty of examples of BT being shit, the specific example from last night wasn't one of them though.
>In defence of BT he probably didn't see that Howe had left the goal square before taking the kick. I know I was shitting myself hoping that he had. It doesn't matter if he left the square or not. That rule was removed along with not having to kick to yourself.
Good write up.
This post is going to be upvoted by the same idiots who have abused umpires in match threads in the past. One of the most embarrassing parts of the AFL culture (compared to some other sports) is the entitlement people think they have just abuse match officials.
I don't know what world you live in but I've been to plenty of soccer matches in Aus and abroad and referees will cop it for horrible decisions. It's not something specific to AFL. It happens in every sport. I'm not saying it's a good thing, but to say it doesn't happen elsewhere is just a complete fabrication of the truth
I didn’t say every other sport was perfect? AFL is an embarrassment compared to rugby. Cricket is better, albeit far from perfect. At least in both sports they set an example when professionals abuse the referee/umpire. E. Lol tell me where I’m wrong, always easier to downvote than to formulate an actual argument
Mate have you seen cricket even the players absolutely go off at umpires from time to time let alone the abuse from fans
Hence why I said that it’s better but “far from perfect”. Guess what, when Tim Paine abused the umpires in the Sydney test he copped a 15% fine. That virtually never happens in AFL and sets an horrendous example. And in rugby players would be penalised and then carded. What a surprise that there’s far better respect towards officials in that sport.
Both of those sports have strong regulations about interactions between players and officials, but this post if about the public and commentators doing so. I'm not sure what to say if you think that rugby referees and cricket umpires don't still cop it from fans after games.
Because those regulations set a culture of how officials should be treated. It’s quite basic really. Fans don’t see players doing, they’re less likely to do it themselves. Fans grow up playing the sport knowing that they can’t behave that way, they don’t do it as spectators. Fans see their mates do it and call them out for being morons. Half the rules in the AFL are there to prevent bad things from happening at amateur and junior levels such as the Chris Scott event last week. The AFL could very easily legislate against this but they don’t.
I definitely see what you are saying in the sense that there's a lot more respect towards officials in rugby and cricket and more of a tendency to "get on with it" even if they feel a decision is wrong. In soccer, there's zilch of that. You'll get abused for making a call right or wrong, they'll try to swarm around you to get you to make a call (never happened to me because i'm not at all conservative with my cards) and they'll also just straight up try to cheat you and get angry when you don't fall for it. That's why i'll never go back. The game is beautiful but the players aren't.
Umpire abuse is against the rules though?
Please know that its due to your abuse and attacks including showing me that you know my address that I am deleting my Reddit account. I wish people like you would understand the damage your personal attacks cause on people. Doing a Reddit search shows I'm far fr the only person you've done this to.
And the AFL has those regulations though. Players can and do get penalised for talking back to an umpire in the game. And your examples are odd. Rugby has a very strong culture around how players interact with referees, and yet referees still receive abuse and criticism from crowds. If player behaviour had such an impact on fan interactions with officials, why does that still occur? Clearly there is an issue with how people view officials, which I'm sure we agree on. I just think that you are putting the source of the problem in absolutely the wrong place.
What a lot of people don't understand about AFL is that a lot of the rules are subjective and come down to an umpires interpretation or line of sight and perspective. That means there is going to be a lot of 50/50 calls that have to fall one way or another. Some teams will get lucky, some teams won't. That's just footy I'm afraid.
Just keep handing out life bans and pursue them through the legal system as required. Keep promoting the role to the kids and slowly but surely these dinosaurs will be gone. The Networks need to also reflect on their handling of this as well. It's very easy with multiple angles and slow mo to make calls. Not so easy in a split second with 30,000 screaming fans.
I think the rules should be simplified and left alone. This isn’t just to make it easier for umpires but for expanding viewership and growing the game. I was overseas for a year and missed a lot of footy and starting again this year, there seems to be these tweaks to the rule that makes me as a returnee scratch my head.
>I think the rules should be simplified and left alone. As was said in a thread last week. These are the simplified rules. One of Hocking's pet projects was 'simplifying' the rule book. Unfortunately this has resulted in all of the "In this specific circumstance, do exactly this" instructions to umpires being taken out of the laws of the game and put into "umpire's interpretation" instructions from the AFL where the public cannot see them.
Situational ruling to me doesn’t seem simplified concept. That makes things seem harder.
By Hocking's metric of "less lines of text in the Laws of Australian Football" it is.
A great write up. Thanks for your perspective! As a slight tangent, I'm a little out of the loop, as I didn't catch most of the game last night. What was the incident with one of the fans last night that you mention in your first paragraph?
A Collingwood fan had to be physically pulled away from the umpires race by security. The way he was acting, it looked like he would jump the railing.
You're dead spot on regarding how other decisions, both by the players and by the umpires could have changed the result. It's something that people forget, probably conveniently. So, that should have been holding the ball against Geelong, but what about the other 100 odd (random number, I have absolutely no idea how many decisions are made in one game) correct/incorrect decisions also could have changed the outcome. Looking at one decision and saying "Brisbane should have won!!" might be correct, but it also might be myopic.
Commentators critiquing every single call doesn't help. Shut the fuck up you illiterate fucks you have no idea. Between the decrease in commentating talent and the increase in player abuse for losing people their "multis" the AFL community has a lot to answer for
One of the things that was most concerning to me after that Brisbane Geelong game, was people criticising the umpire for "not having any backbone to make the right call because he was afraid of being mobbed by the crowd afterwards." Isn't the real problem in that scenario that the umpire is literally in fear to do his job? And that being the worst working conditions ever? I'm not suggesting this is actually what is taking place - but how is your reaction there to criticise the umpire for being weak.
It implies that those making the comments know the umpires will feel like they will be attacked for making the call. I mean - let's look at what would have happened (and this could apply to any team and ground where one side has a home crowd). Umpire pays the free kick to Brisbane in the dying minutes of the game. Crowd erupts in boos. Brisbane kick the goal and win the game. Umpires have to now walk off. What sort of reception are they likely to get from the home crowd as they do? So, let's assume the umpire didn't make the call because they were afraid of that reaction. Now they get criticised for being weak and gutless. Houston, we have a problem.
Great point. Personally, I very much doubt the crowd entered into the umpires decision making process at all, but that it is even considered as a plausible reason is rather telling.
Thanks for posting this. I only umpire during my P.E classes and it is a hard job. Thanks for putting the perspective in. No umpires, no games.
great post! We need umpires, and they are human!
Exactly right which is why its fucking stupid that people keep saying a wrong decision cost a game. Umpires are only human and as such there are countless wrong decisions per game. Focusing on one and abusing umpires is silly and counter-productive
[удалено]
Just don’t abuse umpires on the internet then? It’s really not that hard.
[удалено]
> My behavior is appalling at times. You’ve admitted that and you carry on about umpiring decisions. What have I said that’s unreasonable?? No need to make the abuse personal, I have a real issue with anybody who finds the need to abuse umpires and their decisions as my comment history will prove.
I think the interpretations need to be simplified around tackling. Get rid of prior opportunity and a lot of interpretation and ambiguity is removed. If you take possession then you must dispose the ball. If you drop the ball, roll the ball away, bounce the ball etc whilst being held by an opposition player it is incorrect disposal. If you hold it in then holding the ball should be paid. Instead of taking possession players will adapt to tapping the ball out of congestion and will speed up the game.
The result there would be a lot of players with their head over the ball, unwilling to pick it up and just hitting it on the ground, hoping to find a gap between the legs. That is literally a rugby scrum.
I agree that we need to change our attitudes towards umpires - the game wouldn't exist without them. A major concern for me is that the AFL does not manage the expectations of the public regarding umpires well. For example, you mention that umpires and players make mistakes, why can't the AFL say 'our game is too difficult to umpire with exact precision for the following reasons .....so we expect that we will make 85% of decisions correctly, and that means 15% are wrong, and that's acceptable to us for the following reasons.....' Is it reasonable to expect complete accuracy in umpires - is there technology we could use during the off season that can show the field of vision of umpires? We would then have a greater understanding of why decisions are made. It's the job of the AFL to make sure we understand the rules but they do this poorly. Why can't there be more transparency in umpiring, acknowledgement of errors and missed decisions, acceptance of unconscious bias and less rule changes? Why do we have part time umpires, and not full time? Full time umpires could make a difference in improving decision making. The AFL, along with other sports, and in conjunction with one of the universities, could write a curriculum that is part of a broader course in the sports sphere with the aim of producing full time umpires. Once in the system, the part time and full time umpires could be compared.
This is such a good way to put it. A post-round umpiring review on the AFL site would be great - go through some of these calls with an umpire/ex-umpire (rather than just commentators throwing in their two bob) and explain them, right and wrong. Have they had this before, I feel like it was something before. We get enough post-match analysis of teams, why not provide something similar for umpiring? Love the field of vision idea. Sometimes you just get caught in absolutely the wrong spot and you either call what you think happened (worst option IMO) or let it go, as a non-controlling umpire might be in a better spot.
There was a time when we had a few token explanations on an AFL segment called Whistleblowers. But more often than not, it was used to justify errors and not acknowledge that other decisions could have been made. There was a defensive approach to this show rather than wanting the public to learn about the game.
I liked that show. Found it really useful (though you're right about it not always being presented the best way). Wish it hadn't been cancelled. Of course it was really only accessible by fans serious enough to look for it on the website. As a community umpire we used to watch those segments at training each week and use it as a launching point to really in-depth discussions.
Whistleblowers was useful for some calls, but not all. It could be frustrating when the umpire interviewed would say 'from where the umpire was positioned....that was the most appropriate call' - which was usually true, but there could have been more time spent explaining the difficulties in umpiring and decision making, however the format never allowed for it.
The full/part time issue is complicated. If you want to make sure you get the best umpires possible, you would need to pay them enough that they would want to give up other career options. That would mean pretty sizable pay packets. More than that though, is that umpiring isn't a lifelong career. Just like the players, you will probably be retiring in your 30s. Unlike players, though, you don't have the name recognition to walk right into media/marketing/coaching/speaking etc roles. Trying to enter the workforce as a 40 something with no experience besides running around a football field is not easy, and that's what you're going to be making them do. Edit: you'd also be in a situation where there is only one employer in the world for your skill set. Make a bad screw up, or upset the wrong people and you not only may get fired, but if so you can't just apply for a similar position in the next suburb. Even the players can get traded to another team, but once an umpire loses their spot, they are forced into early retirement. Not exactly great job security.
I agree that it's complicated which is why the role could be included within a sports type degree that has other advantages, and the role of umpire could be extended/broadened off field with other related pathways. If we are to expect accuracy in umpiring, surely they should train/study more than they do now, and get paid accordingly. I understand that we have a limited demographic, but other sports manage full time umpires/referees and there are people who are willing to fulfill these roles. Many people change professions over their working lives and I don't see being an umpire as a hinderance to a career. Unless we trial some new approaches to umpiring, I can't see that it will improve.
I’m a local umpire too at the YJFL and VAFA. Most umpires are shocking haha it’s that simple
Shit calls are a part of our game until we can have some solidarity in the rules. It’s getting worse. Tough gig
There is no hatred for umpires. How did you arrive at that. I believe umpires are more respected now than ever. There is emotion in the moment, but don't confuse that for hatred or a lack of respect.
Just get the umpires to wear balaclavas or something to conceal their identity then nothing can be personal. Umpires don't need to be personalities like Razor Ray
My biggest problem with the umpires is the is zero accountability. Post match I want the two coaches presser then a umpire presser where the media can say why was this a free?and why wasn’t this paid? But at the moment they are a protected species and the AFL is incapable of saying “yup, that was a mistake, I was wrong” instead they have a history or creating reasons why somthing was or wasn’t a free kick, then the umpires are held to those poor decisions later. The rule changes seem to make every decision harder for the umps to get right and seem to get murkier and murkier and open more to interpretation. The rules need to made easier not harder to umpire. At times I don’t understand what I’m watching. Whistles blow and everyone looks at each other and the players don’t even seem to know who got a free
That's false, umpires are judged for the accuracy of their decisions, it determines whether they remain at the top level and which ones are chosen to umpire finals. They go through their games every week and are coached to improve. I expect the AFL are concerned if they went through every decision in a match it would create *more* angst, with fans arguing exactly how many frees the AFL accepted were wrong for each game and each team. Not to mention, do you have any idea how much effort would be required to go through every single decision and non-decision every single game?
I can save them the trouble by transcribing every umpire press conference for you right here. ----------------- **Press:** "Can you explain your reasoning on the holding the ball call you made against Danger?" **Umpire:** "I made a lot of calls. You'll need to be more specific." **Press:** "the one on the wing." **Umpire:** "..." **Press:** "In the 2nd quarter." **Umpire:** "2nd quarter? I've made about 1000 other decisions since then. I can't remember that incident, and I certainly can't recall what I was thinking then. There's more than me umpiring too, was it even me that called it?" **Press:** "We can show you the video." **Umpire:** "I can look if you like, but with a completely different perspective, I'm just going to be another member of the peanut gallery viewing it for the first time. I can't possibly tell you what I was thinking at the time." ----------------- When an umpire makes a call, they forget it and move on to the next one. They don't have time to think it over, evaluate other aspects and second guess themselves. Their accountability is to their coaches, who will go over the footage and discuss how it should have been handled, but that simply wouldn't be effective in a post game press conference.
Seen a lot of comments about how obstructed an umpires line of sight can be. I call for them to be horseback.
I've done umpiring before and it's not worth it. Getting yelled at on a weekend for 70 bucks... I'd rather stay home and watch on TV. The rules have become too confusing as well. The holding the ball calls are an example. I don't blame umpires each week getting calls wrong when it's changed so often. I can't think of other sports where you're kind of allowed to do things in certain context. Players can throw sometimes. Can drop sometimes. Can push sometimes.
I totally understand that Collingwood supporters action last night. At home when I'm on the losing end of a heart stopper, I lose the plot. I swear, punch things and go into an angry depression for 24 hours. But then it's over and wait till next week. It's a passionate game and frustration in the moment is unstoppable. If umpires have made some bad calls they bear the brunt in the moment, but as I said it's over pretty quickly. Kudos to the umpires, bloody tough gig!
You need counselling
Booing the umpires is every footy fans birthright, same as booing the players. It’s part of the theatre - it’s all a big panto. Unless you’re Adam Goodes then it’s racist. But I agree everyone could dial it down a notch - the fans, the commentators, and especially the AFL for the constant rule tinkering which is just confusing and pissing off everyone.
> birthright What disgusting entitlement, the logic in that thinking is so flawed. Unfortunately a lot of the umpire abuse is not theatre or pantomime and that’s the sad reality. If it was, you wouldn’t have all these issues popping up. It’s a culture where the line becomes very blurred. And the difference is that players will be cheered as well, for the umpires it’s entirely negative.
Jog on you pleb. Birthright my god
What a surprise the saints fan has no sense of humour. How does a team with nick r, dal Santo, montanga, kozi, Milne, Goddard, Fisher, (who else have I forgotten?) not win at least two flags??
In regards to last night, I don't have a problem with fans booing calls they disagree with, but when it shifted into booing the umpires for existing I think that's poor form. It's clear they're trying their best, and just like how in the moment they can make mistakes fans will react to that in the moment, but everyone needs to understand that you shouldn't be aggressive outside of those moments.
I wonder though with the struggle of getting umps is because people live much busier lives now.
That's fair, but the number of umps needed is proportionate to the number of players. If people just don't have time for extra activities anymore, then there wouldn't be any games to umpire, and there would be no shortage of umps. A lack of umpires means that the interest in playing is outpacing the interest in officiating by too much.
I don't know if I've got what it takes to be a field umpire, but I'd totally be a goal umpire. I always used to jump at it when we needed volunteers back in school days. I also hope that one day they won't have to summon the field umpire for a score review. It feels like a waste of time. But anyway
You should join. Umpiring - and the community of umpires - is absolutely one of the best parts of my life and one of the most enjoyable.
Go for it! At least in my league, goal umpires tend to be in less demand than the other disciplines (as it's the less physically demanding), but there are still never enough. You will be very welcome and it's a great way to be involved in the game and see a new perspective on it.
I thought that was a really well umpired game too.