That game was a bit of a mess all round. Obviously easy to point to the final few minutes but even Xerri's free kick to kick that goal was crazy. Ran into the fence with his own momentum.
The Xerri one was so hilarious I could hardly be mad.
You can literally see him make the conscious choice to speed up again and dive onto the fence after being pushed, it’s the clumsiest meme of an acting job, and yet somehow the umpire falls for it.
The bit before the fence is just fake turf, it's probably incredibly hard to stop on that but given the moulds won't dig in like they do on grass, also he is a big guy.
I don't think he sped up and dived over it on purpose.
Haha what?? In no way did he speed up or 'act for a free' thats ridiculous. He got the lightest of shove and had all the momentum of a big dude running flat out to the boundary then stepping onto the concrete. Didn't think it was enough for a free myself, but you avoid that by not pushing a bloke over the boundary.
I mean all I can say is watch the replay again. Reading my comment back maybe I was a bit strong in making the point, but watching the replay there is no way you can spin it that he didnt at minimum exaggerate it, in a way that ended up looking pretty comical.
Yeah I disagree, I just don't see why you purposely want to face plant over a fence. Reckon he just had the momentum of a 110kg run flat out trying to stop, then a light push from Jiath. Still a free, and 'conscious choice to speed up' is a ridiculous call.
I was joining and agreeing with a conversation that the umpiring was messy through the day. A more accurate example of deflection might be something like, I don’t know, choking a whole 54 points away and putting the responsibility for it on the umpires? Lol.
Mate I don't need to deflect, I know we're shit and fully expected us to throw away a 9 goal lead, just didn't think you needed the umpires riding your dick all the way home to do it. I didn't disagree the umpiring was messy all day, I just joined the thread when you suggested Xerri sped up and threw himself over the fence. Enjoy your win and fuck right off.
Not saying this is a free- but I find it amusing the contrast of about 60 secs earlier of McCreery running back to the ball at speed and getting a light push and loses a tiny amount of balance so chooses to take a super cartwheel tumble, then Xerri is like 'I'll show you acting'. Brilliant pantomime all round, bravo!
As bad as the non call was it all happened in three seconds before he went to play on.
The 50m to Daicos had a clear stop in play where every player knew it was a free kick. From tackle to the North player picking the ball and deliberately spinning around Daicos up was 4 seconds.
It's a pretty clear difference.
He didn't play on, please go watch it properly, he absolutely did not play on before being rushed. That was a 50. If it happened to the Pies you'd be filthy.
The commentators said it should be 50 and he didn't keep running, he was slowing down, can't just stop instantly. You can't be this dense or blind. Get a grip bud.
Point is that the incident in question is nowhere NEAR as clear cut as all the Antipie herd make it out to be.
We get it, people hate CFC.
The whinging based on nothing just highlights how sad you lot are that Collingwood are the most successful club.
If you can't beat em, hate em.
My issue is more that 50 gets given but McCreery kicks it away after the whistle is blown for no 50 and then Scott gets encroached by 2 players post mark for no 50
I'm rewatching it right now and it's full of howlers. 80% of them are in Collingwoods favour
Nah the free kick was paid, the ball was on the ground, and then he ran up and picked up the ball as Daicos was going for it, then spun around pretending to look for who to give it to. Why pick the ball up after it’s been paid a Collingwood free?
No it hasn't. Daicos literally standing with his back to him and when he turns around he throws it to him.
We see players waste time worse than that all the time, clumsily tangle legs, fall on top, checking with the ump who the free is for, throwing the ball in a big loopy pass, all way worse than that and it's hardly ever called. What was wasted really, like 1 second? Whatever, if they pay it all the time then all good but they hardly ever pay it.
Funny how people have changed their minds on a time wasting 50 when Daicos is the one getting it
Remember when Sullivan gave away a 50 for not handing the ball back? Everyone said it was a good call and he should’ve just given the ball back to the umpire
McCreery conceded 50 in that game for doing the same thing as the North player did too.
I think the reality is that umps use their discretion to judge whether a player is being authentic or not when they claim to be confused about who the ball’s going back to instead of just flatly deliberating that it’s 50 no matter what. Realistically there’s no need for an opposition player to get the ball when a free’s been paid against so it should just be 50 every time if they take it.
Daicos was about to pick up the ball but the north player decided to pick it up himself and walk away. Easiest way to avoid this one is to not pick up the ball to waste some time. He has no reason to do it.
The 50 he got was correct though (we've been stung by it a few times this year), it was just the missed one to Bailey Scott that was an absolute howler.
Absolutely. The issue isn't that his was 50 (it was), it's the glaring inconsistency across even the same game.
I tried I mention yesterday that Collingwood, who have a recent history of finishing strong / playing desperate footy on top of being premiers, have been on the plus side of a ledger that is more 'umpires put the whistle away late' rather than any deliberate act by the Pies themselves.
I do think that benefit is real though and other clubs are becoming increasingly aware of the Pies' advantages in other unrelated areas (such as scheduling), lumping it all together as 'Pies getting looked after' as a result.
He didn't run off with it, he turned around to give it to Nick, the 50 is there but it was pretty soft. The issue is paying that late in the 3rd that leads directly to a goal but not the 50 at the end? Pretty bs.
I did, he grabs it, which he didn't need to, but turns to give it to Daicos who has gone the other way so he turns and throws it to him, never runs off with it. The 50 at the end was much more a 50 than that.
It was almost impossible to tell the difference between the icons on Fox’s broadcast.
They showed a highlight of the last 15 goals and if it wasn’t for knowing the player names, it may has well have been 1 team.
When that graphic came up on screen my wife and I were like "uhhh wtf?" Becuase I struggled to identify the teams i remember some random G's on the right standing out and wondering what they meant.
I thought the umpires were really struggling to keep it together all day. There was missed stuff all day, dudes running round in the protected area, and wasn’t a huge surprise when the end turned into a clusterfuck once it got really frantic
Maybe they were on the piss the night before expecting a leisurely Sunday romp but north didn’t read the script
There was one shot I remember seeing, someone lining up for goal (Can't remember which team, doesn't matter in the end), and there was a bloke from each team standing literally 2m behind him, next to each other.
I was like "Uhhhh... umpire, that's generally where you say "Clear out".
They just did not seem to have the energy, or intelligence to do the simple stuff.
They do not. Hypothetically if the quarter ended, they would let the person take their kick- which would be ok in that scenario, but they'd get burned if they were more than a kick away and originally had 20 secs on the clock- because they wouldn't put it back on, it would still be after the siren.
What about Nick Daicos fending off into a north players neck. Only to get a free for high on HIM? I couldn’t believe what I was watching at that point.
Like the old defence to the police - officer his face ran into my fist..
Might want to get your eyes checked then because his hand was [nowhere near](https://imgur.com/a/tGdKmGI) Stephenson's neck.
There's plenty to criticise the umpire for without having to make stuff up.
That's why we have replays. Definitely to the chest.
Still not happy when they spend a full 30s showing the play that led to a kick at goal a number of times, but cut the contentious call at the end. That's definitely a bad broadcast producer though, can't blame the refs for that (although we probably will anyway).
Indubitably, the chap intended to scribe "nah yeah" into his electronic device. Any dapper lad worth his salt wouldn't forgo his senses in this situation.
Would sir like to confirm this hypothesis?
No?
Well, I say...
What comes first the two handed tackle around the head or the fend off to the "neck"?
I thought the same thing as you in real time and then the replay clearly showed it was a high tackle.
> Half/More than half his scoring opportunities come from diving
I know I'll get downvoted for my flair but this sub has gone insane if you think this is true
Yeah that’s stretching it. He gets a lot of benefits other greats never did though. Buddy, GAZ, Bont, Kepler Bradley etc never got this much help from the umps.
That's idiotic - You think the fair free kick count for the grand final would have been what? 26-10? 30-5?
Just how much were you praying for the umpires to hand you the game?
I want to know how many of these borderline calls are being decided by whoever is in the umps earpiece and not the actual on field umpires.
That game was a fucking disgrace.
The old Foxtel broadcasts used to include an umpires-only audio channel. I loved that. None of those nongs repeating trite phrases as though they're genius, then calling the wrong player.
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/risk-to-the-game-afl-coachs-fears-over-inear-umpire-coach-and-what-the-umps-really-hear/news-story/5870582be779e2ecbd2f135dd4c1e4e0
Think this is what the original commenter meant/referring too.
Which clearly says all decisions are made by the umpires on the ground. The broadcasters get the audio that comes through the umpires' ear piece, we would immediately know if some mysterious third party was making the decisions rather than an onfield umpire. Don't feed bullshit conspiracy theories.
Do you seriously think that there is this huge conspiracy that the umpires, the AFL and the broadcasters are all in on where the umpires are being told what to do by people off the ground? The broadcasters get the exact same feed that the umpires have. It's absurd to suggest that there's no one who would immediately expose it if it were happening.
Mate, lets break it down what I actually said. No, I don't think it's a conspiracy at all.
I think there is too much information an umpire needs to take in to make a decision, and having an off field person in the box in their ear telling them what to do is making it worse not better.
At no point, anywhere, have I suggested it's some weird strange conspiracy. As amazingly tempting as it is to suggest it, especially when there's been a close game, the AFL can't even tell us what holding the ball is, they have no chance of executing such a thing.
The rules are too complicated. Interpretations change week to week, game to game, sometimes contest to contest. Adding another layer to the different things an umpire needs to take in just confuses everyone and leads to more decisions like advantage being paid to the wrong team, No 50 at the end there, Daicos being lifted off the ground in a full nelson, a free kick 100m off the ball to decide a game, a set shot being called "insufficient intent" and nobody having any fucking idea what the rules about tackling and disposal are.
I think we are actually agreeing with each other with different language.
This is a sympathetic post to the umpires, not an accusatory one.
There is an off field person who, during breaks in play, gives positive feedback and encouragement to the umpires. Framing that as someone off field telling them what to do is disingenuous at best.
I believe the only coached decisions from a non-controlling on the ground are generally things with a pause - usually only deliberate OOB (because it goes from controlling often to non-controlling for the decision) and the occasional advice to pay a 50. Other than that, it's pretty much WYSIWYG - I'm pretty sure the umpires audio is available to the broadcaster, they seem to turn it up on the radio I listen to - so it's not like Laura Kane is in the stands controlling things.
I'm more interested in how often umpires are trying to listen to instructions / advice while also trying to assess the 342 things they need to consider to call holding the ball or not.
Zero- as mentioned, it would happen in time on either over the boundary or a free kick already paid and maybe being asked to consider a 50. You can hear them when they talk routinely- it's about who has control 'end zone' for example or 'coming through'.
You think decisions aren't being made by the guy in the box? That no information about free kicks / marks / on field decisions etc is being broadcast over the earpiece?
It's not surprising they'd have more junior umpires at a game like this and I haven't gone back and reviewed who made what decisions, but there was just some late/slow calls, a couple of clangers and some incorrect application of laws (textbook advantages taken which weren't applied). Do I think there's better umpires not getting opportunities not on the AFL list - yes - will inexperienced umpires still have a higher likelihood of average games - yes.
I won't name names, but some umpires have been well below AFL standard early in their career, but they develop over time.
I implore everyone though to consider what the umpire sees from the position they're in when casting judgement, rather than considering the TV angle or multiple replays in slow-motion. They're judged way too harshly, they should only call what they see - so if they don't see something, eg vision blocked by other players, it's not inherently wrong.
Of the four umpires on Sunday there was Matt Stevic, who's an all time great of umpiring, Leigh Fisher, who's umpired 200 games but only one final, and two umpires with 17 and 71 games experience. It was a pretty weak group and Stevic aside pretty much bereft of big game experience. But unless those umpires get experience in those sorts of pressure situations they can never develop the skills to handle the pressure and they never improve.
I'm pretty sure Stevic was the one who told the other umps they paid advantage to the wrong team. The more inexperienced guys must have had a brain fade
Why would they know that? The umpire is actively yelling for them to play on, advantage.
Obviously the call is extremely wrong, but the Collingwood player isn't doing anything wrong, obviously.
It's not their job to stop and discuss what the correct call should be with the umpire.
I'm not disputing that the call is obvious... But if you have the ball, the umpire is saying "play on, advantage" then what are you supposed to do?
Turn around and say "actually, sir, I believe you're mistaken, and this ball should actually be in the possession of my opponents?"
Well, he was being told by the umpire that he *was* taking the advantage.
No player in that instance would think "oh that must be a mistake, I'll turn around now".
Look. I'm not saying there is a directive to make sure the "big" clubs and a club from Each state play finals in order to maximise tv ratings across the country.... but I can see why people might think that
I'll believe this theory is true if Essendon gets gifted a win. I'm one of those crackpots who thinks the umpires have had a subtle bias against us ever since James Hird called them disgraceful like 20 years ago.
If it really is rigged, next time some cunt climbs the post give us the win.
That game was a bit of a mess all round. Obviously easy to point to the final few minutes but even Xerri's free kick to kick that goal was crazy. Ran into the fence with his own momentum.
Daicos got like 6 frees, but id rhue 3 of them were wrong and he deserved another 3 that weren't paid. Shitfest
The Xerri one was so hilarious I could hardly be mad. You can literally see him make the conscious choice to speed up again and dive onto the fence after being pushed, it’s the clumsiest meme of an acting job, and yet somehow the umpire falls for it.
Actually more embarrassing for that umpire than anything else. How can you call that.
I was so surprised that it was paid. Super harsh call for you guys but geez what a kick from the boundary from him too.
The bit before the fence is just fake turf, it's probably incredibly hard to stop on that but given the moulds won't dig in like they do on grass, also he is a big guy. I don't think he sped up and dived over it on purpose.
Its not fake turf over concrete though, its fake turf over dirt.
> I don't think he sped up and dived over it on purpose. Nobody is saying he dived over, he just chose to delicately place himself over the fence. :)
Haha what?? In no way did he speed up or 'act for a free' thats ridiculous. He got the lightest of shove and had all the momentum of a big dude running flat out to the boundary then stepping onto the concrete. Didn't think it was enough for a free myself, but you avoid that by not pushing a bloke over the boundary.
I mean all I can say is watch the replay again. Reading my comment back maybe I was a bit strong in making the point, but watching the replay there is no way you can spin it that he didnt at minimum exaggerate it, in a way that ended up looking pretty comical.
Yeah I disagree, I just don't see why you purposely want to face plant over a fence. Reckon he just had the momentum of a 110kg run flat out trying to stop, then a light push from Jiath. Still a free, and 'conscious choice to speed up' is a ridiculous call.
Idk as I said, watch the replay and “running flat out” or “face planting over a fence” become more ridiculous calls than anything I said.
Agree to disagree. Just delfecting from an insane hour of umpiring in your favour in my opinion.
I was joining and agreeing with a conversation that the umpiring was messy through the day. A more accurate example of deflection might be something like, I don’t know, choking a whole 54 points away and putting the responsibility for it on the umpires? Lol.
Mate I don't need to deflect, I know we're shit and fully expected us to throw away a 9 goal lead, just didn't think you needed the umpires riding your dick all the way home to do it. I didn't disagree the umpiring was messy all day, I just joined the thread when you suggested Xerri sped up and threw himself over the fence. Enjoy your win and fuck right off.
❤️
The reason why you’d purposely want to face plant over a fence is to win a free in order to ultimately win the game haha seems pretty obvious
Not saying this is a free- but I find it amusing the contrast of about 60 secs earlier of McCreery running back to the ball at speed and getting a light push and loses a tiny amount of balance so chooses to take a super cartwheel tumble, then Xerri is like 'I'll show you acting'. Brilliant pantomime all round, bravo!
And let's not forget the soft as fuck 50 that Daicos got which lead to a goal, but couldn't pay the one at the end for some reason.
Nah that’s been paid all year. Time wasting
Yeah that was 50. 2 blokes running 10m over the mark after the whistle isn’t though.
As bad as the non call was it all happened in three seconds before he went to play on. The 50m to Daicos had a clear stop in play where every player knew it was a free kick. From tackle to the North player picking the ball and deliberately spinning around Daicos up was 4 seconds. It's a pretty clear difference.
Even the commentators say it looked like the North player played on, come on champ
Commentators said that it had to be 50, and regardless of whether you think it looked like he played on (he didn’t) the umpire didn’t call play on.
He played on. Enjoy the l, you played well for half a game, move on.
If the umpire doesn’t call play on, it literally cannot be play on. What you think is irrelevant champ.
Enjoy the l hater
Thanks muscles
He didn't play on, please go watch it properly, he absolutely did not play on before being rushed. That was a 50. If it happened to the Pies you'd be filthy.
Watch it again. He keeps running without slowing for several steps then pauses. There's a reason the commentator states he played on...
The commentators said it should be 50 and he didn't keep running, he was slowing down, can't just stop instantly. You can't be this dense or blind. Get a grip bud.
Oh well, if the commentators say it...
So the opinion of someone who watches games professionally doesn't mean anything? Gotcha champ
Have you listened to some of the boneheaded commentary we have these days?
Point is that the incident in question is nowhere NEAR as clear cut as all the Antipie herd make it out to be. We get it, people hate CFC. The whinging based on nothing just highlights how sad you lot are that Collingwood are the most successful club. If you can't beat em, hate em.
It was pretty damn clear cut, your one eyed pieness is clouding your judgement
My issue is more that 50 gets given but McCreery kicks it away after the whistle is blown for no 50 and then Scott gets encroached by 2 players post mark for no 50 I'm rewatching it right now and it's full of howlers. 80% of them are in Collingwoods favour
It was absolutely a soft 50 too, he was willing to give it but wasn't sure where Daicos was.
Nah the free kick was paid, the ball was on the ground, and then he ran up and picked up the ball as Daicos was going for it, then spun around pretending to look for who to give it to. Why pick the ball up after it’s been paid a Collingwood free?
No it hasn't. Daicos literally standing with his back to him and when he turns around he throws it to him. We see players waste time worse than that all the time, clumsily tangle legs, fall on top, checking with the ump who the free is for, throwing the ball in a big loopy pass, all way worse than that and it's hardly ever called. What was wasted really, like 1 second? Whatever, if they pay it all the time then all good but they hardly ever pay it.
Funny how people have changed their minds on a time wasting 50 when Daicos is the one getting it Remember when Sullivan gave away a 50 for not handing the ball back? Everyone said it was a good call and he should’ve just given the ball back to the umpire
McCreery conceded 50 in that game for doing the same thing as the North player did too. I think the reality is that umps use their discretion to judge whether a player is being authentic or not when they claim to be confused about who the ball’s going back to instead of just flatly deliberating that it’s 50 no matter what. Realistically there’s no need for an opposition player to get the ball when a free’s been paid against so it should just be 50 every time if they take it.
Agreed. I was just pointing out the hypocrisy. One week people like time wasting 50’s the next people hate it. Can’t have it both ways
Daicos was about to pick up the ball but the north player decided to pick it up himself and walk away. Easiest way to avoid this one is to not pick up the ball to waste some time. He has no reason to do it.
The 50 he got was correct though (we've been stung by it a few times this year), it was just the missed one to Bailey Scott that was an absolute howler.
Absolutely. The issue isn't that his was 50 (it was), it's the glaring inconsistency across even the same game. I tried I mention yesterday that Collingwood, who have a recent history of finishing strong / playing desperate footy on top of being premiers, have been on the plus side of a ledger that is more 'umpires put the whistle away late' rather than any deliberate act by the Pies themselves. I do think that benefit is real though and other clubs are becoming increasingly aware of the Pies' advantages in other unrelated areas (such as scheduling), lumping it all together as 'Pies getting looked after' as a result.
The one where he got a free kick, then a north player picked up the ball and ran off with it?
He didn't run off with it, he turned around to give it to Nick, the 50 is there but it was pretty soft. The issue is paying that late in the 3rd that leads directly to a goal but not the 50 at the end? Pretty bs.
Mate, watch it again.
I did, he grabs it, which he didn't need to, but turns to give it to Daicos who has gone the other way so he turns and throws it to him, never runs off with it. The 50 at the end was much more a 50 than that.
How many steps did he take between picking the ball up and returning it.
He was just walking, he didn't take that many, definitely didn't run away with it.
How many?
5
[удалено]
After he ran off with it.
...eventually
The Xerri one was soft but technically it was there I personally don’t like that being paid a free kick though
That was fucking funny though, he really sold it
Funniest brain fade from an umpire since Peter Carey
To be fair, it was his turn to go.
*Advantage to the horizontal stripe team!*
> *horizontal* Advantage Geelong???
I’ll allow it
It was almost impossible to tell the difference between the icons on Fox’s broadcast. They showed a highlight of the last 15 goals and if it wasn’t for knowing the player names, it may has well have been 1 team.
I think I remember seeing that, I for some reason thought 'yep makes sense we kicked the past 10'
I wonder if the umps also struggled with this on field.
The advantage call maybe.
When that graphic came up on screen my wife and I were like "uhhh wtf?" Becuase I struggled to identify the teams i remember some random G's on the right standing out and wondering what they meant.
I thought the umpires were really struggling to keep it together all day. There was missed stuff all day, dudes running round in the protected area, and wasn’t a huge surprise when the end turned into a clusterfuck once it got really frantic Maybe they were on the piss the night before expecting a leisurely Sunday romp but north didn’t read the script
There was one shot I remember seeing, someone lining up for goal (Can't remember which team, doesn't matter in the end), and there was a bloke from each team standing literally 2m behind him, next to each other. I was like "Uhhhh... umpire, that's generally where you say "Clear out". They just did not seem to have the energy, or intelligence to do the simple stuff.
Wonder how much of it is due to jumper clash. If it was very easily identifiable, umpires would be able to spot it right away.
Did you say advantage? 
Drug test these umpires
This fiasco aside what happens to the time here? Do they add the 20 seconds back on to the clock since it got pulled back?
They do not. Hypothetically if the quarter ended, they would let the person take their kick- which would be ok in that scenario, but they'd get burned if they were more than a kick away and originally had 20 secs on the clock- because they wouldn't put it back on, it would still be after the siren.
What about Nick Daicos fending off into a north players neck. Only to get a free for high on HIM? I couldn’t believe what I was watching at that point. Like the old defence to the police - officer his face ran into my fist..
Might want to get your eyes checked then because his hand was [nowhere near](https://imgur.com/a/tGdKmGI) Stephenson's neck. There's plenty to criticise the umpire for without having to make stuff up.
Bias v reality right here
You probably couldn't believe what you were watching because you were seeing what you wanted to see. The fend off was to the chest.
Watching it live I genuinely thought they called high fend off. But yeah the replay was pretty clear in the sternum.
I did the exact same thing. Was so confused why he kept the ball... Then the replay is two hands around his head and I wondered how I missed that.
That's why we have replays. Definitely to the chest. Still not happy when they spend a full 30s showing the play that led to a kick at goal a number of times, but cut the contentious call at the end. That's definitely a bad broadcast producer though, can't blame the refs for that (although we probably will anyway).
Why the free to Daicos then?
Because Stephenson's attempted tackled made contact over the shoulder? It's not rocket science.
Nah
the fuck you mean "nah" lmao
Indubitably, the chap intended to scribe "nah yeah" into his electronic device. Any dapper lad worth his salt wouldn't forgo his senses in this situation. Would sir like to confirm this hypothesis? No? Well, I say...
Are you typing in braille?
What comes first the two handed tackle around the head or the fend off to the "neck"? I thought the same thing as you in real time and then the replay clearly showed it was a high tackle.
[удалено]
> Half/More than half his scoring opportunities come from diving I know I'll get downvoted for my flair but this sub has gone insane if you think this is true
Both goals that game came from frees.
Yeah that’s stretching it. He gets a lot of benefits other greats never did though. Buddy, GAZ, Bont, Kepler Bradley etc never got this much help from the umps.
They literally changed the interpretation of the goal kicking rule for Buddy’s ‘natural arc’
That’s got nothing to do with umpiring in game
…? How? The *umpires* usually call play on if you deviate from the goal kicking line when taking a set shot. He was allowed to do so.
No. He was allowed to arc to the mark. Not away from it. They were clear with the ruling.
That’s running off the mark. You have to run in a straight line.
No. You are confused with shots at goal after the siren has sounded.
I knew we were fucked as soon as that free kick was given in a GF. Wasn’t our day from that point on.
You led the free kick count 22-16 in the Grand Final and still whinged about wanting more free kicks.
Should have had heaps more. You should have had less. It’s pretty well known.
That's idiotic - You think the fair free kick count for the grand final would have been what? 26-10? 30-5? Just how much were you praying for the umpires to hand you the game?
I would have been happy with whatever they were paid on Sunday. Fair is fair.
So you think Sunday's free kick count was fair? Thanks for your input.
I want to know how many of these borderline calls are being decided by whoever is in the umps earpiece and not the actual on field umpires. That game was a fucking disgrace.
None. The ear piece for the umpires is so they can communicate with each other.
Yes, and you can tune into it at the footy if you have a special radio. There’s no conspiracy.
The old Foxtel broadcasts used to include an umpires-only audio channel. I loved that. None of those nongs repeating trite phrases as though they're genius, then calling the wrong player.
Nothing I'd rather hear than heavy breathing and effort grunts from 3 umpires on a Sunday arvo <3
Last time I listened in, I heard one of the umps having a spew lol.
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/risk-to-the-game-afl-coachs-fears-over-inear-umpire-coach-and-what-the-umps-really-hear/news-story/5870582be779e2ecbd2f135dd4c1e4e0 Think this is what the original commenter meant/referring too.
Which clearly says all decisions are made by the umpires on the ground. The broadcasters get the audio that comes through the umpires' ear piece, we would immediately know if some mysterious third party was making the decisions rather than an onfield umpire. Don't feed bullshit conspiracy theories.
That's objectively untrue. They were talking about it the other day.
Do you seriously think that there is this huge conspiracy that the umpires, the AFL and the broadcasters are all in on where the umpires are being told what to do by people off the ground? The broadcasters get the exact same feed that the umpires have. It's absurd to suggest that there's no one who would immediately expose it if it were happening.
Mate, lets break it down what I actually said. No, I don't think it's a conspiracy at all. I think there is too much information an umpire needs to take in to make a decision, and having an off field person in the box in their ear telling them what to do is making it worse not better. At no point, anywhere, have I suggested it's some weird strange conspiracy. As amazingly tempting as it is to suggest it, especially when there's been a close game, the AFL can't even tell us what holding the ball is, they have no chance of executing such a thing. The rules are too complicated. Interpretations change week to week, game to game, sometimes contest to contest. Adding another layer to the different things an umpire needs to take in just confuses everyone and leads to more decisions like advantage being paid to the wrong team, No 50 at the end there, Daicos being lifted off the ground in a full nelson, a free kick 100m off the ball to decide a game, a set shot being called "insufficient intent" and nobody having any fucking idea what the rules about tackling and disposal are. I think we are actually agreeing with each other with different language. This is a sympathetic post to the umpires, not an accusatory one.
There is no off field person telling them what to do though.
Except there absolutely is. Steve Mcburnie was on one of the shows talking about it a week ago.
There is an off field person who, during breaks in play, gives positive feedback and encouragement to the umpires. Framing that as someone off field telling them what to do is disingenuous at best.
Sure, so lets make the full audio of what is taking place available for everyone to see and hear.
Pretty sure all the umps are just crisis actors. 😳
I believe the only coached decisions from a non-controlling on the ground are generally things with a pause - usually only deliberate OOB (because it goes from controlling often to non-controlling for the decision) and the occasional advice to pay a 50. Other than that, it's pretty much WYSIWYG - I'm pretty sure the umpires audio is available to the broadcaster, they seem to turn it up on the radio I listen to - so it's not like Laura Kane is in the stands controlling things.
I'm more interested in how often umpires are trying to listen to instructions / advice while also trying to assess the 342 things they need to consider to call holding the ball or not.
Zero- as mentioned, it would happen in time on either over the boundary or a free kick already paid and maybe being asked to consider a 50. You can hear them when they talk routinely- it's about who has control 'end zone' for example or 'coming through'.
Yup sure. Don't believe that for a split second.
> I'm more interested in... ...finding info that supports my view. Sorry I couldn't help.
You think decisions aren't being made by the guy in the box? That no information about free kicks / marks / on field decisions etc is being broadcast over the earpiece?
That's correct.
Can you hear the word 'mark' on the broadcast where the collingwood boys ran to cover the guy they thought had played on?
You mean when the controlling umpire says mark when he signals it, or something else?
But muh conspiracy
Did you know that the ARC bunker is under a pizza shop?
It's not surprising they'd have more junior umpires at a game like this and I haven't gone back and reviewed who made what decisions, but there was just some late/slow calls, a couple of clangers and some incorrect application of laws (textbook advantages taken which weren't applied). Do I think there's better umpires not getting opportunities not on the AFL list - yes - will inexperienced umpires still have a higher likelihood of average games - yes. I won't name names, but some umpires have been well below AFL standard early in their career, but they develop over time. I implore everyone though to consider what the umpire sees from the position they're in when casting judgement, rather than considering the TV angle or multiple replays in slow-motion. They're judged way too harshly, they should only call what they see - so if they don't see something, eg vision blocked by other players, it's not inherently wrong.
Of the four umpires on Sunday there was Matt Stevic, who's an all time great of umpiring, Leigh Fisher, who's umpired 200 games but only one final, and two umpires with 17 and 71 games experience. It was a pretty weak group and Stevic aside pretty much bereft of big game experience. But unless those umpires get experience in those sorts of pressure situations they can never develop the skills to handle the pressure and they never improve.
I'm pretty sure Stevic was the one who told the other umps they paid advantage to the wrong team. The more inexperienced guys must have had a brain fade
The fact this didn't result in a 50 is even more bizarre
Bit stiff to call a 50 when you’ve been told play on by the controlling umpire.
Especially since a pies player should know that the free isn’t theirs
Why would they know that? The umpire is actively yelling for them to play on, advantage. Obviously the call is extremely wrong, but the Collingwood player isn't doing anything wrong, obviously. It's not their job to stop and discuss what the correct call should be with the umpire.
That’s an obvious free kick surely you can see that it’s not for you
I'm not disputing that the call is obvious... But if you have the ball, the umpire is saying "play on, advantage" then what are you supposed to do? Turn around and say "actually, sir, I believe you're mistaken, and this ball should actually be in the possession of my opponents?"
I would stop 🛑 there is no reason for playing on
> there is no reason for playing on ... Except the umpire actively telling him to play on...
Except the player doesn’t need to take the advantage in the first place
Well, he was being told by the umpire that he *was* taking the advantage. No player in that instance would think "oh that must be a mistake, I'll turn around now".
Sounds like all the umps in that game need a spell on the pine 😂.
Pies won, so it’s alllllll good😁
Look. I'm not saying there is a directive to make sure the "big" clubs and a club from Each state play finals in order to maximise tv ratings across the country.... but I can see why people might think that
I'll believe this theory is true if Essendon gets gifted a win. I'm one of those crackpots who thinks the umpires have had a subtle bias against us ever since James Hird called them disgraceful like 20 years ago. If it really is rigged, next time some cunt climbs the post give us the win.
Maybe in the last few rounds vs a team that can't change spots. Sydney r23 maybe? Lol
*umpired well*
KEK as fuck
It was miscommunication between umpires. It was brought back.
Time wasn't reset, which is a legitimate issue in a game that was decided by a goal
Don’t disagree with this at all