The awful truth about AFL maggots

[saynta]

Okay, I thought they were corrupt but it turns out that they are merely incompetent fools.

"The awful truth about AFL umpires: how often do the umps get it wrong?

We’ve all seen crook AFL umpiring decisions, but how often do the umps really get it wrong? The results of a study into the calls that change the game we love will shock you.
Susie O’Brien and Tom Wenn, Sunday Herald Sun
Subscriber only
|
July 27, 2019 5:23pm
The AFL has admitted an umpire erred in a decision that sealed the game for Brisbane in the clash between the Lions and North Melbourne last weekend. Picture: 7AFL


"Footy fans have long suspected it, but research has now proven that AFL umpires get one in every five decisions wrong.

Close matches and umpire inexperience are the most likely cause of errant whistleblowing.

But home ground advantage, what quarter of the game it is and crowd size did not affect decision-making performance.

A study of 8000 decisions analysed by a panel of expert umpires found they got it wrong in 21.8 per cent of cases.

Highly experienced umpires had an error rate nearly 6 per cent better than those who had not taken the field as often.

The Deakin University research found games where the margins were smaller have an umpiring error rate of 22.7 per cent.

Out of the 8001 decisions looked at 6260 were found to be correct, 1162 missed and 579 unwarranted.al.

Lead author Sean Corrigan said on average umpires made 40 decisions a match, of which 32 were right, six missed and three unwarranted.

“As the score differential increases, umpire’s decision-making accuracy improves,” Mr Corrigan said.

He said umpires could have a bias towards “potentially preventing a team from a scoring opportunity by avoiding making decisions that could impact the scoreboard”.

“Decision-making performance improved as the level of experience attained by the umpire increased, with more missed decisions being made by umpires of low experience and less incorrect decisions being made by highly experienced umpires.

“While the number of decisions made was reduced in the final quarter and quarter segment of matches, there were no changes in umpire’s decision-making accuracy across matches.”

Researchers also found umpires tended to make more missed and less unwarranted decisions that favour the defending team in the backline field of play.

The accuracy of the 8001 decisions was assessed by a panel of four umpires who analysed all decisions from the 2014 home and away season made by 32 umpires.

The research was published in the Journal of science in Medicine and Sport.

Mr Corrigan also presented the findings to the AFL Umpiring Department, where he worked as a strength and conditioning coach until 2016.



“The increased error rate of inexperienced umpires, caused by a larger number of missed decisions, may be attenuated by teaming inexperienced umpires with those of a high level of elite experience as they miss less decisions,” Mr Corrigan said."

susan.obrien@news.com.au



Now, if I had made a 25% error rate in my decisions, I would have been fired or worse.

[The_Dud]

Don’t fall for it Saynta, the AFL are just trying to throw us off the scent, Deakin are clearly in on it too, stay woke!

[saynta]

Are there you are dud one. Knew you wouldn't be far away. Sticking up for your corrupt incompetent poorly trained and mostly brain dead skinny little maggot mates.

[barneyboyz]

"Footy fans have long suspected it, but research has now proven that AFL umpires get one in every five decisions wrong".

My question is, of the decisions that they don't make, how many should they have?

The rules are interpreted differently from week to week, month to month...and so on, so the decisions which they do make are frustrating enough, but as mentioned (many times), it's the ones they don't make which boil my guts

[The_Dud]

Are there you are dud one. Knew you wouldn't be far away. Sticking up for your corrupt incompetent poorly trained and mostly brain dead skinny little maggot mates.

Was I sticking up for them...

[desertsaint]

the reality is much worse - this is simply the error margin of paid free kicks. add in those they miss. i would hazard a very conservative guess that they miss out 10 incorrectly every game. so basically 19 errors per game. 5 every quarter.
19 errors a game of 50 (40 paid, 10 missed) is basically a 40% miss ratio.
that is simply awful.
but unfortunately no surprise.

[desertsaint]

now lets compare with premier league referees...

"According to the PGMO (Professional Game Match Officials) a Premier League referee makes around 245 decisions per game, three times more than an average player touches the ball over 90 minutes. That's one decision every 22 seconds.

Approximately 45 of these decisions are technical - whether goal-kicks, corners or throw-ins - leaving around 200 decisions to judging physical contact and disciplinary actions.

Of those 200, around 35 are visible decisions where an action is taken (fouls, restarts), and 165 are non-visible, where play is allowed to continue.

In total, refs make around five errors per game, meaning they are right 98 per cent of the time."

so 98% versus 60% afl correct.
gobsmackingly awful.

[Joffa Burns]

Okay, I thought they were corrupt but it turns out that they are merely incompetent fools.

Well that didn’t last long

Are there you are dud one. Knew you wouldn't be far away. Sticking up for your corrupt incompetent poorly trained and mostly brain dead skinny little maggot mates.

[Joffa Burns]

Don’t fall for it Saynta, the AFL are just trying to throw us off the scent, Deakin are clearly in on it too, stay woke!

Curly was getting to close to the truth, so they have thrown this one out there.

Keep an eye on Curly, if he goes missing we’ll know it Gil and co.

[asiu]

Now, if I had made a 25% error rate in my decisions, I would have been fired or worse.

promoted ?

[skeptic]

Is there any reference to St.Kilda being the club that was cheated the most

[freely]

"Footy fans have long suspected it, but research has now proven that AFL umpires get one in every five decisions wrong".

My question is, of the decisions that they don't make, how many should they have?

The rules are interpreted differently from week to week, month to month...and so on, so the decisions which they do make are frustrating enough, but as mentioned (many times), it's the ones they don't make which boil my guts

Lead author Sean Corrigan said on average umpires made 40 decisions a match, of which 32 were right, six missed and three unwarranted.

[freely]

now lets compare with premier league referees...

"According to the PGMO (Professional Game Match Officials) a Premier League referee makes around 245 decisions per game, three times more than an average player touches the ball over 90 minutes. That's one decision every 22 seconds.

Approximately 45 of these decisions are technical - whether goal-kicks, corners or throw-ins - leaving around 200 decisions to judging physical contact and disciplinary actions.

Of those 200, around 35 are visible decisions where an action is taken (fouls, restarts), and 165 are non-visible, where play is allowed to continue.

In total, refs make around five errors per game, meaning they are right 98 per cent of the time."

so 98% versus 60% afl correct.
gobsmackingly awful.

The premier League doesn't change the rules every season.

[barneyboyz]

"Footy fans have long suspected it, but research has now proven that AFL umpires get one in every five decisions wrong".

My question is, of the decisions that they don't make, how many should they have?

The rules are interpreted differently from week to week, month to month...and so on, so the decisions which they do make are frustrating enough, but as mentioned (many times), it's the ones they don't make which boil my guts

Lead author Sean Corrigan said on average umpires made 40 decisions a match, of which 32 were right, six missed and three unwarranted.

Thanks Freely.

So, by that the three unwarranted (in the oppo's forward line) X the six missed (in our forward line) probably explains it then

[saynta]

Okay, I thought they were corrupt but it turns out that they are merely incompetent fools.

Well that didn’t last long

Are there you are dud one. Knew you wouldn't be far away. Sticking up for your corrupt incompetent poorly trained and mostly brain dead skinny little maggot mates.

Give it up Joffa. The first sentence was a joke.

[st.byron]

now lets compare with premier league referees...

"According to the PGMO (Professional Game Match Officials) a Premier League referee makes around 245 decisions per game, three times more than an average player touches the ball over 90 minutes. That's one decision every 22 seconds.

Approximately 45 of these decisions are technical - whether goal-kicks, corners or throw-ins - leaving around 200 decisions to judging physical contact and disciplinary actions.

Of those 200, around 35 are visible decisions where an action is taken (fouls, restarts), and 165 are non-visible, where play is allowed to continue.

In total, refs make around five errors per game, meaning they are right 98 per cent of the time."

so 98% versus 60% afl correct.
gobsmackingly awful.

The premier League doesn't change the rules every season.

Exactly. Silly comparison. Totally different games. The report just goes to show how hard a job it is. Making split second decisions in real time, when we have the benefit of countless slo-mo replays. If full time umps get it wrong this often, the question is how to improve the situation. Easy peasy to call them brain dead or whatever. Looks like a very hard job to me.

[saynta]

now lets compare with premier league referees...

"According to the PGMO (Professional Game Match Officials) a Premier League referee makes around 245 decisions per game, three times more than an average player touches the ball over 90 minutes. That's one decision every 22 seconds.

Approximately 45 of these decisions are technical - whether goal-kicks, corners or throw-ins - leaving around 200 decisions to judging physical contact and disciplinary actions.

Of those 200, around 35 are visible decisions where an action is taken (fouls, restarts), and 165 are non-visible, where play is allowed to continue.

In total, refs make around five errors per game, meaning they are right 98 per cent of the time."

so 98% versus 60% afl correct.
gobsmackingly awful.

The premier League doesn't change the rules every season.

Exactly. Silly comparison. Totally different games. The report just goes to show how hard a job it is. Making split second decisions in real time, when we have the benefit of countless slo-mo replays. If full time umps get it wrong this often, the question is how to improve the situation. Easy peasy to call them brain dead or whatever. Looks like a very hard job to me.

No. The report just shows up how incompetent or corrupt the present bunch are. IMHCO that is. "Peasy eh? Now that's a new word.

[CarlD]

So how does this all tie in to the team free kick differentials in the "Umpires pets" thread?

It would suggest that there is still more to it than the analysis referred to above indicates. Even suggesting that a team's skill level affects the free kick differential doesn't seem to necessarily explain it ie Gold Coast are reasonably high on the plus side.

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

We have been getting stuffed over for at least 4 decades IMO.

[saynta]

So how does this all tie in to the team free kick differentials in the "Umpires pets" thread?

It would suggest that there is still more to it than the analysis referred to above indicates. Even suggesting that a team's skill level affects the free kick differential doesn't seem to necessarily explain it ie Gold Coast are reasonably high on the plus side.

Good point. Part of it is incompetence but the free kick deferential is the corruption part of my argument. Been the same for years.

Gold Coast is owned and managed by the maggots employers. That might also have something to do with it.

Umpiring in the Saints game at the weekend was okay, not great, but okay.

Think the maggots might have spotted their saints supporting boss in the stands. I certainly did.

[The_Dud]

Okay, I thought they were corrupt but it turns out that they are merely incompetent fools.

Well that didn’t last long

Are there you are dud one. Knew you wouldn't be far away. Sticking up for your corrupt incompetent poorly trained and mostly brain dead skinny little maggot mates.

Give it up Joffa. The first sentence was a joke.

I think it’s a lot more than the first sentence!

[The_Dud]

So Saynta, the umpires in game are corrupt incompetent yadda yadda yadda, but the umpires reviewing the decisions for the study are 100% pure, competent, honest and trustworthy?

So hard to keep track!

[saynta]

So Saynta, the umpires in game are corrupt incompetent yadda yadda yadda, but the umpires reviewing the decisions for the study are 100% pure, competent, honest and trustworthy?

So hard to keep track!

Yadda, yadda, yadda yourself FFS. . Give it up dud one you are flogging a dead horse .

[The_Dud]

now lets compare with premier league referees...

"According to the PGMO (Professional Game Match Officials) a Premier League referee makes around 245 decisions per game, three times more than an average player touches the ball over 90 minutes. That's one decision every 22 seconds.

Approximately 45 of these decisions are technical - whether goal-kicks, corners or throw-ins - leaving around 200 decisions to judging physical contact and disciplinary actions.

Of those 200, around 35 are visible decisions where an action is taken (fouls, restarts), and 165 are non-visible, where play is allowed to continue.

In total, refs make around five errors per game, meaning they are right 98 per cent of the time."

so 98% versus 60% afl correct.
gobsmackingly awful.

The premier League doesn't change the rules every season.

Exactly. Silly comparison. Totally different games. The report just goes to show how hard a job it is. Making split second decisions in real time, when we have the benefit of countless slo-mo replays. If full time umps get it wrong this often, the question is how to improve the situation. Easy peasy to call them brain dead or whatever. Looks like a very hard job to me.

Yep, whinging posters are trying to ignore the fact these split second decisions were made live, and this study reviewed them in hindsight with countless camera angles and slow mo replays, and even after all that it took 4 people to reach a conclusion.

But sooks gotta sook!

[The_Dud]

So Saynta, the umpires in game are corrupt incompetent yadda yadda yadda, but the umpires reviewing the decisions for the study are 100% pure, competent, honest and trustworthy?

So hard to keep track!

Yadda, yadda, yadda yourself FFS. . Give it up dud one you are flogging a dead horse .

I’m not one of the posters starting thread after thread about the umpires.

So who’s really flogging what?

P.s. good job avoiding the question.