Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
desertsaint wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jul 2019 3:11pm
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.
Sounds like you don’t understand the much larger pressures of being a premier league ref, nor the complexities in soccer. 245 decisions every game. Deciding what is a foul and what isn’t is as fine a line in soccer as in football. The referees are heavily criticised in the media and face death threats from fans. They are under the microscope a lot more than ours.
We make excuses for our umps. And nowhere have i called them brain dead. They are just awful at their job. I agree we need to help them improve. That means ample time to learn, reflect, train, etc - which means proper full time status. Having part timers at the highest level is simply not good enough.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
barneyboyz wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jul 2019 2:16pm
"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.
If something is missed, how can it be included as a decision?
desertsaint wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jul 2019 3:11pm
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.
Do you think there just happens to be a bunch of incompetent people doing the job at the moment and if a completely new cohort of umpires were recruited and trained from scratch, the results would change?
They’re such obvious targets for abuse that the difficulty of their job in a super fast contact sport is generally overlooked.
desertsaint wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jul 2019 3:11pm
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.
Sounds like you don’t understand the much larger pressures of being a premier league ref, nor the complexities in soccer. 245 decisions every game. Deciding what is a foul and what isn’t is as fine a line in soccer as in football. The referees are heavily criticised in the media and face death threats from fans. They are under the microscope a lot more than ours.
We make excuses for our umps. And nowhere have i called them brain dead. They are just awful at their job. I agree we need to help them improve. That means ample time to learn, reflect, train, etc - which means proper full time status. Having part timers at the highest level is simply not good enough.
Agree you didn’t call them brain dead. It does happen quite often though. Agree Premier League is higher profile, but that doesn’t necessarily equate to a higher pressure job. Soccer is not as mechanically complex a sport. No use of the hands or arms in contact with the ball except in controlling it above the elbow. No full body tackling. No marking. No full body fighting for the ball on the ground, standing up and aerially. Nowhere near as fast....one ref for soccer, three for AFL, 33% shorter game time on a field 60 or 70 metres shorter and significantly narrower, so less demanding on fitness and concentration. Soccer players can back up after three days. Impossible for AFL.
If the umps are collectively awful at their job, that’s a systemic problem in the organisation of the game. It doesn’t make sense that we happen to have a bunch of incompetents because as long as I’ve been watching footy, there are people making the same claim. It’s a bloody hard job, it’s super fast split second decision making and the AFL keep changing the rule interpretations. They need more training perhaps. Something outside the box like reflex training or mental agility training....I don’t know the answer....but people have been umpire bashing for ages and it changes nothing....it appears what needs to change is their training and the way the game is governed.
desertsaint wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jul 2019 3:11pm
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.
Do you think there just happens to be a bunch of incompetent people doing the job at the moment and if a completely new cohort of umpires were recruited and trained from scratch, the results would change?
They’re such obvious targets for abuse that the difficulty of their job in a super fast contact sport is generally overlooked.
Agree. I don't think you can compare AFL to Premier League for this purpose. AFL much more a contact sport, rules keep changing and many are very difficult to adjudicate. I think the umpires do a pretty good job, 4 out of 5 is pretty good. I would be interested in the number of errors made by players over the same period, bet the error rate is higher. They are only human.
desertsaint wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jul 2019 3:11pm
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.
9 rules changes brought in in 2019 season alone.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
desertsaint wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jul 2019 3:11pm
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.
Do you think there just happens to be a bunch of incompetent people doing the job at the moment .
Yes, Spot on but you left out the obvious, to me anyway, of the corruption factor.
Why should a team like the filth have a 130 free kick advantage over the saints against their opponents ? Answer me that. You wont because you can't.
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jul 2019 5:40pm
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.
However you are a regular defender of the maggots in the threads. So even in review you are regularly getting it wrong. Whip, dead horse, flogging.
desertsaint wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jul 2019 3:11pm
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.
Do you think there just happens to be a bunch of incompetent people doing the job at the moment .
Yes, Spot on but you left out the obvious, to me anyway, of the corruption factor.
Why should a team like the filth have a 130 free kick advantage over the saints against their opponents ? Answer me that. You wont because you can't.
The possibility of corruption or deliberate favouritism is a different argument to competence. Agree with you that it’s possible that it happens. I’d be deeply shocked if there were any organised corruption coming from head office, but not so shocked if one umpire or another was prone to favour a particular team - even so I think it’s very isolated and not at all systemic.
Regarding Collingwood’s free kick ledger this season, different teams populate the top of the free kick differential ladder in different years. Here’s Collingwood’s free kicks for and against per game averages for 2005 - 2015. Swings and roundabouts. https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/attachme ... ng.140953/
Even that is probably more to do with West Coast’s home crowd advantage than any deliberate umpiring plot. One thing Richo did get right was the “noise of affirmation”.
