Umpires

[bigcarl]

They get a few wrong.

do they what!

[plugger66]

They get a few wrong.

do they what!

Yep 14%. 86% right. About 5 to 6 a game on average.

[rodgerfox]

i'd like a ruling on the holding the ball interpretation from my old sparring partner P66, wherever he is.

Must have gone to Perth for the game because he's been M.I.A ever since.

so what did you think of those holding the ball decisions against the guys making the play. is this a good rule and should the interpretation change?

No change drag it in and there is no prior opportunity paid. Must get it out straight away. They get a few wrong because of so many players around the ball. Swings and roundabouts in my opinion.

Serious question on this rule.....

If you drag it in, but no one is actually tackling you, can you still be pinged?

It's incredible the amount of times that a dude jumps on it, a pack forms with no one actually tackling the guy who pulled it in (generally they are just trying the hold ball in under the pack) but the guy gets pinged (ironically) for 'holding the ball'.

If the 'tackler' actually had to tackle the guy instead of just trying to pin the ball in the pack under him, there's a much bigger chance the player would actually be able to get the ball out.

[bigcarl]

They get a few wrong.

do they what!

Yep 14%. 86% right. About 5 to 6 a game on average.

i disagree in principle with a rule that penalises the guy putting his head and body on the line to try to get the ball.

a knowledgable commentator in gerard healy said this rule (or at least its interpretation) will be looked at over the off season and i believe him.

[St DAC]

a knowledgable commentator in gerard healy said this rule (or at least its interpretation) will be looked at over the off season and i believe him.

The rule itself is terrible, and if it is reviewed at season's end that would be a good thing, but the two paid against us were technically correct; a couple that should have been paid against Freo were missed. The umpires can only adjudicate to the rule; it's not like that rule is a state secret. All players should be aware of the pitfalls of diving on the pill in a pack situation.

[Animal Enclosure]

IMO there is a significant issues with the umpires interpretation of 'dragging it in'.

It now seems that simply taking hold of the ball while on your knees or diving on the ground to take possession of a loose ball is deemed to be 'dragging it in'.

It goes against the spirit of our game & the premise that the bloke who wants the ball more will be rewarded. Now it's 'the bloke who is 2nd to the ball but can tackle the more desperate player well enough to lock the ball in' is the one who benefits.

It happens to every club & one of the worst I have seen was against Freo on Sunday & we benefitted.

It comes down to the leadership of the umpires & the fact that they are being advised terribly. It continues to amaze me that Gieschen and Sawyers remain in charge.

[bigcarl]

It goes against the spirit of our game & the premise that the bloke who wants the ball more will be rewarded. Now it's 'the bloke who is 2nd to the ball but can tackle the more desperate player well enough to lock the ball in' is the one who benefits.

Exactly right. That is what i was trying to say, only you have put it better. It's a bad rule that must be looked at.

[Solar]

It goes against the spirit of our game & the premise that the bloke who wants the ball more will be rewarded. Now it's 'the bloke who is 2nd to the ball but can tackle the more desperate player well enough to lock the ball in' is the one who benefits.

Exactly right. That is what i was trying to say, only you have put it better. It's a bad rule that must be looked at.

agreed, during these incidents the "prior opportunity" is thrown out the window. Don't agree that most "pull it in". They dive on the ball and the tackle is so good they can't get it out. It takes out a skill of getting the hard ball that has been the basis of our game for 100+ years. More similar to galic football with tackling.... they want you to keep your feet and knock it out.... total change of our game.

Thought Kosi and stanley were a little stiff with some pushes and over the shoulders not paid. If it was roo they would have been paid.

[bigcarl]

They get a few wrong.

do they what!

Yep 14%. 86% right. About 5 to 6 a game on average.

that's about the percentage that you run at

often right, but not always.

[rodgerfox]

Don't agree that most "pull it in". They dive on the ball and the tackle is so good they can't get it out.

I'd argue that they actually very rarely even get tackled.

The merely get jumped on by 4 players making it impossible for the ball to come out. As Iposted above, most of the time when they get pinged for this, no one is actually even tackling them.
Which as is the case in most these moronic umpiring interpretations, is actually contradictory to what the AFL is actually trying to achieve.


A 'good tackle' these days is vastly different to what was a 'good tackle' in days gone by.

It's almost sad, in a way.

A 'good tackle' these days is to squash a guy who's 'pulled it in' so the ball can't come out, or to grab a guy by one arm.

Even legendary footy dudes like Leigh Matthews now say 'the perfect tackle' in reference to a guy grabbing another guy by one arm so he can't get rid of the ball.

It's a disgrace really.

[SainterK]

Don't agree that most "pull it in". They dive on the ball and the tackle is so good they can't get it out.

I'd argue that they actually very rarely even get tackled.

The merely get jumped on by 4 players making it impossible for the ball to come out. As Iposted above, most of the time when they get pinged for this, no one is actually even tackling them.
Which as is the case in most these moronic umpiring interpretations, is actually contradictory to what the AFL is actually trying to achieve.


A 'good tackle' these days is vastly different to what was a 'good tackle' in days gone by.

It's almost sad, in a way.

A 'good tackle' these days is to squash a guy who's 'pulled it in' so the ball can't come out, or to grab a guy by one arm.

Even legendary footy dudes like Leigh Matthews now say 'the perfect tackle' in reference to a guy grabbing another guy by one arm so he can't get rid of the ball.

It's a disgrace really.

Thank goodness for St Kilda players then....they know how to tackle.

[bigcarl]

that was a sensational tackle by raph and i'd like to see someone, anyone, nail ablett in a similar fashion early on next friday.

i'm upset about raph's injury. just as he was running into his very best form ... again. the poor bugga can't take a trick.

[stinger]

the rule which was a goodie in initiation a, s there were too many packs developing by players diving on the ball for defensive reasons and causing scrimmages , packs , ball-ups etc has become a farce!!

Now because of the penalty teams have worked out how to get further frees from it when opposition players actually "attack" the ball at ground level
and the original intention has been lost.
What we see now in such a situation where a player tries in an attacking vein to go for the pill when its on the ground... and puts his body on the line thereupon , the opposition tries desperately to come in on the grouter to milk a free by forcing him to hold it in .....which now becomes the maligned defensive tactic that the rule was brought in to overcome .........even when the original player is trying desperately to get it out
It's ironical now that those now actually forcing the "game hold up" are coming up with the advantage!!

correct...good post....

[stinger]

They get a few wrong.

do they what!

Yep 14%. 86% right. About 5 to 6 a game on average.

that's about the percentage that you run at

often right, but not always.

other way...... 14% right...imhfo...

[bigcarl]

They get a few wrong.

do they what!

Yep 14%. 86% right. About 5 to 6 a game on average.

that's about the percentage that you run at

often right, but not always.

other way...... 14% right...imhfo...

[plugger66]

They get a few wrong.

do they what!

Yep 14%. 86% right. About 5 to 6 a game on average.

that's about the percentage that you run at

often right, but not always.

other way...... 14% right...imhfo...

Just running 13% ahead of you then. Law courts look a bit dirty lately apparently.

[stinger]

They get a few wrong.

do they what!

Yep 14%. 86% right. About 5 to 6 a game on average.

that's about the percentage that you run at

often right, but not always.

other way...... 14% right...imhfo...

Just running 13% ahead of you then. Law courts look a bit dirty lately apparently.

no prizes for second...

[AlpineStars]

On Sen the other day a caller asked about the % of decisions being correct and asked if it included Uncontested marks, out of bounds, all clear to goal umps and all the easy decisions.
KB wasn't really sure but if it does include all the basic decisions it could place the odds of the contentious holding the ball decisions at 50% ?

[plugger66]

They get a few wrong.

do they what!

Yep 14%. 86% right. About 5 to 6 a game on average.

that's about the percentage that you run at

often right, but not always.

other way...... 14% right...imhfo...

Just running 13% ahead of you then. Law courts look a bit dirty lately apparently.

no prizes for second...

Luckily they still give prizes for last in some events. The only way you could collect. Now get back and clean those dirty floors. roll roll ffs ffs.

[stinger]

nothing wrong with cleaning the chief justice's chambers......much nicer than cleaning those pig pens you got landed with eh????

[degruch]

On Sen the other day a caller asked about the % of decisions being correct and asked if it included Uncontested marks, out of bounds, all clear to goal umps and all the easy decisions.
KB wasn't really sure but if it does include all the basic decisions it could place the odds of the contentious holding the ball decisions at 50% ?

It obviously doesn't include frees they don't pay. If they call no frees, are they then 100% correct? If so, looks like their figures will only improve!

[plugger66]

On Sen the other day a caller asked about the % of decisions being correct and asked if it included Uncontested marks, out of bounds, all clear to goal umps and all the easy decisions.
KB wasn't really sure but if it does include all the basic decisions it could place the odds of the contentious holding the ball decisions at 50% ?

It obviously doesn't include frees they don't pay. If they call no frees, are they then 100% correct? If so, looks like their figures will only improve!

It includes all right and wrong desicions so the ones they dont pay that should have been paid are included.

[stinger]

On Sen the other day a caller asked about the % of decisions being correct and asked if it included Uncontested marks, out of bounds, all clear to goal umps and all the easy decisions.
KB wasn't really sure but if it does include all the basic decisions it could place the odds of the contentious holding the ball decisions at 50% ?

It obviously doesn't include frees they don't pay. If they call no frees, are they then 100% correct? If so, looks like their figures will only improve!

It includes all right and wrong desicions so the ones they dont pay that should have been paid are included.

7.16 am..??? wtf .....wet the bed again mate...?

[plugger66]

On Sen the other day a caller asked about the % of decisions being correct and asked if it included Uncontested marks, out of bounds, all clear to goal umps and all the easy decisions.
KB wasn't really sure but if it does include all the basic decisions it could place the odds of the contentious holding the ball decisions at 50% ?

It obviously doesn't include frees they don't pay. If they call no frees, are they then 100% correct? If so, looks like their figures will only improve!

It includes all right and wrong desicions so the ones they dont pay that should have been paid are included.

7.16 am..??? wtf .....wet the bed again mate...?

Some of us work like myself and some do cleaning at night after all the workers have gone home. I suppose you need a sleep in after that especially at your age.

[stinger]

it's alright mate...you are among friends here......if you need incontinence pads we understand,.....you can tell us....