By Bruce Walkley
April 6th 2009 @ 6:52am
Related coverage
Tell the umpires to shut up!
Hawthorn's Shane Crawford talks to umpire Shaun Ryan during the 2008 Toyota AFL Grand Final between the Geelong Cats and the Hawthorn Hawks at the MCG. Photo Slattery Images
It’s about time someone told the AFL’s field umpires to concentrate on their jobs and stop trying to be coaches. With clubs employing as many as 17 coaches, fitness and development people on their staffs, the last thing the players need is to be lectured by another three on game day.
There are far too many instances of umpires telling players to “knock it out” as they battle for the ball, or “keep your eyes on the ball” in ruck contests.
Fair enough for them to say “holding, Fred Smith – free kick, Bill Jones” or “he tried to kick it – play on” so players and fans know why decisions are made.
But apart from that the men in white, pink, purple, or whatever other colour is the fashion of the day, should be instructed to keep their eyes open and their gobs shut, because they’re missing too many obvious infringements.
So far this season there are two areas in which the umpires are allowing basic infringements to go unpunished – throwing the ball and tackling over the shoulder.
Players are being allowed to get away with releasing the ball with one hand and then hitting it with their other fist. The law requires it to be held with one hand while being struck with the other, and it shouldn’t be that hard for an umpire to see daylight between hand and ball when it isn’t.
Tackling a player on the ground over the shoulder while he is trying to win the ball is another blight on the game. The man playing the ball needs to be protected, not punished unfairly in this way, particularly since the tackler often uses the hand that’s over the shoulder to hold the ball under him and con the umpires into giving a free for holding the ball.
That said (hopefully diverting attention away from my pitiful tipping tally of four at the weekend), there are plenty of positives in the way this season has started.
Take Carlton’s position at the top of the ladder, for a start. We all knew the Blues were going to be more competitive this year, but few would have thought they’d be so impressive so soon.
And the way a couple of teams that copped floggings in the first round bounced back was good to see, too.
Richmond looked something like a football team against Geelong, who may have psyched themselves up so far to beat the Hawks that their minds weren’t entirely on the job.
Essendon left Fremantle for dead, turning the previous week’s result around by 79 points.
And on the other side of the ledger Port Adelaide were on the wrong end of a dominant performance by the Eagles, who had already shown signs, with a spirited effort at the Gabba in week one, that their worst days were behind them.
And so it went on almost right across the board – ups and downs, better-than-expected and worse-than-imaginable efforts, sometimes by the same teams. I mean, how could the Sydney Pensioners go from struggling to kick nine goals one week to ramming home 22 against the reigning premiers the next, even if the Hawks were undermanned?
It doesn’t make any sense, but it does mean there are some cracker games coming up.
Saturday will be a footy fan’s dream, with Saints-Eagles in the afternoon followed by Lions-Swans and Blues-Bombers at night.
Roll on, Easter weekend!
Get Australia's best AFL opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(16)
Mattay said | April 6th 2009 @ 9:07am | Report comment
I sometimes feel sympathy for the Umpires. The rules committee is not doing them any favours by bringing in rules in which they need to make judgements of not only what has happened, but what the players intent was when it happened. I can’t think of too many other sports where the umpire has to decide why a player did something in order to determine whether a free kick should be paid or not. Sure, this ambiguity creates discussion and controvery, but it’s something that should be avoided in my book. In an age where sports like football, cricket and rugby are using (or considering using) TV technology to assist their umpires, it seems like the AFL is going the other way making their umpire’s tasks harder by asking them to rule on things they can’t obviously know about.
But then you see them prance around during the game, calling players by their first name, making comments about the way the players are playing the game, and if a player should dare talk back? 50m!!! For me, it all started when James Hird made those comments about Scott McLaren on the Footy Show. Here was a champion player, who was an honest a player as he was a champion, making some concerned comments about a particular umpire. Sure, maybe not the way to go about it, but he was put through the wringer for it. The message was loud and clear, ‘We don’t care who you are, you are not as important as an umpire’. Respect from players to umpires from that day went out the window. The AFL tried to manufacture “respect” but this has only succeeded in increasing the gap between players and umpires.
I agree with your assersions. The best umps are the ones you don’t notice. The best games are those that take care of themselves. Rule in the spirit of the game. Don’t make yourselves the spectacle. Nobody pays money to see free kicks and no one listens to the radio/tv to hear your comments on the game.
footylover said | April 6th 2009 @ 10:46am | Report comment
I agree totally – the umpires should be seen and not heard. Some of them will be demanding they have hair and makeup done before the TV games !
tigersforever said | April 6th 2009 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Don’t write off the mighty tigers just yet – often teams that start slow finish very fast
swannies said | April 6th 2009 @ 10:50am | Report comment
How dare you call the Swans pensioners, geriatriics is a lot more apt! We desperately need new blood or we may not hear too many renditions of cheer, cheer the red and white in coming years .
Redb said | April 6th 2009 @ 11:59am | Report comment
I don’t the mind the ump telling the players to get the ball out, agree otherwise. They should take the bloody mike off them as well, who wants to hear this whiny little voice yell instruction like a dictatorial harbinger of death to a contest.
Agree on Hirdy, what a legend.
Tigers? ………nuff said.
Swannies played the Hawthorn Under 18s.
Redb
Searly said | April 6th 2009 @ 1:55pm | Report comment
Couldn’t agree more about the umpires. I know they cop a lot from the players and probably feel the need to even up the ledger a bit, but the way they do it in that school teacherish way suggests some of them are getting way too big for their boots.
The ones that REALLY annoy me is when they blow a free kick and the player seems to be willing to accept it without argument, but they STILL feel the need to run up to the mark and lecture the bloke for the next 30 seconds about what he did wrong! “Mate, you were all over him, you never had eyes for the ball, you grabbed his shirt and never made an attempt to spoil, you’ve gotta have eyes for the footy…..” The whole time, the offending player is standing there with this puzzled/p*ssed off look on his face as if to say “Hey, buddy, I know I f***in’ infringed so just blow the f***in’ whistle and quit the f***in’ lecture you trumped up little twerp who couldn’t get a kick in the juniors so took up umpiring instead, and now wants to exert some authority….!”
It definitely doesn’t help player/umpire relations.
I do have to say there are two aspects of Bruce’s article I don’t agree with though. The head high tackle ruling is, in my opinion, becoming a complete farce. Teams are being hugely penalised (free kick in front of goal anyone?) for the most minor and unintentional of indiscretions. Two blokes go at it in a ruck contest, both with arms raised above their heads and inevitable a pinky finger comes into contact with someone’s ear and the umps give a free kick for head high contact! The players all look around like stunned mullets trying to work out what the hell was wrong with that particular contest and the recipient is surprised to discover his good fortune.
Surely the intention of the rule is to protect a player’s head. When the contact is so minimal and unintentional that the recipient doesn’t even notice it, it is ridiculous. It also encourages players to go to ground in the hope of attracting high contact, which is completely OPPOSITE to the intention of the rule. Players are actually happily endangering their own safety to win a free kick!
I know it would increase the interpreation required of umpires, but I reckon there needs to be some threshold of intensity of contact or recklessness or intent before the umps give these kinds of free kicks.
Secondly, I can’t agree that it is a good thing to see Carlton on top of the table. Not only because I’m a Pies fan, but mainly because it is a ridiculous outcome of the AFL’s system of over-rewarding poor performance. Everyone agrees that the teams finishing at the bottom should get the first picks in the draft, but priority picks and all that rubbish effectively mean that Carlton has been given the potential to build a significant dynasty purely because they were so bad for so long. If they win more than one premiership in the next 5 years I’ll dead set be blowing up!
Redb said | April 6th 2009 @ 2:04pm | Report comment
Searly,
The whole time, the offending player is standing there with this puzzled/p*ssed off look on his face as if to say “Hey, buddy, I know I f***in’ infringed so just blow the f***in’ whistle and quit the f***in’ lecture you trumped up little twerp who couldn’t get a kick in the juniors so took up umpiring instead, and now wants to exert some authority….!”
That’s Gold.
How many Carlton fans have jumped out of the woodwork, all of sudden their following the footy again not Victory, Storm Afgan Thirds…. typical bloody Carlton supporters.
Can’t agree with you on the draft picks, they have to be meaningful if your going to try and even things up. Doesn’t mean a dynasty as the salary cap will put a break on their emerging stars. They might win one flag in the next 1-3 years, the year after they wont be able to keep the group together.
Redb
swannies said | April 6th 2009 @ 2:26pm | Report comment
Maybe the swannies should poach some of the Hawks under 18s and lower the average player age below 35
AFLforever said | April 6th 2009 @ 4:30pm | Report comment
Its about time the AFL fell into line with other sports and used video footage to help not get so many decisions wrong. While all other sports fans benefit from this us mugs that follow AFL have to continually put up with the umpire clowns getting things wrong week in week out. If if was up to me I would get rid of most of the on-field umps ( you only need one, OK maybe two because none of them can run that fast) and let the expert panel upstairs use the video to make all the decisions
Searly said | April 7th 2009 @ 9:30am | Report comment
AFLforever, I too would love to see more correct decisions but the pace of the game would be completely destroyed if too many decisions started getting referred upstairs. Mind you, I reckon you could go the tennis or cricket route and give each team 3 challenges per match and that way you might get rid of the real howlers in front of goal.
AFLforever said | April 7th 2009 @ 3:58pm | Report comment
Great suggestion Searly-some of those 50 m penalty’s last weekend just handed goals on a platter tp certain teams – makes you wonder who might have had some little wagers on the outcome. I presume umps or their families are not allowed to bet on games
Michael C said | April 7th 2009 @ 4:23pm | Report comment
re 50 m penalty – - it’s my pet hate. In the VAFA and probably other lower leagues, it’s 25m. However, the umpy can always pay two of them.
I hate 50 m penalties being paid for non-game related activity. (i.e. verbals etc, and perhaps we just have a yellow card for such offences).
Incidental contact has to return regarding body on body duals such as marking especially.
Benefit of the doubt needs to be formalised, especially for the poor bugger on the bottom of the pack – - way too many times, a guy is getting done on the technical interpretation rather than the ’spirit of the game/law’ – - – which, fair enough brings grey area interpretation into it, but, it’s inflexible field umpire red tape that really drives supporters batty. We can handle the player stuff ups, and turn overs etc, but, umpires seemingly going out of their way to find a trivial free kick when we all just want a hard contest umpired like the Grand Final, i.e. ‘play on lads’, or ‘my ball lads’, and give us a bounce, a neutral restart and back into the fiercely contested footy.
goleague said | April 7th 2009 @ 5:16pm | Report comment
So if all you AFL fans are so put off by lousy umpiring destroying your game why don’t you give league a try – flows much better because the refs know they are not the main attraction – well ususally that is the case
Much better game than aerial ping pong
Michael C said | April 8th 2009 @ 6:17am | Report comment
goleague -
you can only say that now that Bill Harrigan is retired.
Actually, now that you have 2 refs in NRL, it’s harder for any one ref to play ’school master’, (as still happens in other single ref games).
reality is, even the umpires need a few rounds to get ‘warmed up’. Normally the interpretations start to sort themselves out, and the way the game is umpired in the latter half of the year seems better than early on in the year (likely too that the players have ‘adjusted’ as appropriate).
bluebloods said | April 8th 2009 @ 1:54pm | Report comment
An early tip – The mighty blues will reign supreme this year – they will win the premiership and Judd will win the Brownlow
Bruce Walkley said | April 9th 2009 @ 11:53am | Report comment
Searly, I’m not advocating giving frees for nothing – just saying that, since it’s illegal to tackle a player OVER THE SHOULDER (whether ir’s dangerous head-high contact doesn’t come into it for the purposes of this argument), that rule should be policed the same when the player with the ball is on the ground as when he’s standing up. If you want to tackle the player on the ground you have to do it around his waist or under his armpits, or grab his jumper and try to haul him off the ball. As Michael C says, the poor bugger who went in for the ball and ended up under the pack needs protection, not persecution.