- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
The football public are either stupid or conditioned to finding something to whinge about. I honestly don’t know how else to put it.
Thinking about it, the above statement is probably true of society at large, an observation that always appears stark in an election year.
While some will feel aggrieved at the generalisation and think they are immune, I’m referring, in particular, to the reaction to the umpiring of Friday night’s match between Hawthorn and Carlton.
Those who love their footy, and understand what a good game to watch looks like, have been enjoying the relaxed rule interpretations from the umpires in recent weeks. There appears to have been a directive to stop paying soft or ’50/50′ free kicks, and only pay the very obvious ones.
The Round 11 Friday night match between Essendon and Carlton was the best example of this we’ve seen, with only 17 free kicks paid for the entire match, the lowest since 2006. Earlier in the year, that could have been the count at quarter time.
Low numbers are an example we use to judge whether the umps are more inclined to let the game go but, as in all aspects of the sport, we get too hung up on them. Each incident or contest is to be appraised separately, and there is no right or wrong figure.
Carlton were on the wrong end of a run of decisions and non-decisions on Friday night, as St Kilda were the week previously against West Coast. Guess what? It happens. The randomness of the universe dictates that every now and then your team is going to get shafted.
If you’re a Blues fan, instead of bleating about free kicks that weren’t paid when you thought they should be, how about being dirty on your team for conceding the first three goals of the game in quick time, a critical lapse in a fifteen point loss?
Why not accept the fact that your team isn’t good enough to match it with the best teams for four quarters, hasn’t shown the mettle to get the job done in close games, and has coughed up leads in a manner similar to North Melbourne?
Mick Malthouse knows all of this, which is why he was happy to light a fire on the free kick topic, and douse it in petrol with pointed, angry comments. As with Kevin Sheedy, the two coaching doyens have been masters of misdirection for years when their team should be under the pump, and the media and public are always willing to be duped.
Malthouse was unhappy that a few holding-the-ball or illegal disposals were missed, and others have been whining about an apparent direction to not pay any free kicks at all.
Here’s a thought – there never has been, never should be, and never will be a direction to not pay free kicks. What a stupid, thoughtless position to take.
What direction there might have been though, or should be at least, is to err on the side of not paying if in any doubt. If an umpire isn’t sure a player has disposed of the ball illegally, or doesn’t quite know if he’s had prior opportunity, then simply call ‘play on’.
Another way to put it would be for umpires to only pay what they are 100% sure of, rather than indulging in guesswork, which has often been the case. 90% sure is not enough.
The benefit of this sort of direction is twofold.
Firstly, it keeps the game flowing, and doesn’t allow players and fans to dwell on poor decisions which are endlessly replayed, especially if they occur in front of goal. When the action continues, players don’t have a choice but to move on, and fans are in the same boat.
Secondly, and connected to the above, it lessens the chance of what we consider to be soft free kicks, the ones that truly drive people mad. Give me one hundred missed free kicks over one soft one being paid. Every time.
Fans of the team that is the victim of a supposed missed free kick are always going to go beserk, but frankly, the opinion of anyone emotionally attached is irrelevant. No-one should care what they think, and if you do, you’re the target of my opening sentence.
Neutral observers and lovers of the game are to be listened to, and most are in unison about enjoying the relaxed rule interpretations.
That said, it was staggering to hear the likes of Mike Sheahan and Jon Ralph bemoan an over-correction from the umpires after weeks of dissatisfaction at too many questionable free kicks.
Maybe it’s a tabloid journalism thing, constantly grandstanding, nit-picking, and looking for the negative. Whingers.
Then we’ve got those that bring up the old chestnut, saying they ‘just want consistency’.
More stupidity. These fans would have you believe they wouldn’t mind the same incorrect decision thirty times a game, as long as it was paid every time. Nonsense.
So let’s not miss the point. It’s not about not paying free kicks. The umpires aren’t out to get your team when they miss what looks an obvious one.
Umpires are going to make mistakes, and that’s more than fine. The greater good is served if they’re calling “play on” when they make them, rather than blowing the whistle.
It’s stupidity to suggest otherwise.