The Roar
The Roar

AFL
Advertisement

Blame the rules, not the umpies

(AAP Image/Tracey Nearmy)
Roar Rookie
1st June, 2017
40

It’s a job that when done to perfection goes completely unnoticed, but when sub-par, in even the thinnest of slivers, is the reason for the all the world’s perils.

Umpires. I don’t envy them.

It takes a strong will and keen mind to deal with the pressure of stepping out and attempting to control 36 beasts with white line fever. At the highest level you have the protection of being surrounded by the white noise of tens of thousands of indiscernible voices, but at the lower levels you can hear every foul-mouthed parent spitting venom straight at you, coaches who don’t care how close they get in your face or what they say.

I know. I’ve been one.

So when the vehement anger that comes from the sidelines while volunteering to help kids, sometimes as young as nine, became the norm, I stopped. It became an awful experience.

That’s why I’ll never turn on an umpire during a game. I’ll never blame them for a loss. The game happens so fast that you don’t have preconceived ideas of teams or players that would affect any decision. Whistle, run, switch focus, whistle, new focus, run – I barely kept up, and I can only imagine it’s nothing but a blizzard of movement at the highest level.

I do, however, have massive issues with the cognitive load that is endlessly heaped on umpires. It’s almost biblical in the way one rule directly contradicts another. With the AFL doing its utmost to be an innovative and dynamic sporting body they often move to paper over the cracks rather than identify the real causes. Sub rule, anyone?

Think of that big red rubber-band ball that sits on people’s desk. It’s a perfect metaphor – one rule, then another, then another to fix that rule. The original problem is then completely lost.

Advertisement

The myriad of coaches across the AFL are like a stable of corporate lawyers. They will always find ways to circumvent and manipulate rules to fit them. The rules committee always seems to be just behind that 8-ball.

(Image: AAP Image/Tracey Nearmy)

How do we help the guys and girls in various shades of fluro? Put the onus right back on the players. A player who leads with his head gets no protection? That’s a great move. Players are using their fragile skulls less and less as instruments to draw a measly free kick. It became a player’s choice.

My main focus here is the deliberate out of bounds rule. I like it. Keeping the ball in play, going faster, getting slicker with the handballs or swift feet out of congestion makes for great viewing, and the game has gone up a notch as a result. I know that it’s far from perfect and still needs to be settled in the minds of players, umpires and fans alike, but asking an umpire to consider a player’s ‘intention’ is nigh on impossible despite seeming to be in the fabric of the game.

So, when a player roosts a kick clear of a pack towards space and it dribbles toward the boundary, end over abnormally shaped end, with opposition players jogging after it with arms outstretched like Christ the Redeemer, there is genuine nervous anticipation from everyone in the crowd. Either call the umpire makes will draw the ire of half of those in the stands and adoration from the rest.

Here’s where we fix it. If the AFL really wants the ball to stay in play and keep the game moving, then if the opposition player has an opportunity to pick it up and keep the ball in play but chooses not to, throw it in.

An opposition player who decides they’d rather chaperone the ball over the line than take possession will lose the benefit they would have been gained by any intention from the kicker.

Advertisement

The crowd will then be calling on their player to get the ball instead of relying on an umpire’s seemingly impossible call.

I’d also like to see this ruck rule around the ground cleaned up. The third man up ruling will bring back the dominance of ruckmen and allow umpires to focus on two duelling players rather than bodies flying in from every angle.

This nomination step is ill-conceived at best and childish at worst. I don’t expect to see top-level players essentially asking permission of the umpires to take part in the game. It’s poorly designed and executed without confidence. This one annoys me because there is already a rule for ruckmen that seems to have been completely ignored.

In the centre square there is a big ten-metre circle that is there solely for the ruckmen. They get a run-up and they get the space to manoeuvre in any direction they like. The best part is that the umpires, along with the millions watching, have no confusion about who the competing ruckmen are. No-one nominates. They just line up.

Why, then, can we not lift and shift that clearly viable ruling around the ground? I’ll paint you a very easily achievable picture;

  • Ball comes to rest beneath a pack of players.
  • Umpire swoops in and collects the ball.
  • Umpire calls for all players bar the competing ruckmen to exit the ten-metre protected zone.
  • Ball is thrown up and once it leaves the umpires hands players can enter that zone.
  • If a third player is in that zone after the umpire calls for everyone to leave, the free kick is awarded to the opposing ruckman.

This clearly allows umpires to see who will be contesting and immediately makes the players accountable. They must be aware of who will be lining up at any given moment. This removes the need for umpires to scan a swirling, jostling thicket of players to see who has raised their hand.

Advertisement

Umpires should be only adjudicating the game, not controlling it.

Remember: the umpires didn’t cause your team to lose. Your team did that all by themselves.

Give them a break.

close