Stand. Stand. Stand. Play on. Back a metre. Stand. Play on. Play on. Stand. Back two metres. One more. One more! Stand. Stand. Play on. Stand. Don’t infringe. Don’t give away a free. Stand. Back a metre. Stand. Play on. Insufficient intent. Stand. Prohibited contact. Stand. Arms out. Dissent. Fifty metres. Get out. Out! Stand. Stand. Play on. Play on, play on, play on! Infringement. Stand. Five-metre area. Fifty metres. Out. Out! Stand. Play on. Back a metre. Stand. Insufficient intent. Stand. Stand. You’ve got the ball, don’t give away a free. It’s your ball. Prohibited contact. Reversal. Arms out, that’s dissent, 50 metres. Stand. Play on. Stand. Play on. Nominate. Max? Sean? Okay. Warning. Six-six-six. Stand. Stand. Play on.
All of this and more, within 15 minutes of a game. Certainly before quarter time.
What the hell has happened to our game?
It’s bloody exhausting to watch, listening to the incessant yammering of the umpires. And notice, almost all of the above, which is ludicrous to see in isolation, is in relation to rules bought in during the last few years.
The umpires are whistle-happy at the moment, and it’s disgusting. It makes the game all but unwatchable.
There are three types of free kicks – the undisputed free, the 50-50s and the soft frees.
The undisputed free kicks are easy. A coathanger tackle. A pull of the jumper. An accidental whack on the face. A clear push in the back (unless it’s Tom Hawkins infringing).
The soft free kicks are the most infuriating. Incidental marginal contact that has no impact on the player or contest. A push or shove between two aggro players, usually off the ball. Neither of them is in any remote danger of injury, but one of them gets pinged.
(Photo by Paul Kane/Getty Images)
What is the actual point of these? Why are they paid? They don’t impact the play. No-one is getting hurt. What has it got to do with the officials at all? Do they fear a mass outbreak of anarchy?
And there are the 50-50s. Arguably the worst of all. What makes them so difficult to handle is that if they were all paid, we’d have 100 free kicks a game.
Each year it seems there are more rules, more interpretations. Never does it lead to fewer whistles. More free kicks. More whistles. More frustration of players, which leads to more free kicks, more penalties and more whistles.
How can the powers that be at AFL House not be embarrassed by what they’ve created?
In the Geelong-Adelaide game on Saturday there were 184 marks and 49 free kicks. That’s over 230 chances to yell stand, one every 30 seconds. Even if the stand rule has added any value, which is arguable at best, why do we have a sport where the participants are treated like babies and yelled at to stand still all game long? Seriously, what is that?
In ruck contests the players have to nominate to go for the ball like they’re in kindergarten.
Giving someone a slight push or a bump running past can lead to a free kick, reversal or 50-metre penalty.
The AFL tried to make this year about appreciating umpires. As is standard practice for this organisation, the reverse has applied. The umpires have been saddled with harder jobs, more to do and more grey areas, which has led to more frustration and more noise from fans, players and commentators alike.
Crowds are staying away from AFL matches. Is umpiring a factor? It’s certainly never been easier to fall out of love with the game.
Chris Symons
Guest
The in the back rule is sacred.... no tolerance... then it's clear...
Randy
Roar Rookie
Plenty of skill and fitness required for League in certain positions. I agree that I think you can get away with having low level of ball skills in Rugby league. Some players are just their at battering rams or tackling machines. The AFL product suffers more from having players with low skill level and gets exposed a bit in AFLW.
Mr Right
Roar Rookie
I would the AFL, the clubs & the umpires have a forum during the off season & discuss these issue & come up with a consensus. Even if a club representative disagrees with the rule, they are aware why they are policing it & under what circumstances it is going to be paid & when a little bit of leniency is going to be shown.
Mr Right
Roar Rookie
Totally agree.
Prez
Roar Rookie
Of course current umpires need to contribute to the future direction. And am sure some do like having another job. But am sure it also excludes a lot more great candidates from the job as it is a massive commitment for a part time role. There is so much football now with AFL, and AFLW. Not to mention all the junior carnivals and such.
PeterCtheThird
Guest
Given your last line, definitely a FW*t of “fans”.
Mr Right
Roar Rookie
In this circumstance, I believe that a 50m penalty should only be given against a player when it is clearly obvious that a free kick has been awarded against his team & choses to play on. When the umpire is unsure, the ball gets brought back to the mark & a free kick is taken. A player is allowed to kick the ball into the crowd after the siren. The real question is whether it was clearly obvious that a free kick has been awarded to Richmond & Warner choose to play on? I was watching the game on Friday night & I was unsure who the free kick was against? BTW I didn’t think there was a lot in the penalty. Probably best to watch the replay & the commentators discussing it. Click on the link. https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/sydney-swans/afl-news-2022-sydney-swans-defeat-richmond-tigers-no-50m-penalty-against-chad-warner-for-kicking-ball-into-scg-crowd-rule-reaction/news-story/df260cd130918b0a3336bb3023538cb0
Nick
Roar Guru
61 free kicks is far too many and stops momentum, as well as frustrating both the players and the fans. If you over-officiate you will find a free in every contest. Pay the obvious ones and the head-highs, like they do in park footy, and let the rest go. I disagree. We've seen what happens with the umpires put the whistle away. Momentum gets ground to a halt and the ball gets stuck. The umpires are there to keep the play flowing. A free kick doesn't stop the flow, it restarts it.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
This from this Roar article about Super Rugby.....(Former British Lions player and current Melbourne Rebels assistant coach Geoff Parling). Part of that is the complexity of the laws and the inconsistencies in refereeing. “There are too many stoppages still in the game, and we have to somehow try and quicken it up,” Parling said. “That’s rugby in general and I feel for Super Rugby to really push it, it needs less law changes, make the product a little simpler for people who are watching.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
I'm with DD here - largely. Rules that could and should be repealed: “Stand” rule, Umpire dissent, ruck nomination, deliberate out of bounds for starters. "Stand" - no - just call play on sooner if the player with the ball doesn't come back behind the mark. And 'the mark'........is where you stand.....stand the mark,.....stand on the mark......it's not that complicated. But just call play on sooner. It looks silly if an umpire gets distracted and the player on the mark is left rooted to the spot. Umpire Dissent - teach players to play to and then accept the whistle. The ultra hard line 50m.......not a fan of unless a player has carried on with it. At local level we can yellow card a player; the AFL doesn't have that option. And THAT is one thing that would solve many of these issues. A player cracks it......yellow card him. Ruck nomination - is great. 1 on 1 in the ruck. It's a fundamental element of our game - the neutral 50/50 restart both in the middle of the ground and around the ground. It's our one 'specialist' role. Protecting the integrity of the ruck contest is something I support - - despite that my North lads were great at exploiting it - Adam Simpson was a ripper at going 3rd man up. However - - when we saw umpires not knowing who was and wasn't contesting a ball up and they'd ping someone for blocking the 3rd man up.........that was a mess. That's part of what it has fixed. That and I saw first hand the Doggies running 2 rucks against Goldstein; all game one just jumped into Goldy while the other went the ball. That was NOT in the spirit of ruckwork at all. "deliberate out of bounds" is fine if applied correctly. However - the "insufficient intent" (to keep it in) - is a step too far as far as I'm concerned. It's getting too close to last touch free kicks. THAT I do not want. This relates to original rules from 1859 and I don't feel that we can change the 'features' of the game because some one suggests it looks like a flaw when compared to other codes. Similarly - we have the most pure goal in the football codes and THAT too is an original 1859 rule.
Scott
Guest
I totally agree with this. Another good way would be for the whole crowd to stand up and turn their backs to the game, every time a ridiculous 50m penalty is payed. Even if it’s your team who wins the 50. Or perhaps everyone just doesn’t take their seat until after the opening bounce. So when the game starts the stands are empty
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
In ruck contests the players have to nominate to go for the ball like they’re in kindergarten. WTF they can’t just throw the ball straight up, and if more than 1 player from either team competes pay a F/A is beyond me Mate - you try umpiring this scenario. Think about it - - let's say 4 players all make a play for the ball and 3 get blocked......who gets the free kick? It's worse than Camberwell Junction with the lights on amber.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
A. you follow the Eagles - so no wonder you're on a downer with enjoyment at the moment. B. if you like the NRL now - good luck to you; however NRL Womens is a token gesture of a 4 week round robin with practically no under lying competition. Remember - - it's Rugby League; there's not much skill involved and stuff all fitness required. C. AFLW is going just fine. Most the critics seem to forget that it's played in the hottest time of the year (changing that 2nd half 2022).
Sunshine Tiger
Roar Rookie
The rules as they are written allow for the manipulation of results , betting companies rule btw Reid paid $33 for the first goal , and it came from an out of play free kick, serie A needs to learn from this
Nick
Roar Guru
Umpires or their interpretation of rules aren't ruining the game. We asked for this, remember?
Nick
Roar Guru
Umpire interpretation has been built into the game since day 1. If that is the reaeon you aren't watching, you never will again.
Naughty's Headband
Roar Rookie
Yep. Even if there's no third man allowed it's very easy to officiate without the players having to nominate.
pablocruz
Roar Rookie
Cowards? That's laughable.
JW
Guest
With or without the rule changes, the game has become more difficult to watch over the last couple of decades because of the flooding, tackling and how congested it's become. I suspect you'd be complaining about the product whether they'd made these rule changes or not (perhaps the recent Richmond success has made you enjoy the it more than other fans in the past few years!). So they do need to open the game up, which is what they've been trying to do. I do agree we hear the umpires too much (simple solution is to turn their mics off), and I don't love the look of the stand rule. Having said that, the stand rule has opened things up and I reckon the game is more watchable than it has been in recent years. Even more watchable than the Sydney/West Coast 05/06 years (that was painful).
andyfnq
Roar Rookie
most of these sound pretty good :thumbup: