Tonight's Umpiring

[matthew]

the umpiring in the first quarter was ordinary, there was one where Jude bolton tackled one of the geelong players and was not paid for holding the ball, what is going on. the giesch must have a lot of explaining to do.

[573v30]

Umpiring was poor, not taking the holding the ball rule seriously and too-much guess work. However, that wasn't the sole reason why the Swans lost as too many handballs and turnovers in the 3rd quarter gave the win to the Cats.

[Triple B]

Yep, I used to come home from games with no voice regularly many years ago, but have mellowed somewhat because, well, what is the point, just accept they are frequently bordering on incompetent.

Guess what, no voice this morning.

As has been previously said, I'm convinced the scumps are in awe of Geelong, as are most of us and just refuse to believe that they can be caught HTB or throw it etc etc etc.

[ScottH]

As liz said the Kelly nondecision, followed by the ROK one, just proved the inconsistency of the umpiring.
There was another instance where B1 tackled cat, ball spilled free, no free. Seconds later another tackle is laid by Moore(??), ball spills free, no free.
Mattner gets the ball, gets tackled, ball spills free. HTB!!

I don't think we were overly hard done by, and would not have changed the result, but some of the decisions are just baffling.

[cos789]

I was really dissapointed about the umpiring because it could have made the game a lot more interesting earlier on .Certainly the third quarter killed us .

I really get angry that the umpring cannot get some consistancy over the year, over a round and as was shown , over a game or within a quarter .

It's only one law and it's states that a player must immediately dispose of a ball when tackled .
So a player spinning 360 degree before handballing is HTB .
So a player waiting to pick the best option is HTB .
So a player with one arm pinned is HTB by virtue of illegal disposal .
So a player with one arm pinned in a pack is also HTB .
So a player diving on the ball and not immediately getting it out is HTB.
So a player diving on a ball in a pack is HTB.
So a player taking a tackle and not trying anything is HTB
So a player taking a tackle in a pack and wrestling the ball is HTB .

Now listen very carefully . In rugby union a player when tackled must release the ball .Yet in Australian Football we let the player prevent the ball being wrestled off of him even though the law says he must dispose of the ball .

People will say players will be reluctant to take poesseion of the ball if we enforce the law as it is written . I disagree. If a player is making a genuine attempt then it's OK .I don't see a lot of genuine attempts in packs at AFL level . Apart from that , there was a time when players would paddle the ball on to their advantage awaiting the time to take possesion . This was a skill .
I don't see too much of this these days .
.

[giant]

Another thing they seemed to regularly do this evening was encroach over the mark. Not by much, just a step or two, but it's effective in stopping the team in possession from playing on quickly because they have to take another step backwards before they can kick.

And then at the other end, Ottens clearly took a mark outside 50 and the ump placed his mark at 45. Obviously over-awed by the occasion, let's hope someone was watching that will ensure we don't see any of them come September.

[giant]

Spot on,i counted 7 five from frees and 2 from the 50's

And 5 of the first 6 - game over! I turned over and watched the Olympics at that stage.

[Nico]

I don't think Geelong needed much help to be honest.

That said, I thought the umpiring was very poor. As I've noticed in many of the Geelong games I've watched this year they seem to get a very good run with the umpires and are marked on a different set of rules to the opposition. It's almost as if the umpires are in awe of them.

I have noticed the same. Certainly with HTB rules there seems to be a different set of rules. There was 2 in a row last night, and even the Ch10 commented as such, where Geelong players had an eternity to dispose of it, were tackled and stripped of the footy, "play on". Yet when we had it for a millisecond with no prior opportunity it was a free straight away. Particularly umpire no.25. And Bevans superb tackle on Ablett went unrewarded. No whistle was heard on the TV. We did get the takeaway but that is not the point. Ablett got pinged for one he just let go of when tackled, but that is his ploy, and rarely gets pinged.

They seem to pay a free for the sake of it to Geelong.

All that said the frees didn't decide the game.

[TheHood]

I know the Cats are fantastic and all that, however the key decisions that put us behind the Eight Ball were poor...wrong decisions.

It's been a while since I've wanted to explode over the Umps but it was amateurish at best and sordid at worst.

The 50 was angried up the blood and the HTB was frustrating for ALL.

The crucial times at which the UMPS cruelled us was match turning.

I was proud of the boys, their effort deserved better from the officials.

[Rod_]

They wanted to have an impact on the game and did. At times I wish they would just put the whistle in the pocket. I had an alternative location, however I applied self sensorship.

Even if I do take off my Red and white sunglasses, being one eyed.

The frees in the first quarter ruined what could have been a good game. Long way back into a game like this after umpire free goals .... It is nearly cheating IMO.

We need to get a better umpire's liasion officer. Attempt to find out how we can improve our free count "for and against" A break even would be good.

Could be worth the 20K and do a James Hird didn't he get a record number of frees after complaining a few years ago?

At times I was wondering if the rules had changed? Seemed we should have received a couple of frees and it went the other way....

Poor game by the umpires and I hope that miss the grand finals as a result!

Rod_

[Melbournehammer]

i have been saying this for a couple of years now but the reaction of officialdom to our winning style in 2005 was to encourage play on and discourage players holding the ball and creating "ugly stoppages". the result has been an encouragement of players releasing/throwing the ball to the vicinity of team mates. this has been evident for a couple of years so that a spillage is less likely to be penalised than a player holding the ball

[connolly]

i have been saying this for a couple of years now but the reaction of officialdom to our winning style in 2005 was to encourage play on and discourage players holding the ball and creating "ugly stoppages". the result has been an encouragement of players releasing/throwing the ball to the vicinity of team mates. this has been evident for a couple of years so that a spillage is less likely to be penalised than a player holding the ball

Spot on. The maggots have been policy umpiring since 2006. Leads to inconsistency, decisions Kafkaesque (RWO special) and baffling and turning off potential converts to the game in droves. Those arse clowns Dimwit and Ando have a lot to answer for.