Umpiring questions

[The Coon Dog]

Over to you A39.

In the first quarter Jay Schultz was charged with the responsibility of kicking in for Richmond after we had scored a behind. He took ages, looked left & right, did nothing so the field umpire called play on. The Bulldogs player then approached Schultz who stepped back over the goal line to concede a point (ultimately very costly for the Tigers).

Given that Schultz had failed to kick the ball clear of his hand prior to stepping over the goal line, should the point have stood or should it have been balled up at the top of the square?

Also, is it just me or do others feel annoyed when a stray bounce by a field umpire advantages one side over another. I'm really starting to think they should have a serious look at whether it might just be easier to throw the ball up instead of bouncing it. I know it's a great skill, part of the game etc... but would throwing the ball up provide a fairer contest?

[Bornadog]

Re: Umpiring questions

Also, is it just me or do others feel annoyed when a stray bounce by a field umpire advantages one side over another. I'm really starting to think they should have a serious look at whether it might just be easier to throw the ball up instead of bouncing it. I know it's a great skill, part of the game etc... but would throwing the ball up provide a fairer contest?

That happened twice in the third quarter resulting in two quick goals for Richmond.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Umpiring questions

I thought Shultz kicked it to himself.

What is the biggest issue today was the Gilbee(?) goal not given when Richo clearly marked it over his head and well over the line. Richo after marking moved his arm down on the line. It ended up costing us 12 points as the ball went straight the other way for a Tiges goal.

There was also a point to us reversed to a throw in when the central ump rightly corrected the female goal ump. Not sure what happened afterwards.

[lowedog]

Re: Umpiring questions

Couldn't believe thtat mark to richo was paid. It was clearly over the line, but with the feral cheersquad in full voice behingd the goal ump, intimidation might have been a factor. I couldn't believe that the goal ump had to confer with the field ump. He was standing 30 mtrs away no where near the boundry. That was astonishing. Wasn't the reason we didn't win, but still made me scratch my head.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Umpiring questions

I couldn't believe that the goal ump had to confer with the field ump. He was standing 30 mtrs away no where near the boundry.

Got that wrong. The field ump did the right thing, basically questioned the goal ump's poor decision.

[GVGjr]

Re: Umpiring questions

A39, Something was just raised on KB's show on SEN about how the South Australian umpires bounced the ball length ways if you know what I mean. I seem to recall that they were pretty good at it. Did you ever try it? Is it a more consistent bounce?

The theory is that if the ball is bounced poorly it is more likely to shoot out to a neutral wing than go directly forward like what happened in the North and Collingwood game.

[Twodogs]

Re: Umpiring questions

A39, Something was just raised on KB's show on SEN about how the South Australian umpires bounced the ball length ways if you know what I mean. I seem to recall that they were pretty good at it. Did you ever try it? Is it a more consistent bounce?

The point being was made that if it's a bad bounce when the ball is held length ways is that it would bounce towards one of the wings and not favour one of the teams by bouncing forwards.



Yesterday was a very ordinary performance by the umpires.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Umpiring questions

Bouncing length ways it most be more difficult to get it right as you have less area to hold the ball. He is more likely to wear one in the head too.
I like a39's suggestion for throw ups apart from the start of quarters.


I don't think it was a big issue in our game anyway as you said twodogs.
The mark over the line was.

[Desipura]

Re: Umpiring questions

Couldn't believe thtat mark to richo was paid. It was clearly over the line, but with the feral cheersquad in full voice behingd the goal ump, intimidation might have been a factor. I couldn't believe that the goal ump had to confer with the field ump. He was standing 30 mtrs away no where near the boundry. That was astonishing. Wasn't the reason we didn't win, but still made me scratch my head.

Totally agree 100% that it was initimidation. Unfortunately I was sitting beside the ferals.

[GVGjr]

Re: Umpiring questions

So who should have got the kick A39? I have it down for Welsh.

[lowedog]

Re: Umpiring questions

Totally agree 100% that it was initimidation. Unfortunately I was sitting beside the ferals.

I cant say I'm not one eyed, but are richmond supporters the whingingest(is that a word?)bunch in the business? When johnno had that little toe poke that went through, i had this idiuot about 2 mtrs away from me complaining that it was of hands. He was carrying on like he was stuck to a live wire. Then he saw the replay, and that it came off his boot, then just stood there and went on complaining about something else that was happening. They are shocking!

[ledge]

Re: Umpiring questions

Yes i tend to agree listening to a few around me, they never got a decision they didnt deserve and all of ours were undeserved.
Richmond supporters are the best at coming out of the woodwork i have ever seen, sad thing is they only have to win one game and they all turn up, unlike us we have to win four and people still question it.

[Desipura]

Re: Umpiring questions

Yes i tend to agree listening to a few around me, they never got a decision they didnt deserve and all of ours were undeserved.
Richmond supporters are the best at coming out of the woodwork i have ever seen, sad thing is they only have to win one game and they all turn up, unlike us we have to win four and people still question it.

The cheersquad numbers somehow doubled when they looked headed for a win. Chanting their way to victory or so they thought.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Umpiring questions

Schulz definately kicked the ball to himself before stepping over the line.

I have seen a couple of instances in the last few weeks where I am sure the umpires have been factually wrong.

1) v St. Kilda - and this happened twice, one to each team. The ball in near the centre and a forward has his jumper tugged. I believe the free should be to the player whose jumper has been tugged, where the offence happened. Twice the umpire gave a 50m penalty to the player with the ball.

2) v Richmond - player kicks the ball forward and the player shepharding gets slung to the ground after the kick. Ball comes back and the player takes his kick again. The free should have been where the ball was when the offence happened, ie. 40m downfield.

[The Coon Dog]

Re: Umpiring questions

Schulz definately kicked the ball to himself before stepping over the line.

I have seen a couple of instances in the last few weeks where I am sure the umpires have been factually wrong.

1) v St. Kilda - and this happened twice, one to each team. The ball in near the centre and a forward has his jumper tugged. I believe the free should be to the player whose jumper has been tugged, where the offence happened. Twice the umpire gave a 50m penalty to the player with the ball.

2) v Richmond - player kicks the ball forward and the player shepharding gets slung to the ground after the kick. Ball comes back and the player takes his kick again. The free should have been where the ball was when the offence happened, ie. 40m downfield.

Thanks SS, guess my question then becomes a hypothetical situation.

Re: St.Kilda game & the 50 metre penalties paid. On the replay the umpires could be clearly heard saying that as the subsequent offence was commtited in the 50 metre arc, then a 50 metre penalty applied to the original person with the ball & not a free downfield.

Seems strange nevertheless.