Poor/soft umpiring???

[ShanghaiSaint]

Did anyone else think that 50m penalty at the very start of the port game was bloody soft?

I was a little disappointed in it and few other things i saw in the port game. I know it was hot and was a hard day for the umps .... you know.

[saintspremiers]

The port game was a nothing praccy match due to the heat.

Forcing a team to play 4 back to back quarters in that heat was negligent to the extreme.

I thought Anderscum was bad, looks like his stand in Gilligan is worse.

[gringo]

Was ok against adelaide then s*** against port. but they were probably sun struck.

[perfectionist]

Did anyone else think that 50m penalty at the very start of the port game was bloody soft?..

I think it might have been Jimmy Webster's first "involvement" in a game of senior footy. He grabbed the jumper after the mark - 50 metres. I'm afraid a little grab is just as bad as a big grab. These days, the open hand and arm must be used to retard, simple as that.

[plugger66]

Did anyone else think that 50m penalty at the very start of the port game was bloody soft?..

I think it might have been Jimmy Webster's first "involvement" in a game of senior footy. He grabbed the jumper after the mark - 50 metres. I'm afraid a little grab is just as bad as a big grab. These days, the open hand and arm must be used to retard, simple as that.

Completely correct. 50 everyday of the week. Isnt a silly practice game a bit early for all this stuff. What about the sitters Dal and Geary dropped. The players can at least control that. The reason they dropped them was probably the heat and early in the season which could be the same reason the umps made mistakes which werent obvious anyway.

[saint6709]

Poor umpiring - but nab not important - first 2 bounces should have been re done and a bunch of early frees - we had a bunch of tired kids - game over

[gringo]

That's the problem with modern umpiring. Umpires can justify a million offences a game but they seem to be unable to have any intuitive ability to look past irrelevant incidents.

[Eastern]

All weekend the umpires seemed to be "HOT" on guys jumping into the back of an opponent who is on the ground. This was previously a tactic to hold the ball in and win a Free Kick. Now they are getting pinged for "In The Back". I like it !!

[CURLY]

All weekend the umpires seemed to be "HOT" on guys jumping into the back of an opponent who is on the ground. This was previously a tactic to hold the ball in and win a Free Kick. Now they are getting pinged for "In The Back". I like it !!

Has to be umpired properly. Players where laying over the top of it and as soon as they where tackled dropping to the ground or throwing themselves forward and getting a free. Umpires cant allow the player to suck them in.

[kosifantutti]

Did anyone else think that 50m penalty at the very start of the port game was bloody soft?..

I think it might have been Jimmy Webster's first "involvement" in a game of senior footy. He grabbed the jumper after the mark - 50 metres. I'm afraid a little grab is just as bad as a big grab. These days, the open hand and arm must be used to retard, simple as that.

Completely correct. 50 everyday of the week. Isnt a silly practice game a bit early for all this stuff. What about the sitters Dal and Geary dropped. The players can at least control that. The reason they dropped them was probably the heat and early in the season which could be the same reason the umps made mistakes which werent obvious anyway.

I still haven't seen the mark that Geary dropped. Maybe you could put it up on youtube for us.

The 50 was definitely there, but it came immediately after a bounce that should have been recalled.

[Majority]

If a player is on the ground with the ball, all the opposition player has to do is keep on his feet and tackle.
The player with the ball will then have to dispose of it.

Why do they jump on top of the player on the ground?
It is always risking an in the back, or a high tackle decision from the scumpires.

[bergholt]

Has to be umpired properly. Players where laying over the top of it and as soon as they where tackled dropping to the ground or throwing themselves forward and getting a free. Umpires cant allow the player to suck them in.

It's still a free though, surely? If you're dumb enough to tackle a guy on the ground from behind then you risk giving away a free. All the players know that, some just forget in the heat of battle.

[stinger]

Did anyone else think that 50m penalty at the very start of the port game was bloody soft?

I was a little disappointed in it and few other things i saw in the port game. I know it was hot and was a hard day for the umps .... you know.

sth aussie port supporting maggots.......was obvious right from the start......even tried to screw the crows over later in the night......

[stinger]

Completely correct. 50 everyday of the week. Isnt a silly practice game a bit early for all this stuff. What about the sitters Dal and Geary dropped. The players can at least control that. The reason they dropped them was probably the heat and early in the season which could be the same reason the umps made mistakes which werent obvious anyway.

I still haven't seen the mark that Geary dropped. Maybe you could put it up on youtube for us.

The 50 was definitely there, but it came immediately after a bounce that should have been recalled.[/quote]


it was actually nathan wright....

[Saint_Ash]

If a player is on the ground with the ball, all the opposition player has to do is keep on his feet and tackle.
The player with the ball will then have to dispose of it.

Not easy to tackle someone on the ground without being on the ground yourself.

Umpires were definitely red hot on anything that looks like it could be high contact or in the back of a player on the ground. Players adjusted VERY quickly though and started throwing themselves forward to win the free kick.

[Life Long Saint]

The umps have totally lost the plot with the in the back interpretation.

If two players are on the ground and one collapses and forces the other to land in his back then it is not a push in the back. It is not why we have the rule in the first place.

The umpire should be assessing who contributes to the incident just like they do when a player ducks his head and is tackled high.

To pay in the back in those scenarios like the Farren Ray incident (and there were a couple of others in the match) shows no feel for the game at all.

Game 2 was poorly umpired but it is the middle of February and the umpires are rusty too.

[CURLY]

Has to be umpired properly. Players where laying over the top of it and as soon as they where tackled dropping to the ground or throwing themselves forward and getting a free. Umpires cant allow the player to suck them in.

It's still a free though, surely? If you're dumb enough to tackle a guy on the ground from behind then you risk giving away a free. All the players know that, some just forget in the heat of battle.

How is it a free if a player is on all fours over the ball and I wrap my arms around him to trap it in?

[CURLY]

If a player is on the ground with the ball, all the opposition player has to do is keep on his feet and tackle.
The player with the ball will then have to dispose of it.

Why do they jump on top of the player on the ground?
It is always risking an in the back, or a high tackle decision from the scumpires.

Standing alongside the player over the ball holding his jumper simply allows him to release it freely. Why would you allow that?

[MCG-Unit]

Yep fairly poor/inconsistent umpiring in the Port game, both frees/50m paid to PA and those not paid to Saints - come to expect that v PA over there. (50m pen still soft IMO, also ball should have been recalled from bad bounce)

Everyone makes mistakes in the exteme heat don't they - even umpires?

[bergholt]

It's still a free though, surely? If you're dumb enough to tackle a guy on the ground from behind then you risk giving away a free. All the players know that, some just forget in the heat of battle.

How is it a free if a player is on all fours over the ball and I wrap my arms around him to trap it in?

It's not. It's a free if you take him high - which is easy to do accidentally when he's on the ground. Or if you fall in his back - which is easy to do accidentally if you're trying to go down on your knees and then grab him. Or if you slide in - which is easy to do if you're arriving at the contest at pace and then going to ground to tackle.

All I'm saying is that it's really easy to give a free away when you're tackling a guy on the ground, so players need to learn to be careful about that. I reckon our guys are pretty poor from that point of view, judging from the weekend's games.

[bergholt]

If a player is on the ground with the ball, all the opposition player has to do is keep on his feet and tackle.
The player with the ball will then have to dispose of it.

Standing alongside the player over the ball holding his jumper simply allows him to release it freely. Why would you allow that?

From the point of view of the game, you'd allow that because it's very ugly to watch players go to ground with the ball and then everyone else play stacks on.

[CURLY]

From the point of view of the game, you'd allow that because it's very ugly to watch players go to ground with the ball and then everyone else play stacks on.

Makes no sence at all why would you allow a bloke easy access to a clear disposal?

[bergholt]

Makes no sence at all why would you allow a bloke easy access to a clear disposal?

As a player, you wouldn't, but players have to obey the rules and the rules are designed to give you an open game.

[mad saint guy]

Both games were horribly umpired, the only difference being it was in our favour in the first game and then went against us in the second. Far too many free kicks paid for incidental contact that had no impact on the contest

[St DAC]

Get used to it. Appears to be a trend ...