He’d argue there were teammates in the vicinity, same as with the insufficient intent rule.
Except on BBlitz !
They don’t have to “improve”.
They are following instructions to give the AFL fat cats in Gil’s own words: “the results we need”.
Sometimes they try too hard to do that. So the AFL fat cats do all they can to sweep everything under the rug.
Optics are important. That is the #2 priority for the AwFL.
(#1 of course is ensuring the executive salaries and bonuses).
The sooner people realise this, the happier the betting companies will be.
Which makes it even harder to understand how the league ratified it.
It was ratified because the AFL were happy that Collingwood won
It’s amusing because technically the North player didn’t actually play on; the umpire was actually correct not to call it. The rules say that only failing to dispose of the ball within a reasonable time, or attempting to dispose of it other than in a direct line over the mark will result in a play on call. Running off the mark isn’t covered in the rules, as simply running with the ball is not an attempt to dispose (unless being off the mark means that a “reasonable time” has automatically elapsed.)
That said, I still don’t think the North player played on. He was running across the ground when he marked, so his momentum carried him off it (as it does with most players who are running when they take a mark, as very few will be running in a direct line with the mark and the centre of their goal line.) He then slows down and pivots to face goal.
I think the other complication was that there was probably also an open question in the North player’s mind about whether it actually went 15m. As we know, another rule applied consistently incosnistently. Better to be ready to play on and get the ball inside 50 if you don’t get the whistle - than to have the Collingwood players pile on and get a ball up.
It just highlights how complex we’ve made the game and how umpires and players need to make split second decisions where multiple factors are in play at the same time.
Still should have been 50 if it was paid the mark. One thing that Laura got absolutely super wrong was that two wrongs don’t make a right. If it was a mark - that’s 50 every day of the week and twice on Sunday. If no mark, should have been play on and probably HTB.
I think the ump did blow the whistle to pay the mark (a couple of steps after the North player caught it, which imo is ok as that’s how long the ump took to decide he controlled it.) That spot is where the mark should have been. I’m ok with umps giving leniency for players’ momentum; requiring them to stop on a dime means they’d have no choice but to squib contests.
However if it was a mark, then the Collingwood players did encroach the protected area. Again, I’d give leniency for their momentum and give the usual “Clear out” and “back 2 meters” calls that umps give all the time, before paying the 50m. However the fact that they’re able to change direction toward the North player when he straightens up to look at goal indicates that they could have cleared the area if they’d turned the other way. The ump stuffed up by not telling them to do that. If the umps can give leniency to players who don’t hear a “touched, play on” call, then maybe they can give leniency to players who encroach the protected area when the ump hasn’t actually pointed out that it was a mark (the “mark” call didn’t come through until after they’d encroached the protected area) and not pointed out where the mark actually is, and when the players have a reasonable case for thinking the player who marked the ball has played on.
Any way it’s looked at, the ump stuffed up.
I think they umpires have been more lenient this year on
- STAND! They give players more time to get OUTSIDE 5! And they’ve allowed players a step or two.
- play on. It’s getting called earlier so the guy on the mark can rejoin play.
- running through the protected area. This is almost not a thing anymore, rarely see a 50 paid even though it’s happening.
And what this leads to is players and coaches push the limits. They’ll be forcing the umpire to make a decision.
I get what you are saying HH and genuine one off mistakes shouldn’t be dwelt on too much. What bothers me is when umpires consistently favour teams or players or should I say consistently penalise teams or players.
You don’t have to go back far in our history to see what appears to be a coordinated bias against us. Watching players climb goal posts and not be penalised or watching a player get punched in the jaw (BZT) when Heeney actually broke his hand right in front of an umpire (the vision of this is telling) without as much as a free kick or a second look. Luckily the MRO cleared BZT of any wrong doing.
Remember ANZAC day a few years ago when decision after decision was made to stop any Essendon comeback and a couple had almost every player on the ground stop because they knew a free kick had been given away, only for the umpire to wave play on and to have Pendlebury lower his head and run into a stationary Essendon player and be awarded a free kick, that was a chef’s kiss for the umpires.
I remember Carey commentating at a North game against us during the Saga when we didn’t have a free kick and they had about a dozen and when another was paid to North and the crowd booed, he just simply and accurately said that was a free kick and should be paid, just because they aren’t paying them to Essendon at the moment doesn’t mean that wasn’t a free kick.
If umpires genuinely make an error you would expect that the errors would even out but that doesn’t seem to happen for some teams and especially us. Whether the bias is institutionalised or just because of the personnel involved there is obvious bias and the AFL do everything they can to cover it up.
The best way to encourage more umpires is for the AWFUL to admit mistakes when they are made and to look at the obvious bias in free kicks in games and eradicate that.
These umps get paid a shitload of money, they should be pulled up for bias against players or teams, and for deciding games with bad or inconsistent decisions.
If they are that bad consistently, they should be publically “dropped”, just like players are.
Backing the turds up only encourages more bias & bad decisions going forward …. No need for the AFL to comment, bad umps just need to be disappeared as a warning for the other pansies feasting in the AFL trough.
So bad how they’ve gone back to rewarding the arm lift duckers like ginnivan, Watson etc.
Tried to stamp it out but then they just let it creep back in within 6 weeks.
It was off the back of the Easter Monday game were ginnivan ducked about 8 times and pundits like Leigh Mathew sooked about him getting a rough deal.
Now it’s back and yeah Umps fall for everything.
Toby green just got done for over the mark in what was an exact replica of the collingwood debarcle
No stand stop nothing just a whistle then 50
They make it up as they go
Hogan had to try kick from behind the post.
May held his head after being tackled.

They make it up as they go
And yet, they are ALWAYS correct!
Quite amazing really. No-one would believe it if it didn’t come from an organisation as ethically pure and transparent as the AFL.

Could be the worst umpired game of all time.
Someone comes up with this line or something similar every week. While the chumps don’t usually cover themselves in glory, this sentiment can’t be accurate every time.

sentiment can’t be accurate every time.
Umpires do try to achieve more each week, so it is possible

Hogan had to try kick from behind the post.
That part was actually correct. The infringement (deliberate rushed behind after the defender had time and space to dispose) was on the goal line (but not in the goal square,) which means the mark is on the goal line. Hogan had to line up in a direct line between the mark (which was on the goal line) and the centre of the goals, which put him behind the point post. That’s the first time I’ve seen that actually done correctly. The commentators were laughing. If it’s a problem then it’s the rules that need changing, that one wasn’t the ump’s fault.

deliberate rushed behind after the defender had time and space to dispose) was on the goal line (but not in the goal square
Never seen this laid yet. Although the forwards appeal for it multiple times a game.
34 minute quarters because not one bounce went straight and they allowed the eagles 5 minutes on every kick in