Blatant cheating by umpires


Pies again with rub of the green

Should be a royal commission into blatant favoritism they’ve got over last few years


Shaun Ryan: Yeah so that one, the 26.4 metre run. The rules stipulate that once you run 15m you must make an attempt to IMMEDIATELY dispose of the ball and we think Brown did make such an attempt but just unintentionally traveled an extra 11 metres by the time the ball hit his foot. Correct decision.


I’m entirely comfortable with any player running as far as they ■■■■■■■ well want against the Swans. If it’s good enough for Franklin then it’s good enough for anyone else.


These jokers (afl) should really get their ■■■■■■■ ■■■■ together and keep in mind that this game belongs to us, the people, not to them and their ■■■■■■■ friends and agendas… because if they don’t, ground invasions are not far away.


They will only worry when people stop going, watching, paying for memberships etc
Unfortunately it’s our national sport and that won’t happen. They continue to meet their KPIs so everything is ok according to Hocking


Maybe the ump warned brown he was running to far so it’s ok


Bring back Russo, the best umpire l can recall, to be the chumps coach, they certainly need one. Get rid of interpretations, make the rules monotonal (black and white), and then get rid of the rules committee. Stop fiddling with the game, it doesn’t need the constantly meddling.

Bring back Glen James as well, he was another good umpy.


That was just plain dumb football from Hooker. No excuses.


It was a goal regardless. The “free kick” for shoulder charging TBell was from about 15 meters out.


Essendon specific umpire debacles aside, on the whole the umpiring this year has been nothing short of diabolical. I can’t remember a season where it’s been so bad. They need a big kick up the ■■■■.


The umpiring department is the only semi professional outfit in the AFL. Umpires should be full time and as someone else suggested they ought to have a bench like the players do in case of an accident or someone is sick etc. The AFL needs to do this for the game and the umpires, the players and the fans. The game doesn’t need changing, its the people changing the game who need changing!

The umpires should be completely supported by the AFL and let’s face it, they are NOT!
The AFL does all sorts of things to tie them up in knots, for instance the continual changing of the rules and not adhering to the rules they already have. The whole thing has become too complex and should be simplified. Who would want to be an umpire?


I thought there were ‘reserve’ umpires in every match? In case of injury or accident



There may well be, but they haven’t had the resources put their way in hardly any shape or form as other parts of the AFL business. It seems to me if your employer doesn’t make your workplace and work load compliant so that you can be the best you can be, then; its hard to be that isn’t it? The are semi professional at best. ALL AFL Umpires should be full time.

And; Michael Christian confusing and conflicting decisions don’t help, if it is as it is and that is the answer to the rule problem, what was the question?


No. That’s not going to solve anything. Probably make it worse…


Won’t solve it whilst the rules keep changing and so discretionary and subjective.

#1 example is the idea of “genuine attempt” when disposing the ball. that, to me is the heart of poor umpiring, congestion and low scoring.

Umpiring: you can get umpires to downright cheat like they did on Anzac Day in Q4 one way. Other times umpires have to be continually trying to decide if there’s been a genuine attempt meaning they can get it wrong and/or miss other free kicks because they are not looking at other things or even confused what has priority compared to other free kicks like in the back or high (incidental) contact as the tackler has been tackling so long without a holding/dropping the ball decision being paid that the tackled player has squirmed his body in the tackle to draw a free kick.

Congestion& Scoring : with “genuine attempt”, our game has become a series of rolling rugby style mauls: player gets tackled, drops/throws it in a "genuine attempt to dispose of it correctly. Because of the time taken, other player descend on the contest and the games closes up. Player B picks up the loose ball and the same happens to a Player C, Player D, etc. before finally the umpire pays a free, balls it up, it goes out of bounds of somebody clears it. A lot of time is taken all in the name of “keeping the game moving” making it an ugly spectacle and reducing time spent trying to score as time is soaked up simply trying to win and maintain possession. The price of “keeping the game moving by making a genuine attempt” has resulted in a lot “dead time” fighting over the ball leading to reduced time to score and hence you have the lowest scores we have had for up to 50 years.


They may as well make THROWING THE BALL LEGAL THEN BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT’S HAPPENING. The rules as you say are too subjective. The AFL needs to simply this and
this will be a game changer. It all too confusing for everyone.


There’s no doubt in my mind “genuine attempt” was brought in to keep the game moving. Side effect is incorrect disposal no longer paid where no prior (and sometimes even with prior as an anzac day) exists.


So I recently read something really interesting - and I think very pertinent to this thread.

According to scientific studies done in North America and involving Ice Hockey, Gridiron and Basketball (I think soccer as well), the colour black and the colour red are widely seen as the most ‘aggressive’ colours. Data gathered via this research project over a significant period, conclusively evidences that teams wearing predominantly these colours are universally penalised significantly more than their opponents. This was particularly graphically exemplified by a team that changed from a ‘less aggressive’ colour to red in the same season!

In other words, there is a PROVEN bias held by people in general that also applies to those officiating even professional sports, against predominantly red and/or black teams. In a contested situation, officials are more likely than not to see the red/black wearing player as the aggressor/offender.
Obviously, Essendon utilises both these colours!

I think there are other factors in play too re: EFC - not scientifically proven (yet!), but may include ‘big club’ syndrome where a perceived battler or underdog is favoured against a (historically) strong club; and since the supplement saga, an additional general bias - possibly even mostly subconscious like the colour bias - carried against EFC (‘weren’t punished enough’, ‘cheats’, ‘pariahs’, ‘deserve every bad thing they get’ etc) by probably a majority of people… including at least some umpires and undoubtedly, some AFL administrators.


@benzina: Thoughts?



They have zero feel for the game and ‘interpret’ rules based on AFL direction.

Sitting them down for 40 hours per week won’t change that imo. It might make them worse because they already feel the need to justify their own sense of self importance.