That was the AwFL rewarding Gordon for his leading the charge against us in the Saga.
2 Likes
But if youâre not deemed to have had prior, you only have to make an attempt, thus rendering incorrect disposal irrelevant in that scenario. Incorrect disposal is only paid if the player has been deemed to have had prior and has then not disposed of the ball correctly. Thatâs my understanding.
1 Like
Kane cornes said the ridley htb was the correct decision, â â â â off mate
2 Likes
I have a thought.
Maybe the fourth umpire should be, in some ways, like the third umpire in cricket. They sit in a room, headphones on, disconnected from the crowd and players and watch the game on a screen. Whenever an obvious incorrect call or non-call is made, they communicate their decision to the umpires and overrule them.
No chance of lapses in concentration due to physical fatigue. Theyâll have an elevated view of the game, too. On-field umpires will take comfort in knowing they have a guy watching upstairs that can correct their human errors.
Crazy idea, but fknâ hell, we gotta try something because the umpiring is a cancer on our game.
7 Likes
You only have to make an attempt to dispose if youâre able to do so (itâs up to the umpire, and apparently they all have different ideas about how many arms need to be pinned to disqualify you as able.) If youâre unable to make the attempt, you donât have to, and itâs ballup\be spun 720 and the ball miraculously gets âknocked outâ to a teammate.
Edit: that wasnât me being facetious, 18.6.4 actually says:
Where a Player in Possession of the Football has not had Prior Opportunity, a field Umpire shall award a Free Kick if the Player is able to, but does not make a genuine attempt to Correctly Dispose of the football within a reasonable time when Legally Tackled.
Of course thereâs nothing to define what constitutes being able to, which leaves it up for umpire interpretation; another grey area.
2 Likes
Correct
The only issue that needs clarifying is prior opportunity or the length of that prior opportunity.
My understanding is as follows;
If you have the ball for a few seconds, therefore prior opportunity, and are tackled, and donât immediately dispose it correctly (not after 2 revolutions) then thatâs holding and/or dropping the ball l. Award free kick
If you have no opportunity and dispose the ball by trying to dispose it legally, say by missing a kick or a bad handball, then thatâs play on
If you have no opportunity and dispose the ball by simply dropping it or throwing it thatâs incorrect disposal. Award free kick
If you have no opportunity and donât attempt to dispose the ball because you canât dispose it correctly,thatâs a ball up. Thats why the Ridley free was wrong.
Dragging the ball in on the ground, tackled and it doesnât come out; Free kick
3 Likes
Problem with that is that dropping the ball could be called a missed kick, and throwing the ball could be called a bad handball.
3 Likes
Rules that frustrate supporters are as follows
Prior opportunity; see my last post. I donât think this is a bad law , itâs just the difficulty of interpretation
Bad laws are
Deliberate out of bounds. Itâs either all or nothing. Punching the ball out deliberately in a marking contest 2m from the line is a throw in. Kicking the ball 40m parallel to the line before it crosses is deliberate and a free kick. Crazy
Handing ball to teammate before giving it to the ump. Just get rid of this stupid law
Other laws are just open to human error. Obviously Drapers arms were hit in a marking contest. Simple free kick missed
Menzie had 2 players pressuring him in the goal square. Not a free kick, just a mistake by the umps.
50m penalty. Too much a penalty. Reduce it to 25.
Throwing the ball. Seriously this is out of control. The umps need to properly penalise obvious throws
2 Likes
Barreling a guy after heâs marked, for instance, should be 50. Flagrantly wasting time. 50.
Technical infringements like handing the ball to the wrong player because you donât know whose free it is. Minor cribbing over the mark beofre being called back. 25.
2 Likes
I guess what can be tricky and what isnât umpired well is that area between whether a player tries to dispose of the ball and misses it or just Plain drops it, which is why I think so many get away with a drop or a throw
Thatâs always going to be the issue no matter what.
Great Thomas suggested today to just get rid of all prior opportunity. You have the ball and are tackled, free kick against
Crazy. Gotta give the players that go get the ball some chance to do something with it
1 Like
Yep. Thatâs been the other side of the coin. If thereâs no leniency for no\incorrect disposal due to lack of prior opportunity, then players will rather not take possession in the first place.
Iâm ok with them keeping prior opportunity, but they should be clearer on what makes a player able\unable to âgenuinely attemptâ a disposal. Theyâve started doing that in the tribunal guidelines with dangerous tackles in terms of spelling out what qualifies⌠well, sort of, they have a list of things that âmayâ qualify, but they also say that the things on that list arenât the only things, but they donât elaborate further.
1 Like
This could be alleviated somewhat by actually paying too high and in the back free kicks from ground balls.
They were red hot on this in the early eighties.
Just about every ground ball tackle these days would be in the back under that interpretation.
4 Likes
just make umpiring a full time job at AFL level. increase pay.
And encourage more ex VFL/AFL players into the system. Extra perks.
They already have the endurance base. Maybe Joel Selwood would be better running around with the whistle than being in the Commentary box.
How good is David Rodan goal umpiring.
5 Likes
Has merit, however, how long will it take for a decision to be made and conveyed to the ground based umpire?
They take forever to make a decision on goals reviews as it is.
They could work from the Foxtel studio.
Yep, stood up there with Malinauskas to announce Gather around and then trots out that garbage
1 Like
Just Make it professional. The whinging about running and bouncing by the umpires association Is because itâs non professional. They wouldnât be issues if they were young and fit enough and training full time
1 Like
I donât have a problem with that.
If you want to move the ball to advantage, there is a risk in doing it.
Really good players already know what they are going to do with it before they take possession, and those really incisive plays when the ball moves quickly is because of a bullet handball or one over the back just knowing a teammate will be there.
Itâs risk and reward.
If no one take possession it will just sit there unless someone makes a move or maybe kicks it off the ground. Either way much less congestion and repeated ball ups.
What you donât want is players taking possession and artfully working out how to feign no prior and succumbing to tackles with an underlying intention of holding it in and getting repeat stoppages to wash time off the clock.
1 Like