Page 1 of 3
THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 9:42 pm
by CENTURION
There seems to be a lot more unrest with the performances of the umpires lately. I mentioned something on another thread last week & I would like some serious (yes me, serious) discussion about my opinion on how to increase the performances of the umps. I said that in my opinion, there should be 2 field umps, 1 does the left, the other the right & there should be 4 boundary umps, 2 go to the left, 2 to the right. The boundary umps are to have more power to over-ride the field umps decisions, or assist in the decision making, like linesmen. Your thoughts?
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 9:50 pm
by bayman
i think the depth of umpires is at low point & not up to the standard, therefore they should revert to 2 umpires at least for the time being
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 9:54 pm
by Dog_ger
Where would we be without
"Umpires"Our universe would not be possible....
Without gravity we could not play ball sports.
Without Umpires we could not play our great game.
Full Stop

Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 9:55 pm
by FlyingHigh
Alternatively go to four umpires who are all ex league players. Guess the problem with this is it takes out the participation of a certain group of footy enthusiasts.
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 10:05 pm
by PhilH
Confession Time ... I have now joined the umpiring ranks
Thankfully it's only goal umpire for the Happy Valley U8's but this still posses some unique challenges.
My son was in just his 3rd game today and when in the forward third he is usually the link man from the half forward flank to a player in the goal square.
Of course as soon I'm there he moves to full foward ... takes a mark and lines up for a shot, 10-15m out 45 degree angle.
I can't honestly say what I would have does if there was a close call to make but alas (or thankfully) he missed pretty clearly for a behind.
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 10:18 pm
by Dog_ger
FlyingHigh wrote:Alternatively go to four umpires who are all ex league players. Guess the problem with this is it takes out the participation of a certain group of footy enthusiasts.
If we had 36 umpires we would still complain.
We tend to look for an excuse.
It's not the umpires. It's your team.

Crows are Carp. It is not the umpires fault.
It's the team.

Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 10:23 pm
by G
I can just imagine some trumped up boundary umpire delighting in going to great lengths to over-ride a field umpires decision and make a name for himself

Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 10:28 pm
by Dutchy
Name a year when we havent complained about umpiring?
FWIW I think giving the boundary umpires some responsibility does have merit for the obvious free kicks that the field umpire cannot see e.g. a throw, mark that hit the ground
Many other major sports allow their linesmen to make make decisions.
Makes sense
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 10:39 pm
by topcat10
I agree,especially after seeing field umpires spend half of a game looking into the sun by officiating from the centre of the ground, and some distance from the play. Stands to reason that both sides of the play are covered if the boundary umpire stays boundaryside while the field ump is in the middle.
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 10:43 pm
by whufc
topcat10 wrote:I agree,especially after seeing field umpires spend half of a game looking into the sun by officiating from the centre of the ground, and some distance from the play. Stands to reason that both sides of the play are covered if the boundary umpire stays boundaryside while the field ump is in the middle.
yeah they did the same at Elizabeth, in the last quarter the sun was above the grandstand yet the umpires persisted in umpiring with there backs to the outer and looking at the members.
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 10:45 pm
by whufc
I think all these different rule changes/interpretations are making their job impossible.
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Sun May 23, 2010 10:52 pm
by scott
Leave the game alone! Bring back the rules of 10 years ago and stop changing everything cause that's what's stuffing everything up.
Boundary umpires making field umpire decisions?? That's not bloody football!!! They throw the ball in, the three men in white make the calls, the two mustache men in lab coats signal goals. Leave it like that. That's how we love it.
Let's just play footy and leave the game the f#ck alone!
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Mon May 24, 2010 8:36 am
by HeartBeatsTrue
CENTURION wrote:There seems to be a lot more unrest with the performances of the umpires lately. I mentioned something on another thread last week & I would like some serious (yes me, serious) discussion about my opinion on how to increase the performances of the umps. I said that in my opinion, there should be 2 field umps, 1 does the left, the other the right & there should be 4 boundary umps, 2 go to the left, 2 to the right. The boundary umps are to have more power to over-ride the field umps decisions, or assist in the decision making, like linesmen. Your thoughts?
We already have 3 umpires making poor and inconsistant decisions, do we really need 6?
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Mon May 24, 2010 8:59 am
by twosheds
scott wrote:Leave the game alone! Bring back the rules of 10 years ago and stop changing everything cause that's what's stuffing everything up.
Boundary umpires making field umpire decisions?? That's not bloody football!!! They throw the ball in, the three men in white make the calls, the two mustache men in lab coats signal goals. Leave it like that. That's how we love it.
Let's just play footy and leave the game the f#ck alone!
What he said !
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Mon May 24, 2010 9:01 am
by CENTURION
the game is faster & they see less, get one of the field, the boundary umps have more time to see things as well, because they don't have to worry about positioning themselves so much.
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Mon May 24, 2010 9:27 am
by LPH
PhilH wrote:Confession Time ... I have now joined the umpiring ranks
Thankfully it's only goal umpire for the Happy Valley U8's but this still posses some unique challenges.
My son was in just his 3rd game today and when in the forward third he is usually the link man from the half forward flank to a player in the goal square.
Of course as soon I'm there he moves to full foward ... takes a mark and lines up for a shot, 10-15m out 45 degree angle.
I can't honestly say what I would have does if there was a close call to make but alas (or thankfully) he missed pretty clearly for a behind.
Me too !!!!
But FIELD & U12s @ GSFL (Full Oval) - Heart Attack is not far away!!
Oh, The Irony!
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Mon May 24, 2010 9:30 am
by CUTTERMAN
I wonder just how much AFL umpiring and rules are being pushed onto the SANFL, it seems like alot more now to a few years ago, if this is so, does the SANFL umpiring fraternity detail these changes and interpretations to the clubs as the AFL do at the start of the season?
I also think some of the positioning of umpires is pretty bad and they feel compelled to make a decision regardless of a good view of the situation or not. There have been times when the boundary ump has had a clear vision and would be able to confer with the field ump. I think we have to stick with 3 field unless we can incorporate the boundary umps view, doesn't have to be all the time just occasionally. What happened to the days when the field ump would be on the boundary line facing the ruck contest during a throw in?
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Mon May 24, 2010 9:37 am
by twosheds
CENTURION wrote:the game is faster & they see less, get one of the field, the boundary umps have more time to see things as well, because they don't have to worry about positioning themselves so much.
"the game is faster" - this sounds like AFL media-speak for any perceived "issue' -how do they see less ?
Two field and four boundary umpires gives you six blokes with potential for disagreement, less consistency, six egos possibly looking to be massaged
If they postioned themselves correctly ( coaching issue) there is no "worry" about positioning
In a perfect world they would officiate in the spirit of the game rather than the letter of the law(s) but - never gonna happen !
Any way going to the footy and giving the umps a spray probably save the country millions of dollars in mental health funding, its a catharsis.
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Mon May 24, 2010 9:59 am
by Wedgie
twosheds wrote:CENTURION wrote:the game is faster & they see less, get one of the field, the boundary umps have more time to see things as well, because they don't have to worry about positioning themselves so much.
"the game is faster" - this sounds like AFL media-speak for any perceived "issue' -how do they see less ?
Two field and four boundary umpires gives you six blokes with potential for disagreement, less consistency, six egos possibly looking to be massaged
Ive seen it trialled once and it resulted in more consistency and was the best display of SANFL umpiring Ive seen in the last 10 years. It results in more consistency as a person who can actually see what's happened can have input into just about every decision as opposed to the constant guessing there usually is in a game.
Re: THE BLOODY UMPIRES.

Posted:
Mon May 24, 2010 10:33 am
by MightyEagles
I think that the SANFL umpires watch to much AFL and try and copy what those umpires.