Umpires are now bigger than the game

[Psyber]

Back in the 70s and 80s, I knew a number of league umpires, and they would always tell you if they never heard their name being discussed it usually meant they were doing a good job. They actually welcomed anonymity. When you compare it with the "look at moi" culture of contemporary umpires, it just makes you wonder where we went wrong.

National TV programming of the AFL - everyone in the game wants to be a "star" now.

[Gravel]

I think the biggest problem is the fitness levels now required to umpire. We have bokes that can run Olympic qualifying times but do not have a feeling for the game and are constantly out of position. Back in the day the umps read the play better and were accordingly better positioned to make a correct call.

[Hondo]

Back in the 70s and 80s, I knew a number of league umpires, and they would always tell you if they never heard their name being discussed it usually meant they were doing a good job. They actually welcomed anonymity. When you compare it with the "look at moi" culture of contemporary umpires, it just makes you wonder where we went wrong.

Yet some of the best umpires of that era are well known and some maintained very high profiles after they retired. KG often told stories of his umpiring days. I don't recall an outcry about that.

The 1 umpire system especially focussed attention on certain umpires. Even with 2, in the 80s growing up I could have named 5-10 SANFL league umpires off the top of my head. Not because I went to the game and yelled at them. Just because their names were often discussed, for good or bad. They are a part of the game.

I don't think the situation that prompted this thread is the same issue as you are discussing which is more about reviews in the media on their on field performances. ie, no news was good news.

[Rik E Boy]

Does any remember Mark Fraser, the former player who became an umpire? He had an excellent feel for the game and it looked like he was going to be a good umpire but got 'bounced' out of the umpiring fraternity because he couldn't do a decent bounce. Surely having more former players involved in umpiring is prefereable to retaining the bounce.

regards,

REB

[Mark Dreher]

Does any remember Mark Fraser, the former player who became an umpire? He had an excellent feel for the game and it looked like he was going to be a good umpire but got 'bounced' out of the umpiring fraternity because he couldn't do a decent bounce. Surely having more former players involved in umpiring is prefereable to retaining the bounce.

regards,

REB

Spot on REB the bounce is almost redundant. All good to start the game (surely one out of the three can be a designated bouncer) then throw it up around the ground. This takes away the variables, can move the game on and take the focus away from the umpire while he preens himself getting ready for it and using it as a look at me moment. Throw the ball up immediately stops packs forming and set defensive plays, therefore opens the game up and hopefully higher scoring. Also takes that bounce issue away therefore one less pressure on the umpire

[Hondo]

I definitely agree on losing the bounce especially if good umpires are being lost to the game because they can't do it.

[gadj1976]

I think that's the major problem with the umpiring recruitment. It's not about how you umpire, it's what positions you make to make decisions. And to make decisions, you have to run. So they base all their selections on who can run quickly.

Note that Goldspink (even though he was greatly despised) didn't umpire in his last year because he couldn't make the cutoff time. I think it's based on certain time for a 4km run.

We should be going to great depths to find the best umpires, not say "you have to run a 4km run in x time". Craziness. Ex players are less likely to umpire because it becomes a young man's caper where running to a cutoff time is the selection criteria.

I don't think Fraser didn't make it cos he couldn't bounce but could be wrong.