Sheer incompetence and dreadful new rules are killing the beautiful game we all love | Graham Cornes

Umpires are a soft target because they are mainly anonymous, but the AFL could make it a little easier to like them, writes Graham Cornes.

At the 25-minute mark of Thursday night’s clash between Brisbane and Collingwood, the Magpie superstar, Josh Daicos, took a mark, between the wing and the halfback flank.

What followed was a bizarre, inexcusable umpiring incident. Bear in mind this is the elite level of our unique Australian rules game, and the umpires are extremely well paid.

Brisbane player, Zac Bailey rushed to stand the mark. As he did so, Daicos’s teammate, Patrick Lipinski, ran past the mark and Daicos feigned to handball. Of course, Bailey reacted and moved to cover the handball which never came.

Instead of calling “stand”, the umpire blew his whistle and awarded a 50m penalty against Bailey. There was the first mistake.

It wasn’t that long ago that the AFL moved to cover the scourge of players exploiting the “stand” rule and milking a 50m penalty by feigning to handball. An addendum to this already dubious rule was that if the player with the ball feigned a handball, the umpire should call “play-on”.

Josh Daicos of the Magpies celebrates kicking a goal during the round six AFL match between Brisbane Lions. (Photo by Bradley Kanaris/Getty Images)

But in this case, umpire No. 16 didn’t. He immediately penalised the Brisbane player 50 metres.

Whether it was umpire 16 or another umpire further afield who measured the 50m, we may never know but the distance of the penalty, later measured by the Fox Footy lab at 77.2m which took him inside Collingwood’s forward 50!

From that distance Daicos was easily able to kick Collingwood’s fourth goal.

OK, given the ease of Collingwood’s eventual victory, this was not a match-changing howler but that is not the point. It is sheer incompetence that such a miscalculation could occur.

Several things come into play here. One is the willingness of the umpire to thrust himself into the game and impact it so dramatically when all he had to do was call “stand” to reinforce the rule.

Second is the enthusiasm with which an umpire can impose the 50m penalty. It is a severe penalty which should only be used to penalise serious transgressions – but no, the slightest infringement over the mark or simple movement on the mark, is slapped with the penalty.

To emphasise further the stupidity of this rule, if the man standing the mark moves backwards off that mark, he is also penalised. Where is the logic in that? Yes, encroach over the mark and you are asking for trouble, but moving backwards off it?

We will never be satisfied with the umpiring but the AFL could make it a little easier to like the umpires. (Photo by Daniel Carson/AFL Photos via Getty Images)

It’s to the stage now when teams don’t even bother to stand the mark. They quickly move backwards off it to cover space for a short kick. The result is that we hear these constant calls of “stand” or “outside five” from the umpires. Do they really need to be miked up?

I’ve railed against this “stand” rule from the moment it was introduced and nothing has convinced me that it has enhanced the game.

Ostensibly it was introduced to allow the team with the ball to play-on unimpeded, preferably through the centre corridor, but teams don’t need the rule to play attractive, attacking football.

Teams like Collingwood and more recently Hawthorn, who play attacking football don’t wait for the “stand” call from the umpire. It happens spontaneously.

If we have seen higher scoring in recent years is because coaches like Craig McRae and Sam Mitchell value positive over negative; attack over defence. Umpires don’t have time to call “stand” before the ball is moved on.

The anomaly is that when a player is having a shot for goal and uses his full 30 seconds, he is still allowed to move off the mark and improve his angle. It’s too big an advantage.

It is true that after the confusion that prevailed when the rule was first introduced, players have adjusted. The penalty is not imposed all that often but even once a game is too much because it invariably results in a goal.

Collingwood beat Brisbane easily on Thursday night but who can tell if one single goal is the goal that shifts momentum unfairly? Photo by Chris Hyde/AFL Photos/via Getty Images.

Collingwood beat Brisbane easily on Thursday night but who can tell if one single goal is the goal that shifts momentum unfairly? It’s beyond time that the AFL concedes that the SANFL model of a 25m penalty is a much fairer and sensible outcome for simple transgressions.

The 50m penalty can still remain for more serious assaults on the player with the ball, but it’s been a long, long time since we’ve seen any of those.

There has never been an era when the fans have been satisfied with the umpires. Regardless of the era, there comes a time in the season when dissatisfaction with the umpiring becomes an issue.

It’s probably worse in this day and age because the game has never been more scrutinised and critiqued. There are so many camera angles that it’s impossible that one dodgy decision can be overlooked. There is no hiding and no escape.

Umpires are a soft target because they are mainly anonymous. I wouldn’t recognise umpire No. 16 walking down the street, so it’s easier to criticise him. Putting a human face to the umpire and allowing the fans to get to know him or her, makes it harder to criticise.

Keyboard cowards on their computers might still spew hate-filled vitriol from their anonymity, but most rational people would recognise the human side of the umpire’s role. Knowing and liking someone does make you think twice about criticising them harshly and impersonally.

Of course, here in Adelaide we are the experts in umpire abuse because in recent years the Crows have suffered the most at the hands of the umpires. We are beset with a persecution complex – for good reason.

Whether it was that goal-umpiring decision against Sydney, Sam Draper from Essendon floundering over the ball or more recently the Izak Rankine mark or non-free kick on the Gold Coast, we have been shafted.

And what about the mark that was awarded to Geelong’s Ollie Dempsey in the recent game when Lachie Scholl had first grab of it? That resulted in a gaol at a critical stage of the match.

Heck, I can even go back to the 1993 preliminary final against Essendon and see the imbalance of frees after halftime but that hurts too much.

Over the years Adelaide has definitely had too many poor decisions go against it, but most clubs can say the same. Although the consensus of opinion, if you do listen to social media, is that Collingwood and Hawthorn both get favourable runs from the umpires.

We will never be satisfied with the umpiring but the AFL could make it a little easier to like the umpires.

One, do away with the 50m penalty. Two, ditch the “stand” rule. Three, introduce a last-touch penalty for out-of-bounds instead of guessing insufficient intent. Four, allow us to see the human side of umpires.

As a final lesson they could attend a SANFL game like Friday’s, between Glenelg and the Crows SANFL team. A close, exciting match with the highest level of skill, the umpires still got abused but they didn’t detract from the quality of the contest.

And there were no frivolous 50m penalties awarded.