Inside the mind of an AFL finals umpire when everyone else is losing theirs

Imagine you demonstrate astute judgment, enormous courage, make the correct decision, and for that, you get bottles hurled at you.

Doesn’t feel right, does it?

That’s what happened to umpire Hayden Meyer and his mates, Brett Rosebury, Nathan Williamson and Jacob Mollison last Saturday night. They umpired one of the greatest games ever seen and, as such, played a small part in it being so great. They weren’t “the Wizard”, obviously, but in a game of that magnitude and pressure, they played their role.

The conversations I’ve had with people since the game have followed a similar tone.

Them: “It’s a shame the umpire made that call at the end”.

Me: “It would have been a bigger shame if he hadn’t, because it would have been wrong”.

Them: “Yeah, but it’s just a shame that it gets decided by an umpiring decision”.

Me: “It would have still been decided by an umpiring decision – it just would have been the incorrect decision”.

Them: “Shut up, Wayne”.

Football is an irrational game, especially in the stands. It’s tribal, and that’s one of the things that makes it so great.

I’ve written before that halfway through my time as head of umpiring at the AFL, it dawned on me that the very thing people wanted from umpiring – consistency – is fundamentally unachievable.

And it’s unachievable for three reasons:

1. Most fans don’t know the rules. I didn’t, either, until I went into umpiring.

2. We see each decision through the lens of the team we barrack for. (For the record, I think this is awesome. Who wants to be rational at the footy?)

3. Umpires make mistakes.

When looking at the holding-the-ball decision against Jarman Impey, my sense is only the second reason comes into play. We all know that’s a free kick, don’t we? The only out I give fans here is that this type of decision should be paid more often.

No.3 doesn’t come into play, so that leaves us with reason No.1. Ah, the irrationality of it all.

What is going through the umpire’s mind at a moment like that?

Umpires are incredibly process-driven – especially so with holding the ball as it’s a family tree of options that can only be worked through by a process of elimination.

Before we get to the actual decision, a couple of broader questions.

Are the umpires aware it’s tight, it’s a preliminary final, and it’s close to the end of the
game? Obvy, as my daughters would say.

Are the umpires aware that every decision is even more critical and magnified? Yes. And are they aware that Hawthorn will want to take it to stoppage and the Lions will want it in free play? Yes.

Does it change the decision-making process of the umpires? I’m not in the mind of every umpire, but I can say comfortably that, on this occasion, Hayden’s decision-making process was sound.

Impey is tackled immediately, so there’s “no prior opportunity”, which brings into play the “genuine attempt” part of the holding-the-ball rule. The umpire notices his arm is free, so holds his whistle. If the ball was pinned, the umpire may have blown his whistle more quickly to stop a potential dangerous tackle.

Impey does not make a genuine attempt, so a correct free kick is paid against him.

What mistakes did Impey and Hawthorn make?

1. He must make a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball; that is, he must kick or handball, or attempt to kick or handball.

2. If you want to fool the umpire, turn your back to him, so he can’t see your arm is pinned. Impey opens his whole body up to the middle of the ground where the umpires are. If he turns to the boundary, we may have seen a different decision.

3. Impey’s teammate, Jai Newcombe, must join the tackle to put confusion into the umpire’s mind. You must give him a reason not to pay the free kick.

A couple of further observations on the enigma that is umpiring. On Saturday, the four umpires did their job extremely well but found themselves dodging bottles as they exited the stadium, while a family in the crowd dodged a plate of nachos.

I loved the way they all held their heads high as they walked off. Maybe this was to ensure they could see the projectiles, but I also think it points to their resilience.

The Swans-Freo preliminary final on Friday night was also a classic; it just wasn’t a top-
three classic like Saturday’s. There were clear umpiring errors in the Friday game – a missed holding the ball on Caleb Serong was one, and Tom McCartin got away with a crude spoil on Josh Treacy. Saturday’s game was brilliantly umpired, yet that’s the one that erupted. Again, irrational.

Saturday’s grand final will be the first without an opening bounce. As a card-carrying advocate for ditching the bounce, I think the game has lost nothing this year through its omission. In fact, it has been better. Both rucks have an equal run at the ball-up, there are no call-backs after wonky bounces, and scoring from centre ball-ups has increased.

But I might miss the theatre of the first bounce on Saturday. I know the umpires won’t.

And finally, to umpire Brett Rosebury, who in his 587th game will umpire his 10th grand final. That’s an extraordinary achievement by an even more extraordinary person – one of the best I’ve had the privilege of knowing and working with in football.

He is what footballers call a great teammate. He has a passion for umpiring, for the game and for his fellow umpires that has made him an outstanding leader of that group for more than 20 years. Congratulations, Brett.