Jared Rivers to contest his fine

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

I cannot believe that the issue of contacting an umpire has become so pedantic.

Good luck Jared, you deserve some going your way.

[titan_uranus 25,020]

Good one, I thought the contact was so minimal he'd get off.

I am surprised that, based on the Heath Shaw decision, Max Rooke didn't get anything for his umpire contact. But I'm glad he didn't.

[H_T 3,047]

Good one, I thought the contact was so minimal he'd get off.

I am surprised that, based on the Heath Shaw decision, Max Rooke didn't get anything for his umpire contact. But I'm glad he didn't.

I suppose it all comes down to the 'manner' and the 'player's demeanour' in which an umpire is touched these days.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

As I saw it, JR tripped over the foot of the umpire. What is happening now with this rule is that opponents will either use the umpire, backing out of a ball up, as a screen or in fact, push their opponent toward the umpire.

At some point, contact will be inevitable. No-one condones a confrontation with an umpire, which results in contact, but with the speed of today's game, when is incidental contact, incidental? In the "good ole days", the umpire would have had a word or 2 with the player concerned and play would continue. (yes, I know, no point living in the past). But if commonsense does not prevail with this rule, then the whole process will become a travesty.

[demon85 17]

Found guilty - AGAIN! Fined $2600.

[Sir Why You Little 37,039]

Found guilty - AGAIN! Fined $2600.

Pathetic decision-this Tribunal system & the "umpire Touching" is killing the game. Two & a half Gees for that. No wonder Demetrio is so well paid & over fed..A JOKE

[Jaded No More 68,915]

What the hell?

I watched the vision, blinked and missed this apparent "contact".

Pathetic.

[demon85 17]

What the hell?

I watched the vision, blinked and missed this apparent "contact".

Pathetic.

When in the game did it happen? I'd be interested in taking a look at the footage myself.

The current umpire theme running through the tribunal at the moment sure isnt doing much for fan - umpire / player - umpire relations!

[deanox 9,922]

ive got no problem with the rule that a player cannot touch the umpire on purpose, especially while arguing a decision. but accidental contact when one stumbles?

[Spaghetti 264]

Disgraceful.

[H_T 3,047]

What on earth? Appeal?

[Deeoldfart 8,033]

ive got no problem with the rule that a player cannot touch the umpire on purpose, especially while arguing a decision. but accidental contact when one stumbles?

My sentiments exactly. Pathetic decision and Riv won't be appealing because he would risk suspension if appeal not upheld,

[Sir Why You Little 37,039]

If this Rubbish continues it would not suprise me at all , within a year or so that players start going on strike. These Fines are outrageous.

Incidental contact is not Forceful or intentional

GET REAL A.F.L.

[Chook 15,013]

ive got no problem with the rule that a player cannot touch the umpire on purpose, especially while arguing a decision. but accidental contact when one stumbles?

Dying seconds . . . "Oops, I tripped." Missed free kick. Game decided. Fans mortified.

[rusty_kingswood 0]

I cannot believe that the issue of contacting an umpire has become so pedantic.

Good luck Jared, you deserve some going your way.

Guilty!

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tab...40/default.aspx

What a joke the tribunal system and the AFL has become. When will simple common sense be applied?

[Nasher 33,616]

ive got no problem with the rule that a player cannot touch the umpire on purpose, especially while arguing a decision. but accidental contact when one stumbles?

Exactly. What a joke.

At least he wasn't rubbed out, but sheesh.

[classy dees 42]

"To say that he [the umpire] might come back in a perfectly straight line is requiring too much of the umpires,” Gleeson said.

This is categorically the stupidest thing ive ever read. what are the players supposed to do? what is a defender supposed to do.

if the umpire marks his line then deviates off it how the hell is that the players fault??

Dying seconds . . . "Oops, I tripped." Missed free kick. Game decided. Fans mortified.

Dying seconds ... "better watch the umpre rather than my opponent". forward roves an easy goal. game decided. fans mortified - this is far more plausible. there are 3 umpires afterall to make the free kick call.

[Nasher 33,616]

"To say that he [the umpire] might come back in a perfectly straight line is requiring too much of the umpires,” Gleeson said.

This is categorically the stupidest thing ive ever read. what are the players supposed to do? what is a defender supposed to do.

I agree classy.

Asking an umpire to stick to the line he indicates is requiring too much of the umpires. However, expecting players to be able to predict where the umpire is going to end up despite the fact that not even the ump knows where he's going to end up? Perfectly reasonable!

What a crock.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Has the AFL released footage of this incident for the clarification of the masses as they did with the Scott McLaren/Shane O'Bree case?

Will they?

[rusty_kingswood 0]

Has the AFL released footage of this incident for the clarification of the masses as they did with the Scott McLaren/Shane O'Bree case?

Will they?

It was just on sports tonight. Very minimal contact, which doesnt effect the umpires position ont he play at all. He simply clips his ankle. What a joke!

[H_T 3,047]

It was just on sports tonight. Very minimal contact, which doesnt effect the umpires position ont he play at all. He simply clips his ankle. What a joke!

Rivers guilty of Ump Bump

From Ben Broad's article (mfc website), Jeff Gleeson said (AFL's umpire legal counsel): "Rivers was aware of the rules and knew his obligation to show a duty of care to the umpire."

Well I ask, what if he had eyes only for the ball or man, and 'miniscule' contact was unavoidable?

Jeff Gleeson said it himself, that the umpire deviated slightly from backing in a straight line. He goes on, “To say that he [the umpire] might come back in a perfectly straight line is requiring too much of the umpires,” Gleeson said.

Too much of the umpires?!

So if they stuff up a bounce at the centre circle, it's not asking them too much to recall the ball and to throw it up?

FFS so they are the 'Untouchables' now are they? Even if they're at fault in causing contact in this case no matter how accidental.

God help the players.

God help the AFL.

To find Rivers guilty in these circumstances (& impose a fine of $2.6K), is nothing short of a disgrace.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

FFS so they are the 'Untouchables' now are they? Even if they're at fault in causing contact in this case no matter how accidental.

Maybe in the Indian caste system sense - not so much in the anti-organised crime sense.

Having said that, I found this to be quite an interesting read. Not so much the stuff about Kennett, but half way down you can read the opinion of AFL Umpires' Association President, David Howlett on the current culture of anti-criticism. It made me think twice about being too hard on the maggots over the gagging issue.

[ucanchoose 1,816]

Well I was right above it, and could see it coming a mile away. Knew instantly this would happen. He should have known better, and could have been better positioned in my opinion

[H_T 3,047]

Maybe in the Indian caste system sense - not so much in the anti-organised crime sense.

Having said that, I found this to be quite an interesting read. Not so much the stuff about Kennett, but half way down you can read the opinion of AFL Umpires' Association President, David Howlett on the current culture of anti-criticism. It made me think twice about being too hard on the maggots over the gagging issue.

Thanks for that Hazy..like you said interesting quote this one from that link you posted: -

President David Howlett said fining players and officials only made umpires look precious.

"This whole fining people for talking about umpires is total rubbish," he said.

"It doesn't achieve anything. They are better off letting them have their criticism. The umpires are prevented by their AFL contracts from speaking to the media, and that is wrong, too.

I guess that's why Bailey was very cautious earlier today regarding Rivers case.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

I quite liked this bit myself:

Let the clubs have their say, then let the umpires have their say back. Don't hang a fine over Mick Malthouse's head. Let him talk, and if he complained half a dozen times about umpires, everyone would say, 'Give it up, Mick. You are a whinger'.

Common sense? In my AFL?