POSTGAME: Community Series vs Carlton

[sue 9,126]

44 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

lets take another tack...

suppose a player throws the ball, tackles someone high or some other infringement

umpire doesn't pay a free

player looks at umpire, raises arm in appeal, says "he threw the ball!",  no malice or anger in delivery

happens all the time

directed at ump - tick

dissenting an umpire decision (i.e. no free) - tick

so, for consistency re dissent this would be a free kick against the dissenter?

That's another example of why if they do try to enforce this during the year it will be a frustrating mess. 

Persoanlly I can't see why dissent is not OK as long as it isn't coupled with abuse.  The game is difficult to umpire unlike some other games where dissent is almost synonomous with abuse. In AFL it's obvious umps get it wrong often (just watch a match where you don't give a damn who wins).  To make dissent illegal is just stupid.

[Lord Nev 13,512]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

The abuse one is a no brainer as well IMHO. Yes it's a high pressure, high paced environment and again there's a difference between a once off sly comment and flat out abuse.

No excuse, just don't so it

I agree, there definitely should be 50s for genuine abuse. IMO they set the bar too low for it in our game though.

[loges 6,767]

2 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

The colour of their jumper comes to mind.

??????

[Clintosaurus 7,858]

1 minute ago, loges said:

??????

You won't see many against the Bulldogs, or West Coast (at Optus).

[Josh 1,420]

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

I agree, there definitely should be 50s for genuine abuse. IMO they set the bar too low for it in our game though.

It's a hard one because the rule is subjective. Running across the mark 50m is the most objective I can think of but what's "umpire abuse?" How do you clearly and without any misjudgment define "umpire abuse" 

What I find offensive, you may not. Calling someone a f**ing cheating c*** is obviously offensive but what about "turn it up"?

I hope the umpires use common sense. I would imagine some people are very polite most of the time so you might give them a warning, other players might be horrible.

 

Ironically by trying get people to respect umpires more your forcing them to make tougher and tougher calls, therefore increasing frustration amongst fans and causing more umpire abuse 🤦‍♂️

 

 

[leave it to deever 17,517]

5 hours ago, daisycutter said:

lets take another tack...

suppose a player throws the ball, tackles someone high or some other infringement

umpire doesn't pay a free

player looks at umpire, raises arm in appeal, says "he threw the ball!",  no malice or anger in delivery

happens all the time

directed at ump - tick

dissenting an umpire decision (i.e. no free) - tick

so, for consistency re dissent this would be a free kick against the dissenter?

Yea not sure where all this is heading.

Does Vineys head shaking constitute dissent and a 50m.

Will be an interesting and frustrating season.

[daisycutter 29,701]

24 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Yea not sure where all this is heading.

Does Vineys head shaking constitute dissent and a 50m.

Will be an interesting and frustrating season.

i think (hope) that they will fine tune it (back off) a bit, and the carlton game was an over-reaction just to make a point (the usual afl ham-fisted method)....but they won't come out publicly and say so

[monoccular 17,570]

On 3/5/2022 at 1:35 PM, The Chief said:

Following the AFL’s determination that players can’t express their opinions on decisions to the umps anymore, it was reported on the radio this morning that a club has instructed its players not to say anything to them at all. Though that could be problematic at the coin toss, maybe we’ll see some interpretive dance?
 

If this is the path the AFL really wants to take, they should instruct the umpires to revert back to referring to players by their numbers not their names and stop pretending they’re best mates with the players. 

 

On 3/5/2022 at 2:08 PM, defuture15 said:

No that's what his intention was. Answering back. Demonstrative responses from players. It wasn't well advertised and seemed very precious. Apparently it's about showing respect to officials at all levels. He wants the interaction with umpires and players in the rooms etc. To encourage respectful interactions.

I guess we are all "stakeholders"

I was very wild on Thursday night as it was as subtle as a sledgehammer 

The big problem is that Gil and the AFL are trying to demand respect of the umpires rather than having them earn it.

Typical half baked knee jerk reaction to what they see as a probelm.  Yes, abuse should not be condoned, but penalising asking a question or showing frustration is another gross overreaction, and likely to have the opposite effect, making relations between players and umpires far more fractious.

Time to reset, Gillon.

[leave it to deever 17,517]

12 hours ago, Josh said:

It's a hard one because the rule is subjective. Running across the mark 50m is the most objective I can think of but what's "umpire abuse?" How do you clearly and without any misjudgment define "umpire abuse" 

What I find offensive, you may not. Calling someone a f**ing cheating c*** is obviously offensive but what about "turn it up"?

I hope the umpires use common sense. I would imagine some people are very polite most of the time so you might give them a warning, other players might be horrible.

 

Ironically by trying get people to respect umpires more your forcing them to make tougher and tougher calls, therefore increasing frustration amongst fans and causing more umpire abuse 🤦‍♂️

 

 

I think the players should all become bi lingual. They can go to town on the umps.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

13 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

I think the players should all become bi lingual. They can go to town on the umps.

"It's a fair cop"

"You're right, it was too high"

"Well, you're in the best position to see"

"Good decision. I was thinking I'd run too far"

That's like a foreign language to the players!

[Lord Nev 13,512]

 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,269]

On 3/5/2022 at 11:50 PM, Jjrogan said:

I agree with your sentiments fwiw.  I used to get all worked up about umpires once upon a time, but then I got myself a life and realised abusing someone to make me feel better is actually pathetic.  But Rome is the mob so er, play on. 

Abusing umpires is part of the theatre of the game. They should understand they are there to play the heel like Macho Man against Hulk Hogan at WrestleMania V and just embrace it.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,269]

On 3/6/2022 at 8:54 AM, Lord Nev said:

Actually thought the delay ones were fair tbh. Lingers has been taking the [censored] with that for a fair while and I hate it when players do that fake pointing thing to delay the game. The Oliver one has been an automatic 50 for as long as I can remember, honest mistake or not. I'm keen on cracking down on the delay of game ones.

The 'abuse' ones in our game tho.... sheeesh... Hopefully the backlash and attention from our game will mean it will settle in before round 1. Always happens with new rules, I remember tons of 50s the start of last year when players standing the mark lost their balance, moved a foot slightly or sneezed, but that settled in after a while.

Same as when they brought in the "protected zone" that first Carlton/Richmond game had about 6 50s resulting in goals.

My worry is we are the first game and also playing the umpires pets so it's a recipe for disaster.

[jnrmac 20,154]

34 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Good to hear the players and club owning it, learning from it and hopefully moving on regardless of how cooked it was on the night

[Pates 9,660]

10 hours ago, monoccular said:

 

The big problem is that Gil and the AFL are trying to demand respect of the umpires rather than having them earn it.

Typical half baked knee jerk reaction to what they see as a probelm.  Yes, abuse should not be condoned, but penalising asking a question or showing frustration is another gross overreaction, and likely to have the opposite effect, making relations between players and umpires far more fractious.

Time to reset, Gillon.

I’m not sure about your argument of demand vs earn. As far as I’m concerned by putting themselves in there as umpires of the game they have earned the right to respect immediately. 

What does need to be considered is heat of battle and the fact that they do make mistakes and the players can be frustrated. Case in point, Kozzie getting his head taken off in the Grand Final and Trac going ballistic at the umpire. Now is that dissent? Maybe. But Trac has every right to stick up for his teammate. 

[tiers 2,843]

Abuse directed at an umpire at any level of footy must be penalised. However, in the AFL where they are all adults at the peak of their profession, the abuse must be seen to be clearly addressed to the umpires by looking at the umpire whilst gesturing or talking so that the direction is unmistakeable.

A normal human reaction such as Tomlinson's expressing surprise or disappointment after watching a replay on the big screeen is not abuse. What if Maxie's reaction to the sling tackle in 3Q of the GF was considered abuse? What about players expressing frustration or even regret at their offence? Surely that cannot be abuse.

As for a delay in returning the ball, there are situations where the identity of the offendee might not be clear (either through misunderstanding of the decision or umpire's call not being audible) so that the  umpire's discretion should be applied.

Time for adults to show their maturity. Gil, for all his outstanding success at getting the past two seasons finished, also needs to grow up.

[Jaded No More 68,972]

I am ALL for stopping abuse against umpires at all levels. What happened with Toby Greene last year was a complete disgrace.

I just don't want the AFL to censor emotions. Players in the heat of a battle will show a range of emotions. As long as those emotions are not abusive or degrading/threatening to an umpire, they should be allowed to continue. Our players are not robots.

I don't know if the free against Trac was actually against him or against Tmac who ran past and presumably talked back to the umpire, but I know that if we punish players like Trac for wearing his heart on his sleeve we will lose a big part of our game.

I also thought Tomlinson getting 50 paid against him for questioning the umpire was soft. Healthy dialogue between players and umpires should be allowed. Max should be allowed to go to the umpire at the break and ask about a questionable free. Tomlinson should be allowed to say why did you pay the free, when the free was as borderline as it was.

If we keep seeing an overreaction from the umpires like we did on Thursday night, the only thing that will happen is greater crowd abuse of the umpires, completely defeating the point of this whole rule change. 

[mauriesy 7,352]

3 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

If we keep seeing an overreaction from the umpires like we did on Thursday night, the only thing that will happen is greater crowd abuse of the umpires, completely defeating the point of this whole rule change. 

That is the danger.

[Mincho Mania 530]

13 hours ago, monoccular said:

 

The big problem is that Gil and the AFL are trying to demand respect of the umpires rather than having them earn it.

Typical half baked knee jerk reaction to what they see as a probelm.  Yes, abuse should not be condoned, but penalising asking a question or showing frustration is another gross overreaction, and likely to have the opposite effect, making relations between players and umpires far more fractious.

Time to reset, Gillon.

And how about McLaughlin bite the bullet and make umpires full time employees. It's amateur hour to have part timers officiating a multi million dollar business. McLaughlin's the pits, can't wait to see the back of him

[Jaded No More 68,972]

1 hour ago, Larry, Moe or Curly said:

And how about McLaughlin bite the bullet and make umpires full time employees. It's amateur hour to have part timers officiating a multi million dollar business. McLaughlin's the pits, can't wait to see the back of him

Great point.

You bang on about the importance of respecting umpires, yet you don't respect them enough to support them to become the best they can be by offering them the ability to make a living doing it. 

[4_Kent_Watts 892]

On 3/4/2022 at 7:37 AM, WalkingCivilWar said:

🙄

I know he's one of your faves but if Jayden has to play as a Defender, our  Backline is in trouble. His benefit is his attacking running so I reckon he's at the wrong end of the ground. 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

2 hours ago, Larry, Moe or Curly said:

And how about McLaughlin bite the bullet and make umpires full time employees. It's amateur hour to have part timers officiating a multi million dollar business. McLaughlin's the pits, can't wait to see the back of him

But .... but ... we CAN'T have professional umps because there are 2 or 3 who do it a a side gig from their main job of being high powered lawyers.

If umps were full time, those 2 or 3 guys would be LOST TO THE GAME and so the game can't progress beyond amateurism.

Somehow the amazing umpiring skills of those guys -- I mean, we can easily identify who they are, they're that outstanding --would be impossible to replace, even by full time professional umps.

An AFL CEO could, potentially, see the bigger picture and not permit the game to be held to ransom by 2 or 3 guys who want to umpire part-time, or, he/she/it could do what they've done for years and wring their hands at the impossibility of it all.

[Ethan Tremblay 30,962]

1 hour ago, Mazer Rackham said:

But .... but ... we CAN'T have professional umps because there are 2 or 3 who do it a a side gig from their main job of being high powered lawyers.

If umps were full time, those 2 or 3 guys would be LOST TO THE GAME and so the game can't progress beyond amateurism.

Somehow the amazing umpiring skills of those guys -- I mean, we can easily identify who they are, they're that outstanding --would be impossible to replace, even by full time professional umps.

All of a sudden I’m not against the umps being called maggots. 

[DeeDJ 56]

2 hours ago, 4_Kent_Watts said:

I know he's one of your faves but if Jayden has to play as a Defender, our  Backline is in trouble. His benefit is his attacking running so I reckon he's at the wrong end of the ground. 

for 19 games before injury last year Hunt played as a defender and did it well, without the injury would've been a premiership defender. His 2021 is underrated I think

[DeeSpencer 26,070]

Razor Ray paid a number of 50’s last year against players who swore at him (one Richmond I think) or aggressive came at him (Liam Ryan, eagles). 

I don’t love Razor, don’t love an umpire having too much of a personality in general, think it sets them up to fail. But he’s never been afraid to pay what he sees, and the players deal with it.
 

Even at afl level so many of the umpires are young and don’t have have any presence. 

Really this rule should be about empowering the umpires to pay it when the know they’re experiencing it. The issue is asking them to look for it. Maybe in their wisdom that’s the best way to empower umps, but there’s risk you turn them in to parking inspectors handing out fines. The best umps are more like stern school teachers who aren’t afraid to hand out a punishment when needed but can then encourage discipline without being too sensitive.