To my mind it would make much more sense to fine an individual (say $1k) for dissent rather than impose a 'team' penalty of 50m. Its not as if a player who touches an umpire is penalised by giving the opposing team a free kick. The player/s should be made aware of the fine during play but be permitted to contest the decision like any other penalty after the game. It might potentially lead to a lot of adjudication but I suspect a lot of players would just cop the fine and move on.

14 minutes ago, Macca said:

And the clear reason why we have a shortfall of umpires is because of the levels of abuse

So cut out the levels of abuse (at all levels)

Do you agree?

I don't think it's clear at all the abuse is the driver of umpire shortages.

To my knowledge, no data has been presented by the AFL to support this.

I'll give you another reason why there is a shortage of umpires. In the past five years or so, the number of women's teams playing competitive football has exploded. With that has come a shortage of grounds, facilities and yes - umpires.

But if the AFL can produce meaningful, well researched data that the shortage is driven by ON FIELD abuse, I'll shut up and move on.

1 hour ago, Macca said:

Why?  I would have thought that nearly all players know what the indiscretion is when they transgress

Take the Lever example (and I'm not taking sides) ... he clipped the GWS player high.  A soft free kick yes, but that's the way the game is umpired

And Lever would have known what he did too.  So under the new ruling Lever must accept the umpires decision, shut up and get on with it

Now, I'm not blaming Lever for the 50 ... for all we know another player might have reacted the wrong way

The issue for the spectators is that the players aren't mic'd up so we have to accept the decision not knowing what might have been said or done

 

Sorry but you're wrong it's always been this way and no, players wouldn't always know what the decision was for and whether it was against a teammate

1 hour ago, Axis of Bob said:

There is no reason why players can't still ask an umpire to explain a decision for them respectfully when the play has stopped. I've done it many times myself because the conversation is genuine, not dissenting. It could be as simple as saying "In the back?" which then is responded with "Yeah" or "Nah, it was high". Was the decision right or wrong? It doesn't matter.

Throwing your arms up in the air, turning to the umpire and yelling "What for?!?!" is not respectful, it's a way of trying to tell the umpire (and everyone that can see/hear) that you think they're wrong. 

As Macca says, by round 15 the players will be self policing it in the same way that rugby players do. You can even see it happening now. How many times will you overtly complain about decisions when the last time you did it you got a 50 m penalty and 21 team mates giving you the death stare?

Harris Andrews didn't "throw' his arms in the air, nor did he appear disrespectful.

52 minutes ago, Macca said:

That's your opinion ET and fair enough.  Each to their own

I believe that the players will eventually learn how to just get on with it

We're going to have some teething issues and it might take all season to sort it all out.  And some tweeking might be required

None of us are experts on the outcomes here.  Why?  Because it's a new rule and we're not sure where it will end up

However, the new ruling needs to be clear cut and in our sport, zero tolerance can often work quite well (but not always)

In my view, the umpires need to be respected a lot more so I welcome the new ruling

In my experience at local level nearly every player had the utmost respect for umpires & their decisions.  In footy you would be sent off for dissent (and weeks) and in cricket you got weeks on the sidelines for the same sorts of indiscretions

And that's at pure amateur level

I rarely even heard of a player crossing the line.  We all knew the consequences

Appreciate the balanced and considered reply. 

On cricket, don’t the players raise their arms when appealing or when questioning a decision? Under the new rules, AFL players can’t even appeal for a free kick by raising their arms. 

Edited April 19, 20223 yr by Ethan Tremblay

The biggest issue I see with this rule is that you have players such as Hawkins, Selwood, Danger who are constantly on the edge of staging for free kicks. When they do (like Hawkins against Harris Andrews last week) and it's blatant, not only is the player being penalised cos they of the staged kick, but players now have absolutely no avenue to vent that frustration, which is more directed against the player taking the dive, not the umpire.

It would not surprise me to see a case this year where they the MRO, rub out a player for taking a dive, but during the game that player also given the free for the dive (unsighted), a 50m penalty because their opponent remonstrates, and then most likely a shot at goal. 

I umpired basketball in the 90's and the most high profile referee in the NBL ran onto the court and abused me. It was the first game I reffed and he was a coach.

I've also run the boundary in footy. I'm no positive Lingers but I can run up and down.

I think I have a pretty good understanding of the abuse umpires receive but there is a point where the pendulum swings too far the other way and the player gets unreasonly penalised.

Edited April 19, 20223 yr by Wrecker46

47 minutes ago, sue said:

That's one of the many problems with this.  With most frees and other 50m penalties, the spectator has some basis on which to form an opinion (however wrong) on why it was paid or not.    

So we don't get to find out

Why is that a problem?  If we respected umpires we'd take their word for it

I know I do.... you should do the same

43 minutes ago, Go the Biff said:

I don't think it's clear at all the abuse is the driver of umpire shortages.

To my knowledge, no data has been presented by the AFL to support this.

I'll give you another reason why there is a shortage of umpires. In the past five years or so, the number of women's teams playing competitive football has exploded. With that has come a shortage of grounds, facilities and yes - umpires.

But if the AFL can produce meaningful, well researched data that the shortage is driven by ON FIELD abuse, I'll shut up and move on.

I would have thought it was quite obvious

Anyone going into umpiring at any level knows that they are going to cop a torrent of abuse

And in this day and age, there aren't nearly as many who are prepared to cop that

40 minutes ago, loges said:

Sorry but you're wrong it's always been this way and no, players wouldn't always know what the decision was for and whether it was against a teammate

I disagree

With the odd exception, I reckon players would predominately know what has happened with regards to a free kick decision

So for the few times that they do not know, they should learn how to cop it

Self discipline is something that all sportspeople should have at the top level

2 minutes ago, Macca said:

I would have thought it was quite obvious

Anyone going into umpiring at any level knows that they are going to cop a torrent of abuse

And in this day and age, there aren't nearly as many who are prepared to cop that

most (real) abuse umpires cop (at all levels) is from the spectators

this over-reaction is only going to get the umpires more abuse from the spectators and a reduction in respect

hard to see much will be gained, especially as they continue to make inconsistent and bad decisions in general

a lot of it is the afl's fault for meddling with the rules and weekly changing interpretations

33 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Appreciate the balanced and considered reply. 

On cricket, don’t the players raise their arms when appealing or when questioning a decision? Under the new rules, AFL players can’t even appeal for a free kick by raising their arms. 

Different sport and appealing to the umpire in cricket is part of the rules

In fact, if you don't appeal, the umpire is under no obligation to give a player out

I played in a final once where the umpire after the game told us we should have appealed for a bat-pad

We lost and the bloke in question made a ton

As per the footy, there are going to be teething problems and don't be thinking that I agree with all the 50's handed out

But in principle, I agree with the crackdown

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

hard to see much will be gained, especially as they continue to make inconsistent and bad decisions in general

As I have said to you on numerous occasions, the umpires are going to make errors in a chaotic sport with more grey areas than a Melbourne winter

The sport itself lends itself to any number of interpretations on any number of rules

You want perfection, you're not going to get it.  You won't even come close

12 minutes ago, Macca said:

I would have thought it was quite obvious

Anyone going into umpiring at any level knows that they are going to cop a torrent of abuse

And in this day and age, there aren't nearly as many who are prepared to cop that

That's where we differ on this Macca. You're happy to accept what you'd have thought whereas I would prefer some evidence.

FWIW I have a few mates who umpire at local level. Juniors up to 17's as they are getting on a bit & keeping up with the play at senior level is a bit taxing. So I canvassed a couple about on-field abuse. Both reckon it's virtually non-existent in their experience. One said that occasionally a player will question a decision but he merely reminds them that he is the umpire, they are the player & let's get on with the game. He reckons it always ends there. Both reckon they cop it from over the fence but are able to ignore it and stress that you should never engage with any off-field "feedback".
 

Both were critical of umpire T&D. One is in the ENFL, the other does ENFL and school comps, private & public during the week.

5 minutes ago, Macca said:

As I have said to you on numerous occasions, the umpires are going to make errors in a chaotic sport with more grey areas than a Melbourne winter

The sport itself lends itself to any number of interpretations on any number of rules

You want perfection, you're not going to get it.  You won't even come close

i don't want perfection at all. umpires will never see everything and they don't have built instant replay

as i said it's the constant rule changes, many just stupid, plus the ever changing "interpretations"

it's not that hard, macca to improve and simplify the adjudicating of our great game  

as others have said the afl need to usher in full time professional umpiring and actually spend some serious money on it, instead of this continual, all to clever, knee-jerk, over-reacting we have seen in recent years 

1 hour ago, Scoop Junior said:

I don't agree with the notion some are running with that "oh well, whatever the rule is, players will adjust".

The rule does matter. Let's say there is a new rule that when lining up for a set shot, it doesn't count unless you close your eyes. Well, guess what, players will adjust to that too and will start taking set shots closing their eyes (otherwise the score won't count).

So it's not simply a case of saying the players will adjust. The rule matters and has to be based in reasonableness and the look of the game. And the "arms out" automatic 50 rule is a horrendous look for the game. We are asking human beings giving their all in a brutal, physical sport, to not show any emotional body language of surprise or disappointment or frustration. A player may have just run his guts out all game to help win the game for his club and is not meant to show any body language response to a crucial last-quarter decision when mentally and physically fatigued?

It is absolutely ridiculous. Arms out can be abusive if it's combined with swearing or yelling at an umpire. That should be punished. But simply holding your arms out in a non-threatening and non-abusive way is a human body language reaction. We don't want to strip the emotion and passion out of the game and have critical 50s paid for absolutely trivial incidents.

The last paragraph I agree with.

Problem is, I also agree with @Macca and others who say we do not want or need more grey areas in our laws of the game. So I understand why the AFL may prefer to just say "anything at all is a 50m penalty".

Of the examples shown over the weekend, the Hewett and Holman ones should have been penalised, but the Andrews and Mitchell ones should not have been - the former two involved the player staring at, and walking towards, the umpire with their arms out, the latter two were just two players almost shrugging their shoulders.

Yes, it's more grey area, but ultimately I think I'd be more comfortable with the "arms out" action being considered in context.

15 minutes ago, Go the Biff said:

That's where we differ on this Macca. You're happy to accept what you'd have thought whereas I would prefer some evidence.

FWIW I have a few mates who umpire at local level. Juniors up to 17's as they are getting on a bit & keeping up with the play at senior level is a bit taxing. So I canvassed a couple about on-field abuse. Both reckon it's virtually non-existent in their experience. One said that occasionally a player will question a decision but he merely reminds them that he is the umpire, they are the player & let's get on with the game. He reckons it always ends there. Both reckon they cop it from over the fence but are able to ignore it and stress that you should never engage with any off-field "feedback".
 

Both were critical of umpire T&D. One is in the ENFL, the other does ENFL and school comps, private & public during the week.

I have never met a person in my entire life that would ever entertain the thought of umpiring a game of football

I wouldn't even bother asking as I know what sort of reaction I'd get.  It's a thankless task with not a lot of upside.  And I played 50 seasons of sport across 4 sports

How many here have ever done it (umpired) on a consisent basis?  

Close to zero I'd imagine ... and none of us were ever AFL quality standard as footballers

As previously stated, fix all the grey areas and you'll solve the problem

But do that and you've got AFLX

Make the umpires full time and they are still adjudicating on any number of grey areas

20 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i don't want perfection at all. umpires will never see everything and they don't have built instant replay

as i said it's the constant rule changes, many just stupid, plus the ever changing "interpretations"

it's not that hard, macca to improve and simplify the adjudicating of our great game  

as others have said the afl need to usher in full time professional umpiring and actually spend some serious money on it, instead of this continual, all to clever, knee-jerk, over-reacting we have seen in recent years 

That would help but what about all the grey areas?  That's the real issue but to eliminate all the grey areas you'll get bruise-free footy

You really want that?

4 hours ago, Nasher said:

Nobody has said players aren’t allowed to be emotional. That’s a strawman argument.

The reason players can’t control their frustration is because they’ve been conditioned that they don’t have to. I’m betting by round 15, players have magically figured the secret and will pull off the impossible (according to you), and won’t be arguing with the umpires at all.

There was one moment early in the game that was picked up on the mic. Trac gave away a (soft) free and just said to the umpire, “can you watch it?”, to which the umpire said “I’ll watch it”. I suppose Trac should have just flapped his wings and stomped his foot.

Early in the game. Now imagine its in the dying minutes of a tightly fought game, ala Hewett from Carlton against Port. 

Putting these demands on players is downright idiotic and I doubt it is something the umpires even asked for. It has been dictated to them by head office because of the disaster they've allowed to fester at grass roots level. Instead of actually doing anything to fix up that abomination they are demanding grown professional sportsmen be treated like pre-schoolers. It is a farce.

3 hours ago, Macca said:

You'd want a lot more than $500 a year to umpire at junior level ... more like $5k as umpires at junior level often have to umpire 3 or 4 games per weekend (due to the lack of numbers)

That's if you'd want to do it anyway ... who would want to cop abuse left, right & centre just because you're trying to umpire a sport with more grey areas than a Melbourne winter?  And that abuse often comes from parents.  How pathetic is that?

It's any wonder there is such a shortfall of umpires (at all levels)

So it starts at the top ... the AFL needs to set a real example with regards to respect for umpires

 

I agree with your premise but not your conclusion. The AFL needs to do far more than pay mere lip service they need to actually take responsibility for the debacle they have allowed grass roots footy and umpiring to descend into.

36 minutes ago, Macca said:

That would help but what about all the grey areas?  That's the real issue but to eliminate all the grey areas you'll get bruise-free footy

You really want that?

no you can't eliminate all grey areas

but you can reduce them somewhat and better define some to be clearer

the main thing that would help in grey areas would be better consistency with umpires, and this consistency is something that i would expect to improve drastically with full time professional umpiring

51 minutes ago, Macca said:

I have never met a person in my entire life that would ever entertain the thought of umpiring a game of football

I wouldn't even bother asking as I know what sort of reaction I'd get.  It's a thankless task with not a lot of upside.  And I played 50 seasons of sport across 4 sports

How many here have ever done it (umpired) on a consisent basis?  

Close to zero I'd imagine ... and none of us were ever AFL quality standard as footballers

As previously stated, fix all the grey areas and you'll solve the problem

But do that and you've got AFLX

Make the umpires full time and they are still adjudicating on any number of grey areas

I have a couple of mates who umpire in the WAFL, to them it’s just water off a ducks back, sticks and stones and all that and they also understand that things are said in the heat of the moment, it’s not a personal attack. To be fair though, they’re both coppers so probably use to the abuse 🤷. One has a teen son who not long started umpiring as well, I haven’t spoken to him since he commenced, will be interesting to get his take. 

Pre-kids I umpired the colts for a few seasons, I loved the banter, I just gave it back and shot the players down. Then we had a laugh and shook hands at the end. 

Edited April 19, 20223 yr by Ethan Tremblay

1 hour ago, Macca said:

I disagree

With the odd exception, I reckon players would predominately know what has happened with regards to a free kick decision

So for the few times that they do not know, they should learn how to cop it

Self discipline is something that all sportspeople should have at the top level

Agree to disagree, a refusal to a polite request from the player would then be disrespecting the player, it cuts both ways.

6 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

no you can't eliminate all grey areas

but you can reduce them somewhat and better define some to be clearer

the main thing that would help in grey areas would be better consistency with umpires, and this consistency is something that i would expect to improve drastically with full time professional umpiring

I like your optimism but the grey areas are in abundance.  And have been for decades.  People were talking about umpires in the same way in the 60's

Marking contests, In the back, holding the ball, holding the man, around the neck, ruck contests, chopping of arms, the bump etc etc are all contentious

Good luck trying to get all of the above clear-cut.  Making the umpires professional will help but the myriad of other issues will remain (unless we change the make-up of the sport)

8 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

I have a couple of mates who umpire in the WAFL, to them it’s just water off a ducks back, sticks and stones and all that and they also understand that things are said in the heat of the moment, it’s not a personal attack. To be fair though, they’re both coppers so probably use to the abuse 🤷. One has a teen son who not long started umpiring as well, I haven’t spoken to him since he commenced, will be interesting to get his take. 

Pre-kids I umpired the colts for a few seasons, I loved the banter, I just gave it back and shot the players down. Then we had a laugh and shook hands at the end. 

And that's a good story and I don't doubt you for a minute ET ... but we do have an issue with the umpiring of the sport (can we make it easier please)

And at junior level there has been a huge shortfall of umpires for decades (in other words, the shortfall is not a new thing)

Edited April 19, 20223 yr by Macca