The very, very contentious 50 for Dissent Rule

[Red But Mostly Blue 4,425]

The AFL has made a mess of this.

According to Collins dictionary, dissent:

Strong disagreement or dissatisfaction with a decision or opinion, especially one that is supported by most people or by people in authority.

Oxford uses the word in a sporting context as:

The offence of expressing disagreement with the referee's decision.

I think the word dissent is fine (as some unacceptable behaviour - such as by someone like Greene - would fall under the dissent umbrella), but it should be construed together with timing, intensity and perhaps even context. For example:

- If you are still dissenting 30 seconds after a decision = dissent.

- If you get in the ump's face/scream/swear/intimidate etc. = dissent.

- Is it a 50/50 call? Does the ump know that they're not sure???

I would say that many of the things pinged so far, and certainly some of the 50s paid against us on the weekend do not fall in this definition, with appropriate context. A player should be able to express a reasonable level of dissatisfaction, perhaps even with themselves, or an instinctual shock at a decision (sometimes players are right! - e.g. a ball may in fact have been touched before a mark/goal - and we get it, umpires don't change decisions - and you have to live with bad decisions in any sport) - but what is the AFL expecting, that players be mutes, even when a terrible decision has been made? Certainly, players should not be abusing umpires/getting in their face/repeatedly disagreeing - but this penalty should lie within the discretion of the umpires. If this rule must stick around (sigh), how about a warning for low level 'arms in the air' exasperation? 

The problem with discretion, is it requires brain activity and commonsense. Have you seen the umps going about? :-(

(Also, for the record, I dissent from the AFL's position on this rule, and B Scott is, and was always, a tool). 

[rjay 24,587]

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Yes I posted that very thing earlier and it's only a matter of time. Then when the player complains, another 50. Hope it's not us.

Sorry 'Red', I had a quick look to see if someone had posted it.

...and yes, I was also thinking I hope it's not us.

[Jaded No More 67,636]

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

They should be professional and that is a seperate issue. 

The ‘emotions of an umpire’ is a bit rich, it’s how they subjectively see something and that is what a blanket ‘demonstrative dissent’ rule seeks to ameliorate. If you throw your arms out after a decision has been made by an umpire - you are pinged or a 50m is applied. 

This removes the subjectiveness (and the emotions).

Except that it very much is subjective because we've seen this happen at least 100 time in the last 5 weeks and only had like 5 frees paid as a result.

So to say that what constitutes dissent is not subjective is just wrong. Even Scott said it's up to the umpire. 

[tiers 2,804]

This issue of demonstrative dissent is becoming murkier and murkier. Watching Robbo last night the folllowing questions were raised:

If there is no free kick awarded but a player waves his arms, what happens next? 50m can't apply if there is no free kick, can it? Do they award a free kick anyhow for dissent?

If player from both teams wave their arms, who gets to decide? First come, first served?

If a player at CHB waves his arms about a free kick awarded, or not awarded, at CHF, what happens next? How far away from the incident does a player have to avoid a 50m penalty?

Can the other 2 umpires award a 50m penalty for arm waving when they are not at the coal face, so to speak? What about those on the interchange bench?

At what point is waving arms when on the mark considered to be dissent? Who the hell will judge? At what angle away from the body will it be considered "on the marK' and not dissent?

Should Brad Scott revert to being a coach of a failed football team? Would it extend his career?

Does Gill really want this fiasco to be his final rules act as AFL CEO?

These are far too many questions that need sensible answers for this rule to continue to be implemented in accordance with the spirit of our great game. Currently our spirit is not happy at all and at a time when the demon spirit should be at its peak, it is being deflected by this absurd rule. Get rid of it in its current form.

One last point. A 50m penalty is far, far too much for such stupid reactions. I have posted before that Sheedy put a stain on our great game and it is time for his stain to be cleansed.

One further last point. The rules are far, far too complicated to adjudicate and there needs to be a greater emphasis on ensuring a safe, fair contest and move away from the ridiculous rules that do not derive from an unfair contest. If two players are both jostling for position in, say, a marking contest, unless one seriously interferes with the other, it should be play on. How often has one player been penalised for what the umpire could not see on the other side? Hand in the back without a push, slight jumper pull without affecting the contest are not legitimate reasons for a free kick to be awarded. They are big boys, let them contest.

This will not end pleasantly. It is sad that our greatest era in nearly 60 years is being tarnished by stupid administration at the AFL.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

2 hours ago, MT64 said:

You see some tackled players spin around 360+ and umpire calls play on then others tackled immediately on getting the ball and being pinged HTB straight away. Set the bar one way AFL then adjudicate. That would be a good start.

Weren't they going to crack down on this? In preseason and community games it was policed and then it wasn't. See it at least once per match now.

 

1 hour ago, sue said:

What if you keep your arms down but roll your eyes?

49m penalty. 48m if you roll them twice.

[loges 6,767]

It's simple, you can pontificate all you like about how the players should discipline themselves and how us supporters should view the game and subsequent decisions so as not to get upset. Bottom line it's a gross overaction and I can see a big push back coming from supporters.

[BoBo 2,912]

I’ve been reading this whole thread and I don’t know where I stand completely yet, but for what it’s worth, here’s an ex-pro umpires perspective and I think it’s valuable especially from a ‘gaining advantage’ angle.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-20/record-setting-umpire-backs-afl-s-crackdown-on-dissent/101002852

[Grr-owl 1,169]

The umps need to be professionals. Would solve many problems. Pay them as well as players and you'd have every fitness fanatic player-who-wasn't-quite-good-enough fangin' at the bit to be positive part of footy....

[daisycutter 29,317]

10 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Weren't they going to crack down on this? In preseason and community games it was policed and then it wasn't. See it at least once per match now.

 

49m penalty. 48m if you roll them twice.

raising eyebrows?

opening mouth like a gold fish?

shaking head left to right?

giving oneself a nev facepalm?

and finally saying sarcastically "good decision, ump"? 

[Pates 9,625]

1 minute ago, BoBo said:

I’ve been reading this whole thread and I don’t know where I stand completely yet, but for what it’s worth, here’s an ex-pro umpires perspective and I think it’s valuable especially from a ‘gaining advantage’ angle.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-20/record-setting-umpire-backs-afl-s-crackdown-on-dissent/101002852

I would say that most if not all people are on board with the idea of reducing dissent/abuse towards umpires as well as making sure the umpires are given proper respect. 

I think what they’ve done wrong is the implementation of the rule, instead of trying to ease it in and looking at a punishment that fits the crime they have looked at an existing punishment (the highest available on field) and decided to utilise that.

As for the argument of arms out and all that, I don’t like it but again it could’ve been brought in so much better and with less pain. Yet again though the AFL have made an absolute meal of it and has made the umpires more disliked than ever. (And it’s not their fault!)

[Pates 9,625]

8 minutes ago, BoBo said:

I’ve been reading this whole thread and I don’t know where I stand completely yet, but for what it’s worth, here’s an ex-pro umpires perspective and I think it’s valuable especially from a ‘gaining advantage’ angle.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-20/record-setting-umpire-backs-afl-s-crackdown-on-dissent/101002852

I just had to quote the players on this:

Western Bulldogs captain Marcus Bontempelli said there had been grey areas in the umpires' interpretations of the rule.

"I think we can all agree with the rationale of supporting our umpires and their standing in the game and obviously adjusting our behaviours off the back of it," Bontempelli told Fox Sports.

"But this will give us a bit more clarity around how we can best regulate our emotions."

Collingwood skipper Scott Pendlebury said the media was the last group to understand the issue.

"The players all have a handle on it, the coaches pretty clearly say we know what to expect but it's the media [and] guys commentating football that seem to have a big issue with it," he said.

Are they sure they have a handle on it? Is the media really the last group to understand what’s going on? 😂

[Lord Travis 10,457]

Abuse of an umpire should be penalized. That’s entirely fair to provide them with a safe work place and show respect. Legitimately questioning the decision, seeking clarification or expressing frustration is not abuse and should never be penalized.

Umpire proclaiming “arms raised is 50” is pathetic and tarnishes their reputation further. The idea that a person full of testosterone running around for two hours straight getting belted from pillar to post can’t raise their arms in frustration is mental and defies human biology. The players are not robots and can’t be expected to act as such.

I will boo this sort of umpiring louder and louder until it is stamped out. I encourage others to do the same. Umpires are less respected than ever and the new rule interpretation is having the opposite effect to its intention. At the end of the day the game is a product for paying customers aka supporters. If they’re not happy, then the product is a failure.

Edited April 20, 2022 by Lord Travis

[Pates 9,625]

Just to add another former umpires voice to the debate: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/stricter-respect-rules-putting-more-pressure-on-umpires-goldspink-20220419-p5aeir.html

This legitimately is such a mess. 

Edited April 20, 2022 by Pates

[BoBo 2,912]

8 minutes ago, Pates said:

I just had to quote the players on this:

Western Bulldogs captain Marcus Bontempelli said there had been grey areas in the umpires' interpretations of the rule.

"I think we can all agree with the rationale of supporting our umpires and their standing in the game and obviously adjusting our behaviours off the back of it," Bontempelli told Fox Sports.

"But this will give us a bit more clarity around how we can best regulate our emotions."

Collingwood skipper Scott Pendlebury said the media was the last group to understand the issue.

"The players all have a handle on it, the coaches pretty clearly say we know what to expect but it's the media [and] guys commentating football that seem to have a big issue with it," he said.

Are they sure they have a handle on it? Is the media really the last group to understand what’s going on? 😂

All fair points!

The implantation has been botched for sure I think, if every time I’ve seen players raising their arms was given 50 thus far this year… the 50 count would be doubled or tripled.

I think my position here on out is:

I’m happy to reset this weekend and if umpires punish that behaviour the same for every game, then I’m fine with the rule and interpretation. 
 

It HAS to be even across rounds and only at when it’s directed towards an umpire.
 

The issue of arm raising seems to be it’s directed AT the umpires. So from this, players can show frustration, but it can’t be directed at umpires. Look away from the umpire, shake your head, give out an angry ‘grrreeereghghgg’, just don’t do it directly at/facing the umpire.

If it’s consistent and players aren’t penalised outside of these parameters, I can see it not being an issue by the end of the year and supporters will adapt knowing that those are the rules.

There will still be grey areas, but hey ho, as long as they continue to be defined as we go. Hard game to make rules for as there is so much subjectivity.

That’s just me though, I can see the point of view from other people. 

[Jaded No More 67,636]

12 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

At the end of the day the game is a product for paying customers aka supporters. If they’re not happy, then the product is a failure.

Putting everything else aside, this is a very important point.

Attendance is well down, sure that might be partly due to Covid, but there is no doubt that a lot of people are finding themselves less and less interested in the game due to the constant changing of rules, poor umpiring and the standard of games.

Without fans and members the AFL has nothing. The MRO and umpiring, as well as the rules committee, needs a serious overhaul. The lack of basic consistency, common sense and fairness is becoming a real issue for fans who are disengaging from the game.

I don't think you will find a single AFL fan who thinks umpires should be verbally or physically abused. Everyone deserves respect in the workplace, and there is no room for abuse on the ground. Hell, there is no room for players to verbally abuse each other either if you ask me. But we can't expect emotions to be in check to such a level that players can't show any frustration. It is human nature when you invest your whole life in something and things don't go your way to be upset. To expect anything less from players is asking them to perfectly control their emotions on top of all the other things they need to execute perfectly on the field. 

The AFL is focused so heavily on TV rights and media deals, but if nobody wants to watch games, then those deals won't be worth much in the future.  

[Lord Nev 13,512]

2 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Attendance is well down, sure that might be partly due to Covid, but there is no doubt that a lot of people are finding themselves less and less interested in the game due to the constant changing of rules, poor umpiring and the standard of games.

The AFL is focused so heavily on TV rights and media deals, but if nobody wants to watch games, then those deals won't be worth much in the future.  

If this was true then TV ratings would have taken a hit also, maybe even more so given that's where more of the casual footy fan will be counted as opposed to at other teams' games.

The AFL recorded it's HIGHEST EVER round 1 ratings numbers this year.

The numbers just don't back up this argument.

[dieter 3,325]

1 hour ago, tiers said:

This issue of demonstrative dissent is becoming murkier and murkier. Watching Robbo last night the folllowing questions were raised:

If there is no free kick awarded but a player waves his arms, what happens next? 50m can't apply if there is no free kick, can it? Do they award a free kick anyhow for dissent?

If player from both teams wave their arms, who gets to decide? First come, first served?

If a player at CHB waves his arms about a free kick awarded, or not awarded, at CHF, what happens next? How far away from the incident does a player have to avoid a 50m penalty?

Can the other 2 umpires award a 50m penalty for arm waving when they are not at the coal face, so to speak? What about those on the interchange bench?

At what point is waving arms when on the mark considered to be dissent? Who the hell will judge? At what angle away from the body will it be considered "on the marK' and not dissent?

Should Brad Scott revert to being a coach of a failed football team? Would it extend his career?

Does Gill really want this fiasco to be his final rules act as AFL CEO?

These are far too many questions that need sensible answers for this rule to continue to be implemented in accordance with the spirit of our great game. Currently our spirit is not happy at all and at a time when the demon spirit should be at its peak, it is being deflected by this absurd rule. Get rid of it in its current form.

One last point. A 50m penalty is far, far too much for such stupid reactions. I have posted before that Sheedy put a stain on our great game and it is time for his stain to be cleansed.

One further last point. The rules are far, far too complicated to adjudicate and there needs to be a greater emphasis on ensuring a safe, fair contest and move away from the ridiculous rules that do not derive from an unfair contest. If two players are both jostling for position in, say, a marking contest, unless one seriously interferes with the other, it should be play on. How often has one player been penalised for what the umpire could not see on the other side? Hand in the back without a push, slight jumper pull without affecting the contest are not legitimate reasons for a free kick to be awarded. They are big boys, let them contest.

This will not end pleasantly. It is sad that our greatest era in nearly 60 years is being tarnished by stupid administration at the AFL.

Makes good sense to me. Kudos.

[dieter 3,325]

11 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Putting everything else aside, this is a very important point.

Attendance is well down, sure that might be partly due to Covid, but there is no doubt that a lot of people are finding themselves less and less interested in the game due to the constant changing of rules, poor umpiring and the standard of games.

Without fans and members the AFL has nothing. The MRO and umpiring, as well as the rules committee, needs a serious overhaul. The lack of basic consistency, common sense and fairness is becoming a real issue for fans who are disengaging from the game.

I don't think you will find a single AFL fan who thinks umpires should be verbally or physically abused. Everyone deserves respect in the workplace, and there is no room for abuse on the ground. Hell, there is no room for players to verbally abuse each other either if you ask me. But we can't expect emotions to be in check to such a level that players can't show any frustration. It is human nature when you invest your whole life in something and things don't go your way to be upset. To expect anything less from players is asking them to perfectly control their emotions on top of all the other things they need to execute perfectly on the field. 

The AFL is focused so heavily on TV rights and media deals, but if nobody wants to watch games, then those deals won't be worth much in the future.  

Or, as a friend who was on North's List under Barassi said today: People don't go to the footy to watch the umpires.

He also thought for a very long time on the question of how much umpire abuse he witnessed in his playing career at North. He finally said, I recall hardly any.

He also made the point that since his playing days, the rules have not changed for the better overall. He's not sorry that the Mathews/Wallis/Brereton etc He-man head hunting has been wiped out, but he doesn't understand how anyone who devised the present day Tribunal system hasn't been sent to Siberia, nor does he understand how the AFL tolerates umpires who allow players like Hawkins, Selwood, Dangerfield, and a host of other 'star' players to get away with shenanigans for which no-namers are punished.

In other words, until the AFL understands that a Professional Sporting Code needs to ensures all umpires/referees are also professional, the AFL will continue to be ruled by a gang called Riff Rafferty, who plug holes in the Titanic with bubble gum, who treat cancers with band aids.

Edited April 20, 2022 by dieter

[picket fence 16,655]

What the AFL really wants are two teams of these guys playing, with no arms to wave around and devoid of human emotion!

Edited April 20, 2022 by picket fence

[BoBo 2,912]

8 minutes ago, picket fence said:

What the AFL really wants are two teams of these guys

I for one welcome the new Android league. ROBOT AFL WOULD BE AMAZING.

[Demonstone 21,761]

They thought about playing robot soccer at one stage.

The final scores in the trial game were R2D 2 defeated C3P 0

[Lord Nev 13,512]

11 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

They thought about playing robot soccer at one stage.

The final scores in the trial game were R2D 2 defeated C3P 0

I believe in the end they decided it wasn't the droids they were looking for...

[rjay 24,587]

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

If this was true then TV ratings would have taken a hit also, maybe even more so given that's where more of the casual footy fan will be counted as opposed to at other teams' games.

The AFL recorded it's HIGHEST EVER round 1 ratings numbers this year.

The numbers just don't back up this argument.

To be fair round 1 went for 25 days this year...

[Jaded No More 67,636]

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

If this was true then TV ratings would have taken a hit also, maybe even more so given that's where more of the casual footy fan will be counted as opposed to at other teams' games.

The AFL recorded it's HIGHEST EVER round 1 ratings numbers this year.

The numbers just don't back up this argument.

Have a look at the ratings since around 1. 
It’s been dropping significantly 

http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=136820

[picket fence 16,655]

Eyebrows raised and facial expressions will be the next thing to get pinged for!!