Umpiring The Umpiring Dissent Rule - Discuss Here

[Some Idiot]

There's nothing confusing about the rule at all, it's zero tolerance. A few umpires got it wrong and were too lenient.

 

[HawkMongrel]

Anybody who finds themselves agreeing with this rule needs to review whether they have any place following any type of sport at all.

 

[peternorth]

As an umpire coach and a former umpire and player the rule I find too controlling.

Footy is an emotional game. Players are not robots. Rule needs to be binned. If a player is frustrated angry or emotional and just vents let it be (it's not personal in that circumstance)

If they get in an umpires face and it does get personal with their verbage then let's take a 50 metre walk down the field champ.

It's all about context. Most players will have the class or courtesy to discuss the matter at a break or after a game seek out an umpire and make peace or show some respect.

At grassroots level it's more the vitriol from sideline supporters or coaches of kids with no emotional stability or maturity that sees them drive umpires away.

Parents and coaches take note. NO UMPIRES means no footy for your kids

Up until the whole arms in the air thing crept up this week (which I think will make many lose faith in the rule), the recent crackdown on umpire abuse has had a great impact on grassroots footy from what I have seen.
When umpiring the other weekend, clubs that have had reputations for constant backchat and abuse really kept a lid on it. Heading into the rooms before the game I let them know that respectful exchanges are fine but any aggression towards any umpire field/goal/boundary will result in a free. Coaches interpret that as they will, some leave it at that, some don't trust the kids so said all communication to umpires goes through the captain.
I tell you what though it worked! Some kids had natural reactions to decisions but either caught themselves and quickly shut up or had one of their teammates calm them down. I wasn't paying 50's if they settled down quickly. When the rule is spelt out clearly, and common sense is used the players police it themselves.
Hell, even the stand rule is really easy to officiate now we are all used to it.
Seniors are always generally good so I haven't noticed a difference, but juniors was always trouble for abuse with parents and players getting hot headed.
It has been a huge help so far, I did a under 17's game by myself and I had four parents I hadn't met come up after the game saying I had great control over the game and it was a good clean hit out. I also had two young boundary umpires do their very first game and they loved it. The abuse rule massively contributed to that positive experience.

I'm in my 4th year of coaching and they've really stamped down on it in the last 2 years - was beyond a joke my first year. Umpires being assaulted in car parks or threatened, bullied by players, coaches and sideline supporters.

Now their is no tolerance and better communication between clubs, leagues and umpires it's a lot better but you still hear of the odd flare up. I'm always on the sidelines with my umpires and i'll tell a player or coach if they are out of line if the umpire is too afraid to speak up at a break.

Fantastic to have umpires posting. Credit to you both and good to hear your accounts.

I too have thought that the abuse is worse from the sidelines, in footy. if im an umpire and cop threatening abuse like you've mentioned why would i continue?

I myself have adjudicated another code of football. Its funny, I had to tell both teams to settle down, and then tell spectators that I'd call the game off if it continued. Suddenly it's my fault...."you didnt control the game", that's why the brew haha started.

Ive always marvelled at how the referee is respected by the players. player and captain are summoned, they have a cordial discussion, decision made and game continues. but AFLites have said that it's private school stuff, sissies, soft, rugby cant handle a bit of verbal banter.

Is it a societal issue? Our convict heritage? Long have we heard "i go to the footy to let off steam". Right there, there's built up anger ready to be released.

 

[brutus76]

At Junior level supporters are right there in super close proximity as sometimes you'll have 2 or 3 or 4 games going on at once on the same field (like AUSKICK at HT of an AFL game) and it's easy to hear them and see them in action and that's where it's most dangerous as they are crowded around that tiny space - with ONLY one umpire though you only have one line of sight and everyone on the boundary often see things field umpire's can't see (due to pack formation/mass player gathering or contesting the ball in one spot)

This is why positioning is important - but umpires can only call what they can see with their own two eyes - parents, coaches and supporters need to COMPREHEND that (not always possible and they often need a fair dinkum explanation to grasp it)

Youth level onwards where it's full size field and they are behind the fence is way easier to deal with

 

[manureid]

Not sure it could be more blatant than this one, yet not paid. Pretty crucial moment of the game also. Stupid rule is stupid.

 

[CheapCharlie]

Geeze just saw the replay from the Hawkins 50. Firstly, he should be auditioning for the Australian diving team. Come on, the guy is 100+kg and also a gun footballer. He shouldn’t be falling over like that. Secondly, for the AFL to be endorsing that decision making by the umpires is diabolical. WTF is the commission doing to this great game.

Hawkins should be charged with staging for sure
Hawks players also out of line pointing at the screen. Mind your business and let the umpires call it.

 

[CheapCharlie]

So was Heenys “poster boy” efforts then

Could have been given a 50 for sure. Could also be said he self censored and stopped half way through his hand raising.
Def several other Sydney players could have given away a 50 with their head shaking and carry on/
Its all easily correctable behavior.

 

[aCunningPlan]

Hawkins should be charged with staging for sure
Hawks players also out of line pointing at the screen. Mind your business and let the umpires call it.

I guess it comes down to what is considered staging? Attempting to fool an umpire into paying a free kick that is not there, or exacerbating contact from an illegal block to ensure the umpire sees it. One is deliberate deception, the other is putting mayo on what is already a free kick. It all comes down to whether the AFL sees a distinction between the two or not.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

View attachment 1376616Such a disgrace this rule. i could've picked out 500 of these over the weekend that weren't paid. Deboer and Hewetts weren't paid and Andrews was paid. Go figure. Andrews was the nicest to the umpire of the 3.

Its a stupid rule. Keep the rule for over the top abuse.

The umpiring standard has been horrendous this year.

I like the rule in general, but they've gone too stupid with the arms up part.
Arms up in general is NOT dissent. It's a natural motion when asking what or why. It needs context to be labelled as dissent. Aggressive motions or yelling and swearing would make it dissent.
Hewett was lucky not to give away 50m for his. He was yelling and moving his arms a bit.

 

[CheapCharlie]

I guess it comes down to what is considered staging? Attempting to fool an umpire into paying a free kick that is nota com there, or exacerbating contact from an illegal block to ensure the umpire sees it. One is deliberate deception, the other is putting mayo on what is already a free kick. It all comes down to whether the AFL sees a distinction between the two or not.

You might be right.
From where I sat it looked like a clear Ham up and id call it staging. Deliberately attempting to fool the umpires should be seen the same as umpire abuse, IMO

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

I guess it comes down to what is considered staging? Attempting to fool an umpire into paying a free kick that is not there, or exacerbating contact from an illegal block to ensure the umpire sees it. One is deliberate deception, the other is putting mayo on what is already a free kick. It all comes down to whether the AFL sees a distinction between the two or not.

You might be right.
From where I sat it looked like a clear Ham up and id call it staging. Deliberately attempting to fool the umpires should be seen the same as umpire abuse, IMO

This is where there's inconsistencies again, like the arms up.
Hawkins certainly put mayo on it and should be fined for staging, but the free was there. You can't just shove a player out of the contest and then not contest the ball yourself.
Same with the one where McKay was fined. Absolutely, fine him for staging because he put some mayo on it, but the contact was there from Chol. Play had stopped and the mark was awarded. Chol should not be making prohibited contact with Harry there. The 50 should have been paid despite harry exaggerating the contact.

With the arms up, personally I think they got the Andrews one wrong and then double and tripled down on it, but then failed to pay ones that should fit under the actual description of dissent, like the missed Hewett one.

 

[PHanevski]

If arms out is a fifty after a free kick is paid, then why is it not a free kick against when the ball rolls out of play and 2 or 3 players looks at the umpire and put their arms out asking for a free kick? Is that not dissent for disagreeing with the umpires decision.

Take note, I am not asking for this, not would I ever want it to happen. At the moment this is an over reaction to a problem that didn't really exist. For as long as I can remember if an umpire feels like a player is being abusive or threatening they have always had the power to pay a fifty. I am sure there were a couple of times over the weekend (can't remember the player it happen to) when they gave a free kick away and they just turned and lifted their arms up with a questioning look as if to say "what did I do" and then a fifty was paid.

 

[Gaspard]

The AFL, as usual, has overdone its rule changes. There needed to be a stop to umpire abuse, and what that is should be clear. Abuse. It can be argued that dissent had to be stopped too. That is, disputing the umpire's decision. Disagreement as evidenced by body language or looking at a video screen is not dissent. The new standard is to make the umpire a tin God who cannot err, and the merest suggestion by a raised eyebrow that he/she might have erred reason for game altering penalties.
The result will be a new and enhanced hostility to umpires from the crowd. Will the next step be additional 50 m penalties when the crowd boos the umpire? The game risks descending into farce as the umpires become the focus of the game rather than the players. The stakes need to be lowered, not raised.

 

[Freoboy in Melbs]

No one wants to talk about why it's only a problem in the men's comp. The women don't appear to have the same problem.

Just seems harder for blokes to keep their mouths shut or their 'jestured disaproval' to themselves. It's kind of funny.

 

[smeltitdeltit]

This is where there's inconsistencies again, like the arms up.
Hawkins certainly put mayo on it and should be fined for staging, but the free was there. You can't just shove a player out of the contest and then not contest the ball yourself.
Same with the one where McKay was fined. Absolutely, fine him for staging because he put some mayo on it, but the contact was there from Chol. Play had stopped and the mark was awarded. Chol should not be making prohibited contact with Harry there. The 50 should have been paid despite harry exaggerating the contact.

With the arms up, personally I think they got the Andrews one wrong and then double and tripled down on it, but then failed to pay ones that should fit under the actual description of dissent, like the missed Hewett one.

Frost would have likely been in a spot to contest the ball had CJ not marked it.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Frost would have likely been in a spot to contest the ball had CJ not marked it.

Correct, but he DIDN'T contest it. All he did was prevent an opposition player from contesting it. That's where the free comes from.

 

[smeltitdeltit]

Correct, but he DIDN'T contest it. All he did was prevent an opposition player from contesting it. That's where the free comes from.

He couldn’t because CJ got in the way. I do see your point however. At best it’s soft as butter. Forwards lay way way way more egregious blocks for teammates than this every week that don’t get paid.

 

[smeltitdeltit]

Brad Scott says they ran at 50% accuracy on a penalty that's aside from too many players on the ground, the largest in the game

 

[danster168]

Brad Scott needs to get sacked. He has no idea what he's doing. He cares more about social level than afl level.

Brad Scott thinks that there was only 6 frees missed. 6? the arms out happens 100 times a game

 

[danster168]

If i screenshot every arms up that isn't called this weekend, can someone make a collage out of it and make it go viral?

 

[Obeanie1]

The umpiring and rules decision makers in this sport is an absolute joke. Watched them discuss it on On the Couch, it's going to be focussed on this week apparantly according to Ralphy, but I bet you my house that there'll be multiple arms out from players, some will be 50, some won't be, and the cycle of amateur adjudication will continue.

Not to mention the flip flop approach. One week its applied with strick interpretation. Then after several howlers qnd stuff ups it will be relaxed. Then someone will say something bad, get 3x 50m penalties for one call, then the following week back to super strick application.

Still cant wait for one of those ambiguous ruck frees to be called no oneknows why and both rucks stick their arms out saying "what did I do"?

Ump keels over in confusion as they dont know which way to pay the 50m penalty.

 

[Fadge]

I like the rule in general, but they've gone too stupid with the arms up part.
Arms up in general is NOT dissent. It's a natural motion when asking what or why. It needs context to be labelled as dissent. Aggressive motions or yelling and swearing would make it dissent.
Hewett was lucky not to give away 50m for his. He was yelling and moving his arms a bit.

This is exactly right.

The rubbish around 'what about the kids' in applying the 50m penalty for simply putting your arms out when questioning (particularly in your own mind without actually saying anything, as Harris Andrews did) is the worst application of a rule in the history of sport.

In a sport where there are so many grey areas, the AFL are making a rod for their own back in stating the controversial 50m penalties from the weekend were correctly applied.

There is a simple test when defining a rule - would you be happy for the rule to be applied in the last 15 seconds of a Grand Final, and directly influence the result of that Grand Final? Surely in the case of this rule, the answer is a resounding NO.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

This is exactly right.

The rubbish around 'what about the kids' in applying the 50m penalty for simply putting your arms out when questioning (particularly in your own mind without actually saying anything, as Harris Andrews did) is the worst application of a rule in the history of sport.

In a sport where there are so many grey areas, the AFL are making a rod for their own back in stating the controversial 50m penalties from the weekend were correctly applied.

There is a simple test when defining a rule - would you be happy for the rule to be applied in the last 15 seconds of a Grand Final, and directly influence the result of that Grand Final? Surely in the case of this rule, the answer is a resounding NO.

Many wont like this but I think it’s not a coincidence that since the AFLW started the rules have become softer and the moral police on how players should behave is based on how women behave and not how men behave.
Women wanted to play AFL but instead of the women playing our game that’s been played for over 100 years it looks as though the men are now being made to play how the women want it played.
I am so glad I gave up our memberships couple of years back, cant In good faith give any money to any part of the AFL organisation. They have ****ed the sport.

 

[Romeoh1]

It’s a good rule.

 

[Fadge]

No one wants to talk about why it's only a problem in the men's comp. The women don't appear to have the same problem.

Just seems harder for blokes to keep their mouths shut or their 'jestured disaproval' to themselves. It's kind of funny.

This is just plain wrong.