Time to bring in a "red card"

[favourites]

I'm not one that likes change but I feel this is one area of the game we have room to move.

Snap shot of Friday Night.

Wellingham "snipes" Simpson and puts him out of the game.

Carlton lose Simpson and gain nothing. Collingwood at the time decrease the amount of fit players on the other team. What does Carlton gain out of Wellingham being suspended for the next 3/4 weeks?

The answer is nothing. If anything they would want Collingwood to beat Geelong on Saturday night to help them with their top 8 chances.

It hasn't sat right with me that Wellers continued to play while the blues went down to 20. In todays game having a one number advantage is a huge plus (one which didn't change the result this time, but might next time).

What I propose is a "third umpire" to decide on a red card. If a player is sniped out of the game and the 3rd umpire believes it was "intentional" (cheap shot) with all the video evidence at hand. The offender will be red carded and cannot return until the player he injured comes back.

I think the way the game has gone - with the advantage so high when rotations are down we need to look at a different way of dealing with game day issues.

I thought being a Collingwood supporter it was a good time for me to bring this up as it would've and should've been invoked on Friday night imo.

I understand that these issues are very rare and therefore the effect shouldn't be large, and I would emphasis the point that there must be video evidence and a third umpire (which there already is) involved.

 

[Oneiros]

I'm not one that likes change but I feel this is one area of the game we have room to move.

Snap shot of Friday Night.

Wellingham "snipes" Simpson and puts him out of the game.

Carlton lose Simpson and gain nothing. Collingwood at the time decrease the amount of fit players on the other team. What does Carlton gain out of Wellingham being suspended for the next 3/4 weeks?

The answer is nothing. If anything they would want Collingwood to beat Geelong on Saturday night to help them with their top 8 chances.

It hasn't sat right with me that Wellers continued to play while the blues went down to 20. In todays game having a one number advantage is a huge plus (one which didn't change the result this time, but might next time).

What I propose is a "third umpire" to decide on a red card. If a player is sniped out of the game and the 3rd umpire believes it was "intentional" (cheap shot) with all the video evidence at hand. The offender will be red carded and cannot return until the player he injured comes back.

I think the way the game has gone - with the advantage so high when rotations are down we need to look at a different way of dealing with game day issues.

I thought being a Collingwood supporter it was a good time for me to bring this up as it would've and should've been invoked on Friday night imo.

I understand that these issues are very rare and therefore the effect shouldn't be large, and I would emphasis the point that there must be video evidence and a third umpire (which there already is) involved.

With the pre-existing third umpire, it makes sense. And for something as game-altering as that you would want to be able to send it upstairs for verification.

 

[el toado]

I am personally against the idea, mostly because I doubt the AFL and the umpires ability to get it right.

There are many potential problems including;

• deciding where a line is drawn regarding what is and what isnt a red cardable offence i.e is a trip cardable? what about an accidental (possibly reckless) head high contact?
• Also who makes the decision? If the on field umpire does it then they will no doubt not have all the facts and get it wrong. If it is a third umpire how long do they take consulting the replay, where do they get all the angles from? Do we stop the game or does the player get red carded later in the game?
• Consistancy across each each of the nine weekly matches would also be an issue.

Just too many variables for me. People are still up in arms about the MRP system and its reductions for early pleas and a good record and those concepts are fairly black and white.

 

[s364376]

great idea, but should be given by the field umpires after consulting with the 4th umpire and the other field umpires. if they all agree that the player should be red carded, off they go. should really only be used in cases like friday night, barry hall v staker etc.

 

[mantis]

See the thread a couple of threads down, "New rules idea, suspensions", being discussed there.

 

[vmac]

I think the sin bin is better than the red card. We need to avoid those elements that make a red card such an epic fail in soccer. If you incur a red card in the opening minute you miss the entire game, you incur it in injury time you miss almost no time at all. It needs to be evaluated by a video referee with the benefit of slow motion replay, it needs to be graded so that the referee determines the number of minutes, it needs to be either loss of a player from the ground or loss of a player from the bench. It would be similar to Formula One penalties. The scoreboard would note that a player is being investigated and within a few minutes the results of the investigation would be posted. This would have the effect of calming down the offended team and removing the offending player from the arena for a period of time.

I agree the current system is not fair. Carlton receive no compensation for having a player's jaw broken and losing him for a period of the game and a number of weeks. Collingwood get almost no penalty - they get to send Wellingham on a high altitude holiday for three weeks and bring him back before the finals with better conditioning. There remains the problem of Grand Final day where if you are retiring after the game you can hit anyone you like as hard as you want and suffer no penalty and help your team win a Grand Final.

 

[Onetonylockett]

A good way to do it may be that a player can be replaced if carded.

For example
yellow: Off for a quarter (can be replaced by someone on the bench)
Red: Off for the rest of the game (can be replaced from the bench)

 

[BarneyBent]

Yes, BUT not for things like Wellingham's bump. That stuff too often happens with borderline-legal or ambiguously legal actions, combined with a bit of bad luck. Think LRT's injury against the Weagles; out for the rest of the game, and a trigger-happy third umpire could have ruled it an illegal bump (it wasn't, thankfully, both were contesting the ball, but it wouldn't have surprised me if it was reported given the quality of some of our umpires), and Brennan would have been out for the rest of the game.

Now, for things like punches, I'd be fine with it. Barry Hall's punch on Staker deserved a red card. I'd argue that any act that occurs outside the realms of normal play (so not just a high bump), causing serious injury should be punished with a red card. So punches, kicks, etc that put an opposition player out of play for the rest of the game, or at least the majority. Perhaps, if the severity of the damage is uncertain, a yellow card could be issued, and they go off for 10 minutes, and then it can be upgraded to a red if the player is out for the rest of the game.

 

[Oneiros]

A good way to do it may be that a player can be replaced if carded.

For example
yellow: Off for a quarter (can be replaced by someone on the bench)
Red: Off for the rest of the game (can be replaced from the bench)

Yeah, I like that. Like the Game Misconduct in Ice Hockey - push out the idiot involved but not completely crucify the team. Maybe make it so he can't be substituted. Playing a rotation down is fair enough, but trying to play 17 on 18 at AFL level would result in a farce.