What just happened at SCG ?

[D-N-R]

Why should clubs have to put up with ignorant officials. If this steward is not sacked then there is a conspiracy to cover up AFL incompetence

Was the Tiger's official ignorant too?

Their interchange steward had asked the AFL interchange official whether the player was allowed to come back on once cleared by the doctor and was told 'yes'.

Why didn't the Tigers' official know that he had to wait 20 minutes regardless of whether the player had been cleared by the doc or not? Didn't he understand the rules himself? Don't they run their own stopwatch on it?

 

[Tigerland]

Was the Tiger's official ignorant too?

Why didn't the Tigers' official know that he had to wait 20 minutes regardless of whether the player had been cleared by the doc or not? Didn't he understand the rules himself? Don't they run their own stopwatch on it?

Naive comments.
The AFL have admitted blame but it's still the Tigers official's fault is it?
You weren't on the bench, you're speculating when you clearly have no clue whatsoever.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Was the Tiger's official ignorant too?

Why didn't the Tigers' official know that he had to wait 20 minutes regardless of whether the player had been cleared by the doc or not? Didn't he understand the rules himself? Don't they run their own stopwatch on it?

He may have thought that the doctor would know that part. Also as I said before the doctors as a group wanted to include non game time as part of assessment and it is unclear whether the afl changed it or not.

 

[D-N-R]

Naive comments.
The AFL have admitted blame but it's still the Tigers official's fault is it?
You weren't on the bench, you're speculating when you clearly have no clue whatsoever.

If the coach asks the bench 'how long until Edwards comes on', what do they say? If the Richmond bench didn't have a stopwatch on a player under a concussion test, they aren't doing their job. If they have to run to the AFL official to ask him 'how long', then they aren't doing their job. They should know when he is due to come back on so they can warm him up and have him ready to go.

The AFL official stuffed up, or misunderstood the question, but the Tigers' bench had their man on nearly 2 minutes early which indicates that they didn't have a clue when he had started the assessment. They should know when the assessment starts and when it finishes and only check with the official to make sure.

 

[D-N-R]

He may have thought that the doctor would know that part. Also as I said before the doctors as a group wanted to include non game time as part of assessment and it is unclear whether the afl changed it or not.

It seems the question was misunderstood. The article I have linked seems to suggest that 20 minutes real time is the current rule.

 

[Crankyhawk]

It seems the question was misunderstood. The article I have linked seems to suggest that 20 minutes real time is the current rule.

If 20 minutes real time is the rule then the ruling must have been wrong - injury second quarter, return to field in third with half time in between. I think that the herald sun article may not be correct as I can't find confirmation on afl website of the change from game to real time.

 

[D-N-R]

If 20 minutes real time is the rule then the ruling must have been wrong - injury second quarter, return to field in third with half time in between. I think that the herald sun article may not be correct as I can't find confirmation on afl website of the change from game to real time.

It depends when they started the assessment though. I don't think he came off immediately.

WRT the change in the ruling, if it was 20 minutes of game time, then he wouldn't have been due to come on until 15 minutes into the quarter or thereabouts. He came on less than 2 minutes early and very early in the quarter, so I guess 'real time' is the current ruling.