MRP / Trib. 2023 MRP Lotto

[SonofSamsquanch]

Will they investigate if the umpire actually is a cheat?

Taking that to the tribunal is a strange way to deal with it. Was the umpire offended by the f-bomb or by being called a cheat?

Seems that the offensive language part of it is more likely based on the wording of the rule, but who's offended by that these days? I would say worse would be uttered in a primary school play ground.

So, the AFL refers a case where a player calls an umpire a cheat to the tribunal huh? Maybe this fits into the rule somehow, but wouldn't it be at least a bit prudent of the AFL to at least investigate what caused the player to make that statement? L really doubt somebody would make an accusation like that if they didn't hold a strong opinion that they had been cheated.

The game is emotional and I suppose, even for players it must be hard to hold back if they really do feel like they were hard done by. But if he just didn't like the ump he'd surely just call him a campaigner as opposed to calling him a cheat.

 

[giantroo]

Didn't we cop an 80k fine for Scott calling Mr Overland a cheat?

Edit: 50k for us and 30k for Scott
https://m.afl.com.au/news/2016-06-21/roos-scott-cop-massive-fines-for-false-umpire-claims

https://m.afl.com.au/video/2016-06-18/they-dont-pay-lindsay-free-kicks-scott

 

[Thewlis Dish]

If you want a better standard of umpiring you need to have better development and career pathways, which means you need as much participation at junior levels as possible, which means umpires need protection and support in situations like this and players need to be called out for disrespectful behaviour.

Obviously it goes both ways (to an extent) but you're not going to get youngsters not playing footy because umpires are too aggressive.

 

[ferball]

If you want a better standard of umpiring you need to have better development and career pathways, which means you need as much participation at junior levels as possible, which means umpires need protection and support in situations like this and players need to be called out for disrespectful behaviour.

Obviously it goes both ways (to an extent) but you're not going to get youngsters not playing footy because umpires are too aggressive.

Not unless we start arming them with nulla nullas.

 

[shintemaster]

If you want a better standard of umpiring you need to have better development and career pathways, which means you need as much participation at junior levels as possible, which means umpires need protection and support in situations like this and players need to be called out for disrespectful behaviour.

Obviously it goes both ways (to an extent) but you're not going to get youngsters not playing footy because umpires are too aggressive.

Yeah. This is one I have no real issue with. I don't think a game is an appropriate forum to question umpires integrity. That said I do feel the AFL approach to umpire integrity is all wrong, having no proper official forum to debate the rules and an approach where 99% of decisions are justifiably "correct" just leads to more perception of integrity issues in the game IMO.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Yeah. This is one I have no real issue with. I don't think a game is an appropriate forum to question umpires integrity. That said I do feel the AFL approach to umpire integrity is all wrong, having no proper official forum to debate the rules and an approach where 99% of decisions are justifiably "correct" just leads to more perception of integrity issues in the game IMO.

The whole theory of 'if you question umpiring decisions then no one will want to do it' is a crock of s**t.

 

[shintemaster]

The whole theory of 'if you question umpiring decisions then no one will want to do it' is a crock of ****.

Agree. There’s nothing wrong with healthy discourse around how the game should be interpreted and umpired IMO. Having them be unimpeachable just increases the angst and fury against them IMO. The rules committee don’t do them any favours though.

The sport actually needs a Vatican II style ruler taken over the whole game. Instead of worrying about trying to tweak every game to provide the perfect spectacle they should be worried about simplifying and streamlining the rules to make the game easier to umpire and easier for players to perform without having to worry about which interpretation will be the rule of that month, week, game or quarter of football. Rules like “deliberate OOB or behind” are prime examples. Just make it last kick or don’t, interpretation doesn’t need to come into it. I’d look closely at whether prior opportunity needs to even exist given it changes contest to contest whether the umpires believe in it. Just have players required to correctly dispose of the ball. No kick, no handball – free kick. If you don’t like your odds of achieving this don’t pick up the ball, instead push it forward, knock, kick off the ground whatever.

These are just examples and I'm not saying they have to be the changes but there are just way too many rules that can go either way based on feel rather than simple black and white rules.

 

[ferball]

"Vatican 2 style ..."

LOL - really did laugh out loud.

That's a very astute observation actually.

 

[giantroo]

Carlton veteran Dale Thomas has been fined $7,500 for abusing an umpire.

 

[Hojuman]

And Soldo a week because he is not Ablett or Fyfe.

Joke.

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

And Soldo a week because he is not Ablett or Fyfe.

Joke.

No immunity idol...



So all these blokes complaining about being suspended... STFU and win individual immunity so you can snipe freely.

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

Carlton veteran Dale Thomas has been fined $7,500 for abusing an umpire.

Move on. Nothing to see here.

 

[Snake_Baker]

View attachment 678271
Move on. Nothing to see here.

He should tell them to get ****ed and not pay it.

What can they do, throw him in jail?

 

[ferball]

Just ban him from playing or being involved in the game ever again.

 

[giantroo]

He does it again

 

[Hojuman]

He does it again

Hahaha ! Fantastic.

 

[grimface_87]

He does it again

"insufficient force"

[IMG='width:390px;']https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/d3d8d6dfaa5151d6e4ab6ce460c55116?width=1024[/IMG]

 

[Snake_Baker]

He does it again

Try getting out off that one grub.

That's ****en weeks this time.

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

"insufficient force"

[IMG='width:390px;']https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/d3d8d6dfaa5151d6e4ab6ce460c55116?width=1024[/IMG]

Still has an impepeccable record. Has a Brownlow. He is unflushable.

 

[75-77-96-99]

He does it again

not one mention of it on FOX or CH7 - how can we get this on social media for the AFL to see it...

 

[Snake_Baker]

He's certifiably ****ed .

Judge Gerard could give the entire AFL commission blowjobs and it won't save him this time.

 

[Sideburns Ahern]

Ralphy needs to be careful. The Geelong mafia will take him down for that heresy.

 

[SMaturin]

He's certifiably ****ed .

Judge Gerard could give the entire AFL commission blowjobs and it won't save him this time.

If they’re ‘fair dinkum’ he’ll get more than a ******* week.

 

[WayneShimmiesTheBush]

Try getting out of that one grub.

That's ****en weeks this time.

you just know that the media will try and get him out of a suspension. it will be along the lines of, because the ruling is insufficient force, they cant suspend him. However, the AFL should make an example of this behaviour and fine Gary Ablett Frank Costa a large sum.

 

[Roosurgence]

Try getting out off that one grub.

That's ****en weeks this time.

Let’s see how this is any different to the Soldo one.

I’m sure Hocking is coaching Christian on his response right now.