Rules Do we need a send off rule?
- Thread starter fargothegreat
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I tend to agree here. That is probably all that is required in the AFL (the send off rule at other levels is quite different, but without the scrutiny available at AFL/AFLW level).
As things stands, the incentive (thankfully not used so far) is there to go sniping in a grand final.
- Feb 13, 2011
- 10,894
- 13,738
- AFL Club
- Richmond
It starts off for hits like Stewart or Gaff or Bugg or Vickery, but very soon it becomes for any hit that knocks a guy out for the rest of the game, and then it transforms into Dangerfield getting sent off for a clash of heads or Ryder for hitting a guy while stationary, and then eventually a situation like Ablett on Vlastuin in 2020, where a guy gets sin binned for an act the MRO ticks off as fine.
Umpires already cop enough flack for being horrendous. Imagine if they were given more power to completely alter the outcome of the game-and like they do with everything -* it up.
It's not like Stewart went around mass concussing half of the Richmond side lol
It's not like Stewart went around mass concussing half of the Richmond side lol
JustaBattler
Everyone Looks Better In Blue
- May 31, 2012
- 27,040
- 63,359
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The umps arent up to making decisions like that in AFL - unlike the rugby codes AFL is a 360 degree game much harder to officiate consistently. The MRO has plenty of time to go through video evidence - after the fact and decide on what punishment is apt - and even then the whole regime is full of inconsistencies and make uppy decisions depending on the fashion of the day.
Chandler sling tackle?
Bailey Smith headbutt?
JHF swining arm?
Preuss sling tackle?
Ladhams punch?
Buddy open hand swat?
Where do we draw the line?
Chandler has to go right? Smith? Not much force but a total non football incident that leaves a player bleeding? JHF?
Once you send off one guy you're opening it up to grow and grow.
Bailey Smith headbutt?
JHF swining arm?
Preuss sling tackle?
Ladhams punch?
Buddy open hand swat?
Where do we draw the line?
Chandler has to go right? Smith? Not much force but a total non football incident that leaves a player bleeding? JHF?
Once you send off one guy you're opening it up to grow and grow.
00Stinger
100 - 7
No
- Mar 11, 2018
- 8,149
- 12,482
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Hmm, doesn't seem to be enough incidents (thankfully) to warrant it, so probably not. But that's never stopped the AFL before. ('member the season with post-it note managed interchanges?)
But IF it does come in, then it can't be the umpires responsibility. It would have to be an MRO doing a normal incident review during game time and then advising through bench umpire that player XYZ must be removed from the game. An on duty MRO should be able to make a send off/not send off review within minutes and a few replays. And the decision threshold would need to be clear. Gaining timely injury reports would be the challenging part, but it would make sense that if any injury is not yet clear, then it could not be a send off offence.
Onto suspensions - I've long thought about who is punished and benefits from a suspension. In this case, Geelong was advantaged through an illegal act (assuming Stewart is found guilty, and as opposed to advantage achieved via any randomly occurring injury) and Richmond disadvantaged. The player is suspended, which disadvantages Geelong for the next X weeks. So Geelong is square on the ledger. But the teams who will benefit from Geelong's disadvantage wil be the teams Geelong plays over the next X weeks. Richmond never receives any advantage to square their disadvantage from the original incident. I wonder if something like suspensions > 1 week, one of those weeks is held over for the next time those two teams clash? e.g. Stewart is suspended for the next X-1 games, and the next game where Geelong plays Richmond?
Anyway, just my mental noise.
But IF it does come in, then it can't be the umpires responsibility. It would have to be an MRO doing a normal incident review during game time and then advising through bench umpire that player XYZ must be removed from the game. An on duty MRO should be able to make a send off/not send off review within minutes and a few replays. And the decision threshold would need to be clear. Gaining timely injury reports would be the challenging part, but it would make sense that if any injury is not yet clear, then it could not be a send off offence.
Onto suspensions - I've long thought about who is punished and benefits from a suspension. In this case, Geelong was advantaged through an illegal act (assuming Stewart is found guilty, and as opposed to advantage achieved via any randomly occurring injury) and Richmond disadvantaged. The player is suspended, which disadvantages Geelong for the next X weeks. So Geelong is square on the ledger. But the teams who will benefit from Geelong's disadvantage wil be the teams Geelong plays over the next X weeks. Richmond never receives any advantage to square their disadvantage from the original incident. I wonder if something like suspensions > 1 week, one of those weeks is held over for the next time those two teams clash? e.g. Stewart is suspended for the next X-1 games, and the next game where Geelong plays Richmond?
Anyway, just my mental noise.
Long thought this.
The clear snipes (hall, conca, gaff, etc) are exhibit A but the actions like stewart, rowbottom on merrett a few weeks ago, etc where its still a football action but comes late while the player is exposed needs to be stamped out. Disincentive to hurt should be the driver. We want even contests and fair play. Moreover, reducing the risks of concussion should also be prioritised
But id hand it to a video system (and invest in decent ones)
The clear snipes (hall, conca, gaff, etc) are exhibit A but the actions like stewart, rowbottom on merrett a few weeks ago, etc where its still a football action but comes late while the player is exposed needs to be stamped out. Disincentive to hurt should be the driver. We want even contests and fair play. Moreover, reducing the risks of concussion should also be prioritised
But id hand it to a video system (and invest in decent ones)
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
Don't really have an opinion on this thread's topic question, but I absolutely love the irony in this post.
It was well after the ball was tapped on, Stewart had plenty of time to avoid collision instead he lined the player up in a deliberate act, 4 to 6 weeks would be fair.Softcocks at the AFL will probably hand out the good guy punishment 1 week and a fine.
Elmer_Judd
Everyone's favourite grouch
- Jul 25, 2019
- 53,234
- 78,495
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Leeds United
- Banned
- #89
In the bay maybe, but on the mainboard, only really posted in the player poll comparison threads involving Richmond, so i think you are exaggerating in that context postcodes.
Btw really hope Prestia is okay, no one likes to see that of injury in footy.
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
Really stalking Elmer Judd lately Tiger2709, still not over EJ disagreeing with you, I guess?
Would a send-off rule mean the team only had 17 players on the field or just be a rotation short?
I think it has merit for things like Hall vs Staker or Greene vs Umpire but regarding a high bump it would need to be for all off the ball high bumps, not simply based on the outcome - if the reason is to protect players from CTE / concussion.
I think it has merit for things like Hall vs Staker or Greene vs Umpire but regarding a high bump it would need to be for all off the ball high bumps, not simply based on the outcome - if the reason is to protect players from CTE / concussion.
- Mar 3, 2022
- 4,942
- 6,447
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Extending the bench to 6 and doing away with the medi-sub gives us the opportunity to apply a send off for anyone who commits a violent act that results in a player missing the rest of the game.
I don't see a punitive function adding value, but I do see it keeping the contest even re: rotations.
I don't see a punitive function adding value, but I do see it keeping the contest even re: rotations.
No it wasn't, it was less than half a second after Prestia punched the ball away from him and before any other player on the ground had touched the ball.
Well then you're either blind or can't read since 100% of the thread is reasons why we shouldn't have it.
He deserves 6 weeks, same as the scum Jonas got for his hit on Gaff in 2016
And how often do they actually make the right call? How often do the umpires not see the incident, then later see a player down behind play and send a player off on the outcome not the action?
Again, funny how all those in favour ignore the question, would you have sent of Mackay for his hit on Clark last year? Because I guarantee you 100% the umpires would of sent him off for a bump found to be totally legal.
Nah
Not broken, doesn’t need fixing
Not broken, doesn’t need fixing
Yellow and red carded players are replaced. Certainly in Melbourne metro and surrounding leagues. May be different interstate, I dunno.
- Sep 3, 2019
- 17,241
- 49,912
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Calm down. If the victim was a Collingwood player would you Richmond supporters be going this Helen Lovejoy at this proposal
The downside with a send off rule is when the umpire *s things up and overstates the incident. But with the ARC now in place, there is no reason why any incident can't be reviewed first to make sure a send off is justified.
As I understand it there's a send off rule in the official rules, but it specifically precludes the AFL. Just take away the exclusion.
As I understand it there's a send off rule in the official rules, but it specifically precludes the AFL. Just take away the exclusion.
Similar threads
