MRP / Trib. Eric Hipwood to tribunal - Result $2500 fine

[Spearman]

What does this have to do with it? Could also claim as an ex Hawthorn player and North coach he's further conflicted. But I can't see how that changes the decision Michael Christian has made to refer this to the tribunal and let them decide.

I think he was being sarcastic. At least that how I read it.

 

[Thedeftouch]

I had a quick look at the Laws and it seems to only be a reportable offence for a player to make contact with an umpire. Hipwood didn’t do that. This will get chucked out and they will close the loophole when they update the Laws.

 

[maskmcgee]

The relevant section of the 2022 Tribunal Guidelines. Due to media editorialism I can't actually see which one of these he's been charged with, but the only category which has specific provisions for causing another player to contact an umpire without making contact yourself is the careless contact section, which only allows for a fine. If Brisbane have a lawyer of any value he'll face effectively no penalty.

(F) CONTACT WITH AN UMPIRE
1. Intentional Contact with an Umpire

Contact with an Umpire that is aggressive, forceful, demonstrative or disrespectful will be deemed intentional and the Player will be directly referred to the Tribunal. In determining the sanction for Intentional Contact with an Umpire, the Tribunal must have regard to the number of elements of the offence (aggressive, forceful, demonstrative and/or disrespectful) which are established.

2. Unreasonable or Unnecessary Contact with an Umpire

Where contact with an Umpire is not aggressive, forceful, demonstrative or disrespectful but could otherwise be regarded as intentional, it will be classified as Unreasonable or Unnecessary Contact with an Umpire and subject to a fixed financial sanction.

3. Careless Contact with an Umpire

Contact with an Umpire by a Player will be regarded as careless when it constitutes a breach of the duty of care owed by the Player to the Umpire. Regard will be had to the following factors when determining if the contact is careless:
» Whether contact occurs at a centre bounce or ball-up;
» Whether the Player has set up behind the Umpire;
» Whether the Player has taken a path that intersects the Umpire’s exit line from a stoppage;
» The force of the contact;
» Whether the Umpire’s decision-making is impeded;
» Whether the Umpire goes to ground as a result of the contact;
» Any mitigating factors (effort to avoid contact, offline bounce or throw, pushed by an opponent into the Umpire’s path etc).

A Player may also be charged with the offence of Careless Contact with an Umpire by pushing or holding an opponent into an Umpire or their direct path. A charge of Careless Contact with an Umpire will be subject to a fixed financial sanction

 

[Maddo11]

Absolutely impossible to prove intent from the available footage, so surely it will be

A Player may also be charged with the offence of Careless Contact with an Umpire by pushing or holding an opponent into an Umpire or their direct path. A charge of Careless Contact with an Umpire will be subject to a fixed financial sanction

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

Should have probably been a free kick for a push in the first place tbf. What did hodge get for pushing someone (was it wingard?) in to a goal post? Not that I’m comparing an immovable object to constantly moving umpire, however, you can’t make deliberate contact with an umpire. If by definition that extends to deliberately pushing someone in to an umpire (intent or not, the tribunal loves looking at the outcome) then he’s probably ****ed.

 

[Toump Ass]

I hate umpires and I’m not a fan of Dogs but I think Hippy Hipwood knew what he was doing and thus deserves a very big penalty as he bowled over the umpire after throwing the dogs player at him.
Lions would argue u can’t prove intent and pretend it was an accident.
Tough one to call. I’d think 4 weeks is fair.

 

[HairyO]

There is no way you can prove intent there. Question is whether the tribunal finds he should have known that shoving a player near and umpire could lead to contact.

Could be a week or 2 weeks but I cant imagine it being more without an Appeal which could then find 0 weeks.

There are collisions with umpires all the time. Almost none get penalised.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Does anyone think he deliberately pushed him into the ump?

You see it half a dozen times a game where a player pushes his opponent in the direction of another to gain separation. Players used to do it all the time at the centre bounce and then an umpire got cleaned up and it became a free.

 

[Pusswah]

Does anyone think he deliberately pushed him into the ump?

You see it half a dozen times a game where a player pushes his opponent in the direction of another to gain separation. Players used to do it all the time at the centre bounce and then an umpire got cleaned up and it became a free.

Pushes the player in the direction that they're running?

Straight in the direction of the umpire?
There's no way he didn't know what he was doing.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Does anyone think he deliberately pushed him into the ump?

Only my interpretation of it (which means squat) but I think it was absolutely deliberate.

They would have known the umpire was there as he was ahead of both players as they ran forward. Players have pretty dam good periphery vision so I’m sure they would have seen him.

The ball was still a good 20-30m away and there was no need to push for separation at that exact point.

Having known the position of the umpire, Hipwood could have chosen to push the Dogs player at any other moment but didn’t. Could have pushed in another direction but didn’t.

In the screenshots (as blurry as they are) you can see from the side view Hipwood is looking straight ahead as the image captures the side of his head. Meaning he’s essentially lookin straight at the umpire from behind him.



Now Hipwood has plenty of space to go around the umpire or could have created separation simply by running on the opposite side of the umpire. Instead, while still standing behind the umpire he pushed the Dogs player straight into his back.and again appearing to look straight ahead as the image captures the side of his head.



I think he 100% did this deliberately. If the guidelines are that this type of offence is only a fine then so be it but I think this particular act deserves a couple weeks.

 

[Vindicater]

Does anyone think he deliberately pushed him into the ump?

You see it half a dozen times a game where a player pushes his opponent in the direction of another to gain separation. Players used to do it all the time at the centre bounce and then an umpire got cleaned up and it became a free.

He absolutely did it on purpose.

Will be lucky and get fined and the rules will be changed.

 

[Sherrinator]

Only my interpretation of it (which means squat) but I think it was absolutely deliberate.

They would have known the umpire was there as he was ahead of both players as they ran forward. Players have pretty dam good periphery vision so I’m sure they would have seen him.

The ball was still a good 20-30m away and there was no need to push for separation at that exact point.

Having known the position of the umpire, Hipwood could have chosen to push the Dogs player at any other moment but didn’t. Could have pushed in another direction but didn’t.

In the screenshots (as blurry as they are) you can see from the side view Hipwood is looking straight ahead as the image captures the side of his head. Meaning he’s essentially lookin straight at the umpire from behind him.

View attachment 1437528

Now Hipwood has plenty of space to go around the umpire or could have created separation simply by running on the opposite side of the umpire. Instead, while still standing behind the umpire he pushed the Dogs player straight into his back.and again appearing to look straight ahead as the image captures the side of his head.

View attachment 1437529

I think he 100% did this deliberately. If the guidelines are that this type of offence is only a fine then so be it but I think this particular act deserves a couple weeks.

Do you think or do you know lol. Fine Hipwood if you want - the guy is a saint.

 

[Toump Ass]

Does anyone think he deliberately pushed him into the ump?

Absolutely.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Do you think or do you know lol. Fine Hipwood if you want - the guy is a saint.

Well unless we expect the MRO and tribunal to have higher powers and can 100% determine the intentions of a player and their state of mind, every decision is based on ‘think’.

I’d say based on the actions of Hipwood, the balance of probability lies with him intending to get the result he got. Based on;

Can reasonably assume given the umpire was in front, he was well aware he was there.

Given he was still behind the umpire when he pushed the Dogs player, can assume he wanted to use the umpire to impede his run.

He could have used his body at any other point in leading for the ball rather than 1 step behind the umpire but chose to at that exact moment.

And, Hipwood could easily have just taken a simple side step to one side and gone straight past the umpire, used them as a barrier to create space between he and his defender without actually causing a collision.

Based on that, I ‘think’ it’s clear his intentions but no we will never definitively know what he was wanting or aiming to do unless we go Harry Potter on his arse.

 

[le dominateur]

AFL will send a message, could have injured the umpire, big suspension coming up.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[HairyO]

Does anyone think he deliberately pushed him into the ump?

You see it half a dozen times a game where a player pushes his opponent in the direction of another to gain separation. Players used to do it all the time at the centre bounce and then an umpire got cleaned up and it became a free.

That would be the point. Tried to push the player the other side of the umpire to get some separation.

Whether that is a fine or a week or 2 we shall see.

 

[Sherrinator]

The guys a stick, he hardly has full control of himself let alone 2 other humans.

 

[Thedeftouch]

Those of you expecting any kind of suspension are going to be sorely disappointed

 

[caveman72]

Give him a week and make him umpire half a dozen junior games

 

[Hollow Knight]

Feels like a classic BigFooty groupthink overreaction to me (that also vastly overrates the abilities and game awareness of E. Hipwood) , but I have skin in the game.

We'll see how it pans out.

 

[Bald]

I would expect it’ll be a fine and a rule adjustment. I believe it was blatant and intentional but there’s not really any way to prove it and there’s enough doubt to argue he didn’t.

 

[janty]

The Fox Footy boys already have started their weekend long agenda. All we need is the Grand Poobah/Moral Compass of all AFL Gerard Whately to give his opinion on Monday and Hipwood will be suspended.

 

[maskmcgee]

big suspension coming up.

Nope, it can only be a fine, know the rules

 

[juss]

IMO no player would ever deliberately push another player into an umpire.

What I think happened was Hipwood tried to push his opponent to create space and either a) didn't think the player would hit the umpire but did mean to push him towards him b) misexecuted the push and wanted to push him around the umpire as a secondary blocker.

Both of those are pretty careless thoughts though. I wouldn't be surprised if he got a couple of weeks.

 

[_Mike_]

Absolutely impossible to prove intent from the available footage, so surely it will be

more the point it will be argued that Hipwood was merely giving Gardner a pat on the back for being a good runner, and it was Gardners flop for a free which resulted in the ump being floored. Gardner should get a 2 year suspension for making intentional contact.

that’s how it works around here.

/sarcasm for those unable to interpret