Fletcher gets a game

[Macca19]

Well at least the tribunal is consistent.
Shouldnt of been suspended but thems the rules.

What i find baffling and rather unfair is that Cousins ran into the umpire on the weekend...not only has it not gone up to the tribunal...Port didnt even receive a free kick for it!!

 

[sabre_ac]

Hrrmmm talk about total bull********.
Not only did fletcher only have eyes for the ball.
But the umpire was backing into the play.
And the umpire suddenly changes direction.
Unlike curly fletcher put up his hands to cousin the blow.

This rule is total crap, im disgusted at the outcome and its about time the tribunal take a good hard look at themselves.

On top of all this
Im more than a ten year career fletcher has never been suspended.
You will never find a more honorable player in the league.
The question remains had he played for another club would he have recieved a suspension at all??

 

[Port01]

The answer to your question is if it was the bulldogs...yes.

 

[RacerX]

Congratulations AFL, every year you make up some farked up rule and every year the dockers end up getting screwed by it!

Further congratulations to the 3 afl game veteran umpire who sold fletch down the river with comments like,
"he made no attempt to cushion the impact"
how the hell would you know - eyes in the back of your head maybe?

It's just wrong, no one got hurt, it was accidental, adelaide got a free kick out of it. Why do they have to penalize the player even further for it.

Fletcher = 200 game plus veteran with a squeaky clean record.

Umpire Moron = 3 game rookie whose unnecessary & damning comments ensured a suspension!

 

[greggo]

This morning I look like a sufferer of Parkinsons Disease. I haven't stopped shaking my head since I heard the news of the Fletcher incident.

May 16th 2001 is a date that will go down in infamy.
Can any one tell me why an umpire with twelve quarters of football experience can be believed more than someone who has 868 quarters of football behind him? In what existential plane of reality are these umpires and tribunal members from?

Can anyone tell me the difference between what Fletcher did and what an Essendon player ( who tapped the umpire on the weekend) did? I can tell you...Fletcher's was an accident in the rough and tumble of play. The other one was a deliberate, disrespectful and I say reportable and suspendable offence.

There are 36 players on the field at any time. There are three umpires on the field at any time. Football is a game that gets very congested and of course collisions occur. If a collision is deemed reckless, intention or otherwise then by all means give a free kick and throw in a 50m penalty as well.

But to suspend someone who accidentally bumps into an umpire is not a miscarriage of justice but an abortion of justice.
I say that if the AFL sees fit to put numbers on the backs of umpires then the players have the right to run through them, jostle them and abuse them. The 3 men in white on the field are becoming more important than the game itself and I say it stinks to high heaven. I can see this heading to a proper Court in the near future and that will be the thin edge of the wedge.

I wonder what Umpire Head thinks about umpiring over here?

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Originally posted by greggo
This morning I look like a sufferer of Parkinsons Disease. I haven't stopped shaking my head since I heard the news of the Fletcher incident.

May 16th 2001 is a date that will go down in infamy.
Can any one tell me why an umpire with twelve quarters of football experience can be believed more than someone who has 868 quarters of football behind him? In what existential plane of reality are these umpires and tribunal members from?

Can anyone tell me the difference between what Fletcher did and what an Essendon player ( who tapped the umpire on the weekend) did? I can tell you...Fletcher's was an accident in the rough and tumble of play. The other one was a deliberate, disrespectful and I say reportable and suspendable offence.

There are 36 players on the field at any time. There are three umpires on the field at any time. Football is a game that gets very congested and of course collisions occur. If a collision is deemed reckless, intention or otherwise then by all means give a free kick and throw in a 50m penalty as well.

But to suspend someone who accidentally bumps into an umpire is not a miscarriage of justice but an abortion of justice.
I say that if the AFL sees fit to put numbers on the backs of umpires then the players have the right to run through them, jostle them and abuse them. The 3 men in white on the field are becoming more important than the game itself and I say it stinks to high heaven. I can see this heading to a proper Court in the near future and that will be the thin edge of the wedge.

I wonder what Umpire Head thinks about umpiring over here?

Good post greggo.

And Macca19, excuse me but where is the consistency?? Disregarding the types of bump, one with hands, one with shoulder, how did Curley's contact deserve FOUR weeks, and Fletcher's earn ONE? Curley's previous good record was not mentioned as a mitigating factor in his sentence and in fact there were many (eg Walls) who wanted him to get 10 weeks. No such speculation has occurred this time.

The whole concept stinks anyway.

 

[Unregistered]

Originally posted by Dogs_R_Us



Good post greggo.

And Macca19, excuse me but where is the consistency?? Disregarding the types of bump, one with hands, one with shoulder, how did Curley's contact deserve FOUR weeks, and Fletcher's earn ONE? Curley's previous good record was not mentioned as a mitigating factor in his sentence and in fact there were many (eg Walls) who wanted him to get 10 weeks. No such speculation has occurred this time.

The whole concept stinks anyway.

Firstly

Disregarding the bump is like disregarding wether someone used a shoulder or an elbow to remove another player from the play.

Not to mention the fact that the umpire involved in the fletcher incident suddendly changed direction.Or that he had the ball coming towards him.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Originally posted by Unregistered


Firstly

Disregarding the bump is like disregarding wether someone used a shoulder or an elbow to remove another player from the play.

Not to mention the fact that the umpire involved in the fletcher incident suddendly changed direction.Or that he had the ball coming towards him.

Were those factors considered? Perhaps they were. The evidence was confusing. Both umpires whinged pathetically. Fletcher was found to be "negligent", while Curley "negligent and reckless", later changed to "negligent" only. One "negligent" is worth 2 games and the other, one game. Are there degrees of negligence then - 1st degree Negligence and 2nd degree Negligence etc?

The paper said: "It was Fletcher's record of only one fine for wrestling during his career that earned him a lighter penalty." (no mention of Curley's record)

Maguire said Fletcher had known the direction field umpire Matthew Head was heading in and entered the area ``at speed'', and said that Head, who was oblivious to an oncoming Fletcher, ``did not contribute to the contact''."


A shoulder and an elbow certainly count for player on player; a shoulder can be considered fair play in most cases, and a push in the back a free kick. Whereas an elbow will probably get you a week. And the contact between players is almost always intentional.

With the umps pretty well ANY type of contact, even if accidental, will get the book thrown at you.

 

[Barking_Dog]

fletcher gets 1 week, and a couple of weeks ago curley got 2 weeks, and fletches seemed to be more deliberate than curleys.

 

[Ted's Robot]

Now Fletcher is appealing. It will be interesting to see if his penalty is halved (dismissed). The major difference I can see between the Curley case and Fletchers is Curly didn't see the ump so he had no chance of avoiding him.

Something will be done about the rule now as no-one expected another player/umpire clash so soon.

Good Luck to Fletcher

The rule sux!!

 

[Captain Sensible]

Its a disgrace that either player got a suspension, but it doesn't matter that Fletcher only got half the penalty. The point is that NEITHER player should have missed any matches. The AFL have opened a can of worms that they can't contain.

What I want to know is why are umpires being called in to report players by the AFL appointed umpires directer? Why are the umpires being so strident and critical of players at the hearings?
This is all very sinister.

Any way good luck to Fletcher on beating his bum rap.

 

[RacerX]

This whole umpire contact thing has got completely out of control. I agree that it looks sinister too.

I reckon Umpire Head was coached about what to say to ensure Fletch got suspended. The rules aren't clearly defined, but if a player is seen to have reckless or negligent contact with an ump then they get suspended. What is the first thing the ump says at the tribunal, you guessed it, Fletcher made reckless contact.

This all hinges on the definition of terms like reckless and negligent. Are the tribunal qualified to make this distinction, an army of lawyers could argue for decades over such definitions.