Back to fining players for umpire contact, I see.
So Rioli clearly extending his hand to touch the ump is considered 'careless' (and not intentional) now. Would have definitely been a good laugh under cross-examination at the Tribunal.
Counsel: 'Did you mean to touch the ump?'
Rioli: 'Well, clearly the vision shows that I did. My hand moves away from my body towards the ump, I brush my hand against his hip, and I then move past him without any hint of hesitation from me as a result of having made accidental or incidental contact.'
Counsel: 'So would you call it intentional contact, then?'
Rioli: 'No, not as such, no.'
Counsel: 'The AFL rests...'
Didn't expect any different, of course.
But how the AFL expects to be taken seriously when they offer up such clearly contradictory findings from week to week is utterly astounding.