Non-Lions Footy Season (2017)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gadzorks

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 23, 2015
Posts
3,623
Likes
4,476
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
It could be a like for like arrangement - the reported thug is off for the same amount of time as the player he took out. So if they are only out for a quarter the reported player is also only off for that quarter, but if you are gone for the whole game so are they.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jackess

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Posts
33,510
Likes
26,257
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
It could be a like for like arrangement - the reported thug is off for the same amount of time as the player he took out. So if they are only out for a quarter the reported player is also only off for that quarter, but if you are gone for the whole game so are they.
What if Dangerfield knocked out Bewick in the first minute? Wouldn't we just keep Bewick off for the whole game?
 
Joined
May 3, 2005
Posts
87,792
Likes
82,057
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
Moderator #3,003
What if Dangerfield knocked out Bewick in the first minute? Wouldn't we just keep Bewick off for the whole game?
Next level tagging. Just need to draft the most obnoxious, infuriating, mouthy and punchable bloke you can find.

baseketball_crop_exact.jpg
 

Gadzorks

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 23, 2015
Posts
3,623
Likes
4,476
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
What if Dangerfield knocked out Bewick in the first minute? Wouldn't we just keep Bewick off for the whole game?
I'm sure it would be exploited that way but the easy solution is don't king hit someone. It's a deterrent for extreme thuggery that doesn't occur incidentally during play. And the best players should have the experience and self control to not perform these acts.
 

Dylan12

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 7, 2007
Posts
16,924
Likes
14,789
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Chelsea, Boston Red Sox
I still think it's reacting to a problem that doesn't exist.

The issue Will be if they do ever use it, the incident will be similar to another where they don't use the card. Or someone implementing the red card for no good reason.
That's like saying just about every other code in world sport that sends players off has it wrong. AFL is one of the few that doesn't have a send off rule.

For all those advocating that there is too great a margin for error is ignoring the fact that those for sending players off only want it implemented for instances such as thuggery acts such as Bugg.

Seriously, who is going to get that wrong?
 
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Posts
1,969
Likes
2,456
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
That's like saying just about every other code in world sport that sends players off has it wrong. AFL is one of the few that doesn't have a send off rule.

For all those advocating that there is too great a margin for error is ignoring the fact that those for sending players off only want it implemented for instances such as thuggery acts such as Bugg.

Seriously, who is going to get that wrong?
Soccer has a send off rule, it's awful inconsistently applied & decides games. Just because other codes do it doesn't make it the right thing to do.

The AFL implementing a new rule will just lead to inconsistent applications of it that will frustrate the hell out of everyone.

And for what? To stop teams Koing blokes to win a game of footy. There's absolutely no evidence to suggest that's happened - not in modern day footy.

Plus if you're intention was to take someone out deliberately. Just bump I to them with their head over the ball. Those bumps never get graded intentional so how could you send someone off in that situation. Punches are one thing but the grey areas around bumps would be impossible to adjudicate a send off rule consistently.

I don't think these days a team has ever set out to deliberately hurt someone, if they wanted to, a send off rule wont stop them. Therefore I think it's a rule trying to solve a problem we don't have that won't actually work.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jackess

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Posts
33,510
Likes
26,257
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Soccer has a send off rule, it's awful inconsistently applied & decides games. Just because other codes do it doesn't make it the right thing to do.

The AFL implementing a new rule will just lead to inconsistent applications of it that will frustrate the hell out of everyone.

And for what? To stop teams Koing blokes to win a game of footy. There's absolutely no evidence to suggest that's happened - not in modern day footy.

Plus if you're intention was to take someone out deliberately. Just bump I to them with their head over the ball. Those bumps never get graded intentional so how could you send someone off in that situation. Punches are one thing but the grey areas around bumps would be impossible to adjudicate a send off rule consistently.

I don't think these days a team has ever set out to deliberately hurt someone, if they wanted to, a send off rule wont stop them. Therefore I think it's a rule trying to solve a problem we don't have that won't actually work.
And to reduce the impact it has on the result of the game
 
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Posts
1,969
Likes
2,456
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
And to reduce the impact it has on the result of the game
Yeah I've never been convinced going a man down is that much of a disadvantage.

Sydney won in the game in question. We beat Essendon with 3 on the bench all game. Players like to play, I'm not convinced it's as big a deal as people make out.

Bad luck is bad luck it's been in footy for years the sub rule came in to try & decrease your level of bad luck & we all hated it.

The deterrent is already there & set to increase next year. We don't need anything else.

The other thing that will irritate me if you punch someone & they don't get concussed a player will not get sent off but throw the same punch & concuss someone & you're off. How is that right? I get that the outcome has to play a role in the level of punishment but if you have a send off rule you have to punish the action not the result.
 

Skoob

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Posts
13,688
Likes
20,503
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
That's like saying just about every other code in world sport that sends players off has it wrong. AFL is one of the few that doesn't have a send off rule.

For all those advocating that there is too great a margin for error is ignoring the fact that those for sending players off only want it implemented for instances such as thuggery acts such as Bugg.

Seriously, who is going to get that wrong?
Do you then separate the Houli and Bugg incidents?
If yes, because Houli threw an arm back, then it's a fine line if someone lines up their victim with their peripheral vision.
If no, then it's possible we see someone sent off for being reckless rather than malicious.
There is always a line, and you're asking umpires to find that line. You're asking them to determine guilt or level of guilt, in which case, why do we have a MRP and tribunal?
Sure, other sports have send off rules, but they are also constantly either sending someone off unfairly, or leaving a player on who should be binned.
Such a rule, like others is open to interpretation, and they will get it wrong from time to time. I'd hate for a player to be rubbed out of a game, because the umpire thought he meant to hit someone, but didn't. I'd equally hate it if one of our players was hit and despite a send off penalty being available, wasn't implemented because the umpire thought it was accidental.
There are 2 things at play here. As a deterrent, I don't think it would work. These incidents are very much heat of the moment these days. I don't think Bugg laid that punch with the thought that "Oh well, I'll only get a month off". It was a week after the Houli hit, and punishment never entered his head. The existing penalties act as a deterrent to pre-meditated violence, so we have "melees" instead of all in brawls, and players aren't deliberately taken out as a strategy.
The merit to the idea is the punishment aspect. As discussed, it's an eye for an eye approach so that the victim's team is impacted less. Hard to argue against that, except for the reasons above, that the umpire suddenly becomes judge and executioner, where we currently rely on a tribunal with lawyers to determine the level of guilt.
Do other sports have it wrong. I think so, because they do get it wrong.
It's similar to the arguments for and against the death penalty. In extreme cases you have to be either guilty or innocent. We can say it is only for blatant offences, but what constitutes blatant? And are those who aren't sent off, therefore innocent? There's a lot of grey in there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom