Hot Topic Send Off Rule

Remove this Banner Ad

I'd allow the sub on, yes.

That changes things up quite a bit in my opinion then.

If it were a soccer like scenario then I'll stick with my original opinion on.

It just goes to show how significant the parameters would need to be.
 
I played in a senior grand final 34 years ago and there was a huge melee involving about 30 players at Windy Hill.

There were spot fires everywhere and punches were being thrown willingly by both sides in the mayhem.

Yet somehow the umpire sent three players off from my team and none from the opposition. :huh:

We were seven goals up just before half time and had to play out the remainder of the game with 15 players .

We ended up losing in the last minute of the game........

So I am not all that keen on the sendoff rule.

I understand the AFL would be more professional and you would hope they would get it right.

It is probably needed .

We all remember Alistair Lynch's farewell to footy......There was no next week in that Grand Final, it was his last game, he was injured and ineffectual and the only impact he could make was throwing haymakers from all angles. What was amazing was that none landed.

We wouldn't want to see that again. A thug could break a player's jaw with a coward punch and be free to keep playing while the team that suffered the injury are a man down.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Gaff should have been sent off if the process existed.

Webster should have been sent off if the process existed.

It should only be for undeniable incidents such as the above.

It adds a layer of complexity to a system that is already highly inconsistent.

Here is my problem with it:

Imagine sending Maynard off for the Brayshaw incident last year in Q1 of a final.

Collingwood plays a man down for the rest of the game. It determines the outcome of the game.

The tribunal process plays out exactly as it did (Maynard ultimately cleared).
If it can’t be determined IMMEDIATELY they list as a report and carry on as usual.
 
I don't like tying the send off to an injury.

Frankly it should be umpires discretion with the heavy emphasis that a send off is only for dangerous conduct which was deliberate.

So if you lay a guy out like Gaff/Brayshaw, you're off. If you just lay a heavy bump, but in the contest, play on.

I just want it to be clear that sniping needs to be absolutely off-limits.

On Pixel 7a using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
ain't no doctor but I'm tipping the more obvious, heavy hits may not always cause the most damage as far as concussion is concerned - look at mccartin - some of his concussions didn't seem to come from big head knocks - just suggesting it's a dangerous game to play suggesting only the obvious collisions cause damage.........
 
Last edited:
I'd allow the sub on, yes.
As a general idea, I'm yes to that. But if one side has already activated their sub and then has a player taken out (so they're effectively down 2 players), I'd like some mechanism to help 'equal up' number of players available for rotations. Either the side that has lost a player can reactivate the subbed player, or if they've bèen subbed off due to an injury, side of the 'aggresor' cannot activate their sub.
 
Why is this even a debate, if there is a send off rule in community football, surely some rules and guidelines can be applied at the professional level. there needs to be a judge and the judge is accountable for its application for better or worse
 
Card system with Video review & Fine/Suspension (eg. Peter Wright incident = Red Card with x weeks suspension, if Player is careless and OP is OK but comes off for 20 mins, yellow card but still suspension review). Either way, it will even up the numbers on the ground and stop Big hits in GFs etc where the next week is not important.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top