Opinion Should the AFL bring in a red card policy?

[Stoods]

Lately there has been a lot of discussion over if the AFL should bring in a red card policy during games, in which would be the same as soccer - if you get a red card you get sent off and can't come back. The umpires have come out and said they are happy to do it if the AFL allows it.

The topic has risen again after the big hit on Gaff from Jonas, what does everyone think?

I for one am against it, i think the tribunal ban alone is enough punishment and it should stay like that, again stop changing the rules, it's fine the way it is. I would hate to see a controversial red card given where the umpire was say blind sided or something and he thought he saw something really bad and it turns out it wasn't as bad and he gives a red card and potentially costs a team a game. So a no from me

 

[Feerits Elf]

No also.

I think we can wrap this one up, Murphy.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

I've thought so for a long time.

It's bullshit. You can take a player out and yeah, you may miss a game or two, but ON THAT DAY, the sniper could have won his team a game that seals Top 4 spot or costs the other side a Top 4 spot.

Too much on the line in football these days to allow players to get away with malicious acts.

 

[Feerits Elf]

I've thought so for a long time.

It's bullshit. You can take a player out and yeah, you may miss a game or two, but ON THAT DAY, the sniper could have won his team a game that seals Top 4 spot or costs the other side a Top 4 spot.

Too much on the line in football these days to allow players to get away with malicious acts.

When was the last time a team won a match that sealed a top 4 spot or cost the other side a top 4 spot by belting an opposition playmaker?

Genuinely interested to know.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

NO!

 

[ThexderX]

NO....the umpired can't get basic holding the ball decisions right.

Most umpire reports now are thrown out lately...they tend to over-react.

Players will start going down like they've been shot in the back....cough cough Lindsay Thomas

 

[ppoiter]

Not a fan of this idea, although wouldn't mind a sin bin for blatantly dirty acts

 

[mattys123]

No has always been my response to this and will continue to be.

BUT;

If they are going to bring in some type of game day punishment, it has to be backed up by an "NRL bunker" style of system. Even the NRL don't use their bunker to decide all send offs or 10 minute penalties, but they should.

So if they bring it in bring it in with at least 1 AFL tribunal member sitting next to the goal review person on the day.

Never been a fan of send offs in any sport though, the amount of games that are decided based on a wrong call are considerable in all sports with a send off rule.

 

[Wooljay]

Sin bin is a good middle ground.

I find in full contact sports like AFL it'd be bloody hard to make a clear decision on a send-off, and you'd have narcissistic twats like Razor Ray keen to get involved.

Yellows and reds exist in soccer for good reason, otherwise you'd be able to professionally foul your way through a game with minimal repercussions. Coupled with the fact that some dirty tackles in soccer can snap legs and end careers I think it has to be there as a deterrent.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Not opposed to it, seems to work ok in other codes
Would need to be a very clear and strict criterion

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Could we add a Poll, might be interesting to see what the numbers are

 

[76woodenspooners]

It's the grand final, everything is on the line Grand Final illustrates, whack the opposition without fear of meaningful consequence. See 1989 ...



... Or 1990 for that matter

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I don't trust the umpires to adjudicate it properly on the ground. Maybe bunker referral is an option. Should only be for acts deemed intentional.

 

[slugger01]

Two things to consider when making a judgement here.
Firstly, sending a player off is like having a tribuneral and decision made immediately in a split second. This may be ok, but it can also mean that a harsh decision is made, and the player is sent off when there could be reasonable doubt as to his guilt, or indeed, the penalty does not warrant a send-off or suspension. You are asking an umpire, in the heat of the moment to determine whether to penalise a side by sending a player off, without due consideration, deliberation, asking questions, looking at footage, etc.
Secondly, what if a player is sent off because of an incident, but then the player that was hit or injured miraculously gets well, and comes back on later in the game? The perpetrator is sent off, and his team are penalised, whilst the other team has a full list again (am considering the possibility of dirty tactics here by some teams...).

A player who deliberately acts to injure a player is disgusting, and that player should be penalised harshly. But i don't think that penalty can be delivered within seconds of the incident in all situations. Proper consideration and investigation should take place, just as we we do with all laws in a democracy. A person in innocent until judged guilty, and that takes place with due process.

 

[Baird]

Yes. If you snipe somebody and knock them out cold you should serve a match penalty. I can think of 2 instances already from this year

 

[unplugged]

I think players should be red carded but only if the player is stretchered off, i.e. not through the interchange gates so they can't come back on. And only if it was absolutely intentional.

You'd hate to see an incident like the Brisbane player last year who got stretchered off and came back on later.

Also saw an incident with Lin Jon (is that his name?) against GWS who looked like he had knocked out his opponent cold... until he got up 2 minutes later and jogged off pretty well unassisted.

Basically you'd hate to see a modern day Brereton in a grand final knock out a star player and run around for the rest of the game. If no red card to send them off for the rest of the game, at least bring in the card where the player is "sin binned" for 15 minutes like a country footy game, where your team is a man short until that time is up.

 

[Pera]

It's the grand final, everything is on the line Grand Final illustrates, whack the opposition without fear of meaningful consequence. See 1989 ...



... Or 1990 for that matter

Who ended up winning those matches? You'll usually find the teams that belt blokes actually tend to lose the games. Both the players in question played out the game on those days also.

Loading the GF day suspensions is enough of a punishment and for regular season, well, theres a bigger chance of an umpire incorrectly sending a player off compared to a player going out and belting a bloke deliberately to end their game.

Id hate to see it in our game. Its bad enough at local level where they just yellow card players for the slightest of tussles.

 

[Pera]

Yes. If you snipe somebody and knock them out cold you should serve a match penalty. I can think of 2 instances already from this year

May and Jonas? They werent snipes. Just poorly timed and clumsy attempts at a bump and spoil. You have no time to react out there these days and once you decide to go, theres no going back. I dont think either had it in their head they were going to put the other bloke on a stretcher.

 

[jathanas]

Hate snipers and would have enjoyed seen Jonas get sent off.

Just because a grand final has not been lost because of a dog-act yet, it doesn't guarantee that it won't happen.

Plus it's an extra deterrent.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

When was the last time a team won a match that sealed a top 4 spot or cost the other side a top 4 spot by belting an opposition playmaker?

Genuinely interested to know.

I think you've misinterpreted my post.

I"M not aware I said it was a common occurrence. I said football is too big a deal for it to ever be allowed to happen, even once. That's ignoring the fact that that sort of stuff needs to be stamped out. I can assure you, if a team is down to 17 men for 5-10 minutes of a match and cops a nice handful of goals as a result, players will think long and hard before doing anything like it again.

 

[TradeDraft]

I don't trust the umpires to adjudicate it properly on the ground. Maybe bunker referral is an option. Should only be for acts deemed intentional.

Agree. Only reason be sent off it was Intentional and very late hits.

Jonas would been sent off

 

[TradeDraft]

I think players should be red carded but only if the player is stretchered off, i.e. not through the interchange gates so they can't come back on. And only if it was absolutely intentional.

You'd hate to see an incident like the Brisbane player last year who got stretchered off and came back on later.

Also saw an incident with Lin Jon (is that his name?) against GWS who looked like he had knocked out his opponent cold... until he got up 2 minutes later and jogged off pretty well unassisted.

Basically you'd hate to see a modern day Brereton in a grand final knock out a star player and run around for the rest of the game. If no red card to send them off for the rest of the game, at least bring in the card where the player is "sin binned" for 15 minutes like a country footy game, where your team is a man short until that time is up.

So like Ice Hocky?

 

[Pera]

The old tribunal system couldnt even properly determine what was intentional, negligent etc. Why on earth do people think a bunker on game day will make the right call when someone knocks somebody else out of the game?

 

[Royal Flash]

I think the send off rule as used in regional football is great. It has basically eliminated the dirty acts and footballing thugs who used to be routine per team and per game. It hurts teams to be a player or players down and coaches quite rightly are dirty on players getting sent off and this has led over the years to a general cleaning up of country football (the odd incident aside). Individual players have been subliminally taught that if you transgress the rules then you've let your team down and this starts at junior level and players now focus on the ball much more than the man than they used to.

Some of the shit I used to see on football fields at regional level would make your skin run cold these days (I'm talking the 1980's and early 90's and I'm reliably informed back in the 70's it was even worse) and ever since they've brought in the send off rule a lot of the spite, brawls and unnecessary aggression has been thankfully relegated to a thing of the past.

 

[jjsmitty8]

I feel like there does need to be some sort immediate disciplinary action for acts like Steven May and Tom Jonas. Why is it fair to Brisbane and West Coast that they've got to play out a game a man down, purely because an opposition player has ended their day? How does a 5 week suspension to Steven May help Brisbane at all? The club with the player shouldn't be disadvantaged.

I think there does need to be a sub rule, but done differently. Have the traditional 4 on the bench, cap the interchanges, whatever, but have one sub who can enter the game in the event that a player won't be returning. I would go as far as saying ONLY if that player is sent off on a stretcher, and the injury has been directly caused by the opposition. Therefore if you're normal injuries that occur during a contact sport arise, you still have to play a man down. By doing this, the player who performs the act can still be sanctioned, the club with the injured player still has 22 playing, and no red card needs to be introduced.