Universal Love Steve Hocking has retired as AFL operations manager

[Not Important]

who do we blame now that hocking is gone?

 

[Not Important]

Does anyone actually think anything will change? The next one will just be another Gil puppet.

AFL is jobs for the mates, not jobs for the competent.

bingo!

 

[Tigerish09]

Whispers are that by this time next year the following will occur .
Travis Auld > Gil
Brad Scott > Shocking
Rob Auld > Brad Scott
Nicole Livingstone and Trisha Squires into AFL head exec positions .

You missed one, Curtis Deboy to become Head of umpiring.

 

[SumTingWong]

Jobs for the Boys – Reform the AFL

reformtheafl.com

Sounds like where I work

 

[tigs2010]

Sounds like where I work

The AFL?

 

[Rayzorwire]

Vale the AFL, self-evidently it's become the Geelong and Greasy Family Football League.

The GAGFFL.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

You missed one, Curtis Deboy to become Head of umpiring.

and
virgin

 

[SumTingWong]

The AFL?

Nepotism.pty.ltd

 

[tigs2010]

Vale the AFL, self-evidently it's become the Geelong and Greasy Family Football League.

The GAGFFL.

 

[JackGraham]

Gil stated Shocking tried to introduce a 160metre long goal square, just at one end of the ground. 'Hahaha, I stopped him', he said 'he was going to trial it in Richmond vs. Geelong games where if Geelong won the toss, they could choose their end...and if Richmond won the toss, they couldn't choose their end.' 'The teams wouldn't rotate ends at the end of quarters as this wasted time'. 'He also wanted to trial a new 'stand' rule where you couldn't raise your arms on the mark as this allowed Trent Cotchin

9

Trent Cotchin

Age

35

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.4

5star

K

13.8

5star

HB

9.5

5star

M

3.4

3star

T

3.9

5star

CL

5.2

5star

D

19.0

4star

K

9.5

4star

HB

9.5

5star

M

2.7

3star

T

4.3

5star

CL

3.5

4star

D

16.6

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

8.6

5star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.0

3star

to block off the '90 degree vertical' kick into space, ...literally.. into space'. 'I finally realised he's a campaigner!' said Gil, 'so I sacked his arse'.

 

[biaseddustyfan]

Mission accomplished, he said.

View attachment 1171242

Heading down to Geelong mid-season to be their new CEO, so yeah, no conflict of interest there….

Footy boss departs AFL, reveals Gill's ONLY overrule

Steve Hocking will depart the AFL and return to former club Geelong

www.afl.com.au

 

[biaseddustyfan]

can't believe this wanka gets sent off with a circlejerky press conference with gil where he acts like he was a god that saved footy

it should've been an embarrassing sacking where journos grill him about how everything he set out to do failed miserably...bring up quotes from what the new rules were supposed to do (according to him beforehand) and facts about what they actually did - while simultaneously making the sport look closer than ever to the worst sport of all time - netball

ask why he rarely tested rules before implementing them and if he did he tested them for a tiny amount of time in training games. ask why he brought in rules a day before the season - what was he doing all summer ?

question the bias he used in decision making and why he took on so much power himself. ask about the rumours that he drove out the umpiring head coach earlier this year. ask him why as a top official that should be completely unbiased, he himself and his stats partners both mentioned that several new rules were specifically designed to harm 1 particular team

ask him why he continued the role for so long while looking to take over a competing club. while you can obviously work a job with a conflict of interest that is declared, there are certain things you have to withdraw yourself from and let someone else do. but by all accounts he had a far reaching job and controlled everything, even down to approving every MRO decision - and this is simply not something you should be doing with such a huge conflict of interest

eat shit hocking. hope geelol falls off a cliff

 

[YeOldTiger]

This is where I think the process is confusing for people.

Houli case.

The MRO, who was some combination of Michael Christian and Simon Lethlean at the time, referred the matter directly to the AFL Tribunal, presumably briefing the AFL Advocate to argue for a 4 week penalty. The Tribunal heard the case, found Houli guilty and mitigated his penalty seemingly based on character references from the prime Minister and Waleed Aly. They gave Houli a two week suspension. Lethlean on behalf of the AFL then appealed to a secondary Tribunal on the basis the suspension was manifestly inadequate. The second Tribunal agreed with Lethlean and upped the suspension to 4 weeks.

This case, whilst frustrating for us Tiger supporters and curious for being the only one the AFL has appealed, certainly recently, shows the system working fairly and correctly IMO. I think this despite thinking the outcome was a little harsh on Houli.

Fritsch case

Here the MRO(Christian and Hocking but effectively Hocking) gave Fritsch one week, which tbh I thought was a week light. The action Fritsch fended with was voluntary though I doubt the contact to the head was intentional. This should have been graded at least reckless IMO. The MRO said it was a careless action.

Anyway, Fritsch appealed the the Tribunal, who found his action was not careless, and overturned the MRO decision.

I am not sure the AFL can appeal on a subjective judgement of the facts like that. But maybe there is a mechanism along the lines of “no reasonable person could look at those facts and arrive at that decision.”

Should that have been applied in the Fritsch case? Probably not. So while I disagree with the decision of both the MRO and the Tribunal, I think this case also demonstrates a system working properly.

————————————————————

Where the really bad holes are in this system are shown up more in the Dangerfield v Vlastuin, Hawkins v May, Dangerfield v Kelly, Stanley v Grundy, and Duncan v Hall cases.

Here only one of these cases is referred to the Tribunal by the AFL but with the AFL(Hocking) curiously arguing for the minimum possible sanction for the offence - 3 weeks for careless/high/severe in the Dangerfield v Kelly case. Correctly done they should have been arguing for a minimum of 4 weeks for reckless/high/severe, given the shocking head first technique Dangerfield applied. In the other cases the MRO(effectively Hocking) waved those through as no further action.

This is where there is a clear flaw in the system. There is no realistic mechanism for anyone to look at those decisions and say hang on, that needs to be re-considered. The person in the position to do that was Hocking. And he is hardly going to appeal or review his own decision is he?

So there are several issues here. The first and most obvious is Hocking has had a clear conflict of interest in cases involving Geelong players whilst at the same time being close friends with the Geelong Coach AND, even more unbelievably, being involved in applying for the role of Geelong FC CEO. I cannot believe the AFL community is not up in arms about this.

The second and less obvious issue is the system does not allow a realistic way for an MRO decision of "no case to answer," or "too light a penalty" to be reviewed.

The third and even more subtle issue is the MRO - effectively Hocking - is acting as a pre judge of tribunal cases by having the AFL Advocate argue for the penalty Hocking sees as correct. In an adversarial set up like the Tribunal, the AFL should in almost all cases be arguing for the maximum possible penalty, then allowing the player to argue for the least possible penalty and the Tribunal to judge what is correct within those extreme arguments. In the Dangerfield v Kelly case Hocking effectively capped the penalty the tribunal would issue at 3 weeks.

We will always find cases like Fritsch or Houli where we disagree with the outcome even in a perfectly structured system. But this system is very poorly structured in several ways and I am very surprised nobody seems to realise this or care about it.

What Meteoric Rise said...

 

[Do the Dew]

can't believe this wanka gets sent off with a circlejerky press conference with gil where he acts like he was a god that saved footy

it should've been an embarrassing sacking where journos grill him about how everything he set out to do failed miserably...bring up quotes from what the new rules were supposed to do (according to him beforehand) and facts about what they actually did - while simultaneously making the sport look closer than ever to the worst sport of all time - netball

ask why he rarely tested rules before implementing them and if he did he tested them for a tiny amount of time in training games. ask why he brought in rules a day before the season - what was he doing all summer ?

question the bias he used in decision making and why he took on so much power himself. ask about the rumours that he drove out the umpiring head coach earlier this year. ask him why as a top official that should be completely unbiased, he himself and his stats partners both mentioned that several new rules were specifically designed to harm 1 particular team

ask him why he continued the role for so long while looking to take over a competing club. while you can obviously work a job with a conflict of interest that is declared, there are certain things you have to withdraw yourself from and let someone else do. but by all accounts he had a far reaching job and controlled everything, even down to approving every MRO decision - and this is simply not something you should be doing with such a huge conflict of interest

eat sh*t hocking. hope geelol falls off a cliff

One issue with this. It would take competent journalists.

 

[telsor]

Returning to Geelong. fu** off you turd!!!

Did he ever, really, leave?

 

[SunshineBoy]

One issue with this. It would take competent journalists.

Any other country and they would be asking questions, but this is Australia

 

[69vintage]

Whispers are that by this time next year the following will occur .
Travis Auld > Gil
Brad Scott > Shocking
Rob Auld > Brad Scott
Nicole Livingstone and Trisha Squires into AFL head exec positions .

Gee the betting companies will love the Auld family being involved. Can't believe anyone in the AFL media hasn't looked into the family background. It's going too make the Essendon drugs scandal look like a Sunday school pic nic .RIP PLUGGER FEVER .

On SM-G950F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Gee the betting companies will love the Auld family being involved. Can't believe anyone in the AFL media hasn't looked into the family background. It's going too make the Essendon drugs scandal look like a Sunday school pic nic .RIP PLUGGER FEVER .

On SM-G950F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Do you have detail?

 

[Mr Magic]

Danger has only just come back in the middle. I think it suits more link less ruck contest mids.

Someone like a Zac Bailey probably suits more, similar reasons to T Miller and D Parish

Bontempelli more suited because still takes marks less ground contested ball.

Like the ruck new rules probably do not suit Prestia, Neale, Mitchell as much

Jack Viney back at Melbourne, arguably less suited to rules compared to Kelly and Whitfield of Giants

I am looking at this more deeply.

Hunter is having a weaker year, Gaff a weaker year. Outside players that would rely on more ground ball presumably. Hunter is in a strong team to at the moment.

Small forwards. Are any standing out?? Dahlihaus has dropped big time, Eddie Betts not doing to much, Cameron at the Lions not shooting the lights out, Sunny at Freo not doing to much either.

Weightman is going okay at the Bulldogs but he plays more like a small leading forward.

I think of Port Adelaide. They should have been stronger this year theoretically except Ebert retired. However have the new rules worked against them? Wines is having a great year, Boak slowed a little? Their smalls/crumbers not done too much and the talls either, the ruck nulified??

Has Marc Murphy's retirement come forward because of the new rules with less ground ball? See Serong has not really kicked on from last year. As a shorter player are the rules working against him and favouring a Mundy type?

The other player that caught my attention is Jake lloyd of the Swans. I know his role changed apparently recently(not taking as many kick outs etc..) but his numbers have been down before that. Swans have been going better but is it because he is shorter again with less groundball?

 

[69vintage]

Do you have detail?

Andrew Rule loves a story about this sort of thing .The AFL journalists haven't got a clue about the goings on around this family.

On SM-G950F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

Any other country and they would be asking questions, but this is Australia

She'll be right mate...

 

[Karp3_dm]

She'll be right mate...

It’s disgusting isn’t it

My mrs is American and she can’t stand the attitudes of big businesses and the government here and she’s 100% spot on

 

[smasha]

I ask this question.
Where would Richmond be with the old rules?

I reckon top 3 for sure.

The AFL will make a Hocking statue because "he stopped the 3peat" ,that was the whole agenda behind these new rules.

Rules in history have been changed because of Richmond,we are the only team in the history of the game that has rulebooks changed to stop our dominance.

#weareeveryonesgrandfinal
#TigerPride

 

[Aeons]

LOL, i just had to come back here to make sure i didn't dream this up...

Did i really hear that the AFL official in charge of the rule and umpiring of the game has resigned to announce he will now be running the Geelong Football Club, & That the twin brother of the coach of.....THE GEELONG FOOTBALL CLUB, is now going to be running it instead?

Did he ever, really, leave?

This is a very good point. Considering a lot of pro Geelol decisions he has made such as dangerflog not getting rubbed out for knocking floss out in the granny, the stand rule to nullify our defensive pressure, and many others, he started as a geelol stooge, and is still obviously a geelol stooge. The definition of conflict of interest and bias in my book and yet another reason to hate geelol even more.

 

[Dont_Argue]

Good riddance to the campaigner