Umpiring The Umpiring Dissent Rule - Discuss Here

[hawkman]

How easy would it have been for the ump to simply reply "no prior" and move on. Players would respect that a lot more.

If Coniglio dropped a couple of f bombs then fair enough.

Exactly right. Perfect response to the question the umpire was asked.

 

[FireKrakouer]

Footy fans: we'd like clarification of the current interpretation of the dissent rule.
The AFL:

 

[JustaBattler]

AFL is the only contact game I know of where players are allowed to speak to umpires - let alone complain.

Everyone is an expert on why the ump decided to pay the penalty because they were listening to his every comment to players throughout the game....and of course no other free kick has ever been paid in front of goals by any umpire ever- with 12+ minutes to go in a game ...

It is a bad 'look' for crybabies and umpire bashers on BF - but maybe Coniglio will learn to keep his mouth shut in the future.

 

[marcus1232]

AFL is the only contact game I know of where players are allowed to speak to umpires - let alone complain.

Everyone is an expert on why the ump decided to pay the penalty because they were listening to his every comment to players throughout the game....and of course no other free kick has ever been paid in front of goals by any umpire ever- with 12+ minutes to go in a game ...

It is a bad 'look' for crybabies and umpire bashers on BF - but maybe Coniglio will learn to keep his mouth shut in the future.

While I agree in principle with what your saying.
If that is a free kick then I believe there needs to be 100 frees paid a game.

My only question to you is would you feel the same if your team wasn't the beneficiary?

 

[Demonic Ascent]

The umpires and the AFL are doing nothing to help their image as a bunch of self important w***ers

 

[living_in_syd]

AFL Head of Umpiring Dan Richardson:
Firstly, I want to say the dissent rule has had the positive impact intended and has found an appropriate level over the course of the past 12 months.
We have been really happy with everyone’s approach, both during the back half of last season, and in the early parts of this year.
The players have generally been doing their bit and umpires have been applying the rule where required.
In regard to Saturday’s GWS GIANTS vs Carlton match and the free kick paid in the fourth quarter.
I want to be clear – the dissent was paid based on the player challenging the umpire both verbally and visually, both in his tone and his manner.
If there was no challenge to the decision, regardless of personal opinion on the threshold, then no free kick could or would have been paid.


02:08

Head of Umpiring on dissent rule​

AFL Head of Umpiring Dan Richardson discusses the game's dissent rules and the decision late in the GWS-Carlton game
Published on Apr 3, 2023
Just like we have some players or coaches who occasionally get emotional, or become overly expressive when under pressure, we also have umpires with differing levels of temperament.
We have a set of guidelines for the umpires to work between, and we coach them, but we also can’t coach human response.
Footy is not black and white, it is one of the hardest games to umpire, there is a level of ‘grey’ and within this area is where the debate always sits.
The umpires understand in the heat of battle there are going to be times regarding this rule, whether it has been an accumulation across the match or a single response, a time comes where they need to make a call.
We understand the debate on the level of dissent; we understand the debate on whether the umpire made the right call on the weekend, but this part is clear - if you put yourself in a position for an umpire to have to make a call by verbally or visually challenging a decision, then you need to live with the potential consequence, and in the example on the weekend - the umpire made a call.
If you don’t challenge the decisions, then there is no need for the debate.
The approach going forward won’t change.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Disgraceful decision

 

[HairyO]

So by defending this one umpire, they are saying all of the other umpires are doing a bad job enforcing the rule.

What a ****ing clown show.

 

[living_in_syd]

Just a reminder it makes the sport feel really really amateur

 

[JackFlash]

Dan Richardson should resign immediately...The AFL got this wrong completely.

 

[ChristianBoy]

While I agree in principle with what your saying.
If that is a free kick then I believe there needs to be 100 frees paid a game.

My only question to you is would you feel the same if your team wasn't the beneficiary?

Ding ding ding.

Here is the issue. Carlton supporters are happy as it won them the game. Of course if the shoe was on the other foot they’ed be screaming bloody murder. Same thing happens with garbage MRP desisions people are only angry when it’s their team.

 

[FireKrakouer]

AFL Head of Umpiring Dan Richardson:
Firstly, I want to say the dissent rule has had the positive impact intended and has found an appropriate level over the course of the past 12 months.
We have been really happy with everyone’s approach, both during the back half of last season, and in the early parts of this year.
The players have generally been doing their bit and umpires have been applying the rule where required.
In regard to Saturday’s GWS GIANTS vs Carlton match and the free kick paid in the fourth quarter.
I want to be clear – the dissent was paid based on the player challenging the umpire both verbally and visually, both in his tone and his manner.
If there was no challenge to the decision, regardless of personal opinion on the threshold, then no free kick could or would have been paid.


02:08

Head of Umpiring on dissent rule​

AFL Head of Umpiring Dan Richardson discusses the game's dissent rules and the decision late in the GWS-Carlton game
Published on Apr 3, 2023
Just like we have some players or coaches who occasionally get emotional, or become overly expressive when under pressure, we also have umpires with differing levels of temperament.
We have a set of guidelines for the umpires to work between, and we coach them, but we also can’t coach human response.
Footy is not black and white, it is one of the hardest games to umpire, there is a level of ‘grey’ and within this area is where the debate always sits.
The umpires understand in the heat of battle there are going to be times regarding this rule, whether it has been an accumulation across the match or a single response, a time comes where they need to make a call.
We understand the debate on the level of dissent; we understand the debate on whether the umpire made the right call on the weekend, but this part is clear - if you put yourself in a position for an umpire to have to make a call by verbally or visually challenging a decision, then you need to live with the potential consequence, and in

 

[Demonic Ascent]

It's farcical.

But it's the AFL at fault. Not the umpire.

Why would they be angry with him, or punish him?

100 other instances go unpunished over the weekend. So the AFL should be upset with those umpires that didn't pay free kicks? It's one or the other if it's a rule you have to pay them all and the umpires that didn't should be held to account. If it is a pissweak interpretation by the umpire in the GWS game and he made an egregious decision at a critical point which effectively gave a free goal to Carlton then the AFL should hold him to account.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I saw a little bit of the Essendon game and that moment when that guy did that.

Not only did he wave his arms - he did whilst referring to the scoreboard!!

That's two boxes ticked for 'Dissent'.


But to be fair, the umpire wasn't watching. So I don't think it was an incorrect non-decision so to speak - it was just incompetence in terms of her simply not seeing it.


Which begs the question really doesn't it? Is it really an act of dissent if the person that you're supposedly showing dissent to is standing 1m away and doesn't even notice?

And I think the AFL are setting the umpires up here. I highly, highly doubt an umpire gives a s**t if a player argues with them, or even carries on like a child. But they're forced to pay these for the AFL's bigger cause.

And as a result, the vitriol gets directed at the umpires!! Which is a complete and total backfire on what the AFL was trying to do.

Once again, the AFL have s**t the bed.

The umpire is in control of the game. They can elect not to pay a ridiculous free kick like that (and most do).

 

[McIvor]

AFL is the only contact game I know of where players are allowed to speak to umpires - let alone complain.

Everyone is an expert on why the ump decided to pay the penalty because they were listening to his every comment to players throughout the game....and of course no other free kick has ever been paid in front of goals by any umpire ever- with 12+ minutes to go in a game ...

It is a bad 'look' for crybabies and umpire bashers on BF - but maybe Coniglio will learn to keep his mouth shut in the future.

You've obviously not watched soccer.

All a bit rich coming from a Carlton or VFL club particulalry when you had a play do the same, yet the umpire ignored it.

 

[Square Peg]

Head of umpiring says the AFL reserves the right for their umpires to make capricious decisions at critical points in games favouring their fairytale team of the moment.
I'm shocked to be reading this

 

[westie]

I have just heard another directive from bullshit castle:- In this situation of backchat from an underling, An umpire shall stand to attention and while clicking his heels, he must point an open hand at an angle of no more or less than 45 degrees and he must say "There will be no dissent"

 

[FireKrakouer]

After reading Dan's statement, I feel we're all thinking the same thing.

I was all like Dan,

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

AFL Head of Umpiring Dan Richardson:
Firstly, I want to say the dissent rule has had the positive impact intended and has found an appropriate level over the course of the past 12 months.
We have been really happy with everyone’s approach, both during the back half of last season, and in the early parts of this year.
The players have generally been doing their bit and umpires have been applying the rule where required.
In regard to Saturday’s GWS GIANTS vs Carlton match and the free kick paid in the fourth quarter.
I want to be clear – the dissent was paid based on the player challenging the umpire both verbally and visually, both in his tone and his manner.
If there was no challenge to the decision, regardless of personal opinion on the threshold, then no free kick could or would have been paid.


02:08

Head of Umpiring on dissent rule​

AFL Head of Umpiring Dan Richardson discusses the game's dissent rules and the decision late in the GWS-Carlton game
Published on Apr 3, 2023
Just like we have some players or coaches who occasionally get emotional, or become overly expressive when under pressure, we also have umpires with differing levels of temperament.
We have a set of guidelines for the umpires to work between, and we coach them, but we also can’t coach human response.
Footy is not black and white, it is one of the hardest games to umpire, there is a level of ‘grey’ and within this area is where the debate always sits.
The umpires understand in the heat of battle there are going to be times regarding this rule, whether it has been an accumulation across the match or a single response, a time comes where they need to make a call.
We understand the debate on the level of dissent; we understand the debate on whether the umpire made the right call on the weekend, but this part is clear - if you put yourself in a position for an umpire to have to make a call by verbally or visually challenging a decision, then you need to live with the potential consequence, and in the example on the weekend - the umpire made a call.
If you don’t challenge the decisions, then there is no need for the debate.
The approach going forward won’t change.

The AFL has this annoying habit of defending thier umpires at all cost.

 

[marcus1232]

Dan Richardson should resign immediately...The AFL got this wrong completely.

He is a puppet fronting the media.
The head office are a bunch of cowards all they have done is empowered local umpires to over officiate what they are trying to achieve here will have the direct opposite of what they are trying to achieve in this instance.
More hatred and abuse to umpires

 

[Hookster]

No one has come out and said the umpire Fooked up and should have paid a free for dropping the ball. So the head is in the sand again. Not fixing the problem. When hiring an umpire they need to do many mental stability tests, problem solved.

 

[ChristianBoy]

No one has come out and said the umpire Fooked up and should have paid a free for dropping the ball. So the head is in the sand again. Not fixing the problem. When hiring an umpire they need to do many mental stability tests, problem solved.

McKay dropped the ball was a clear free to GWS

 

[Truckosaurus]

Of course the AFL didn't say the umpire got it wrong. He'd have paid a free kick against them if they did.

 

[gordo2016]

No one has come out and said the umpire Fooked up and should have paid a free for dropping the ball. So the head is in the sand again. Not fixing the problem. When hiring an umpire they need to do many mental stability tests, problem solved.

People who don't know the rules have their heads in the sand. That isn't dropping the ball, he had no prior.

 

[domin8]

AFL is the only contact game I know of where players are allowed to speak to umpires - let alone complain.

Everyone is an expert on why the ump decided to pay the penalty because they were listening to his every comment to players throughout the game....and of course no other free kick has ever been paid in front of goals by any umpire ever- with 12+ minutes to go in a game ...

It is a bad 'look' for crybabies and umpire bashers on BF - but maybe Coniglio will learn to keep his mouth shut in the future.

Someone took their self righteous pills this morning