Umpiring The Umpiring Dissent Rule - Discuss Here

[ZionMig22]

AFL is taking every bit of emotion from the game, only a matter of time before crowds won't be able to boo and yell LOL

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Al Clarkson coached/barracked from the boundary line and did the holding the ball signal right near the play I think it was last week. AFL says this is fine yet players cant do anything? Even the umpires explanation to Whitfield clearly did not match what Cog's did, yet nobody at HQ gives a *. Microphone's on umps was the worst thing they ever did.

How did it not match what Cogs did?
He said he had his arms out and yelled 'how's that not a free kick?'
Looks exactly like what Cogs did.

It's ok to disagree with the decision, but don't try to rewrite history when we can all watch the video.

 

[Orange crush]

How did it not match what Cogs did?
He said he had his arms out and yelled 'how's that not a free kick?'
Looks exactly like what Cogs did.

It's ok to disagree with the decision, but don't try to rewrite history when we can all watch the video.

The ump definitely exaggerated Cogs’ arms movement when explaining himself to Whitfield

 

[Alesana]

You've obviously never experienced constant pleading/whining/remonstrating/insulting/yelling etc etc all in a confined space surrounded by tens of thousands of screaming 'fans' - half of which will disagree with any decision you make that doesn't suit their preferences. All this whilst cameras are tracking your every decision and replay decisions you make as well as decisions you didnt...and then whenever it feels right - a bunch of clickbaiting commentators wanting some drama make an issue out of a decision you have made...

and then come back next week - again for more.

Then you look at the $160,000+ you received for it (plus your day job income) and you figure it's not a bad gig after all.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

The ump definitely exaggerated Cogs’ arms movement when explaining himself to Whitfield

Is that it?
Not sure the umpire was worried about being 100% historically accurate with his impersonation. I also don't think it matters in the slightest how he showed the action to another player when explaining it.

 

[JustaBattler]

Then you look at the $160,000+ you received for it (plus your day job income) and you figure it's not a bad gig after all.

Don't forget the extra AFL dollars he gets as a GWS/AFL 'ambassador'...
As an ambassador maybe he should be more polite instead of whining away like a broken record at every umpire anywhere in his vicinity because he is so 'entitled'...

#weloveaflumpires

 

[Chezz]

Has anyone's opinion changed on the back of the supposed news that Cogs was badgering the umpires all game?
I'm not interested in whether people believe this bit of news, or think the AFL has just said it to cover their arse (I think it was Jon Ralph who came out with it).
Assuming it's correct, does that change your view? If he got away with it all game and the ump finally had enough? Should he have had a warning (assuming he didn't)? Would it be fair for the ump to go to him, or the captain and say 'stop arguing every call, or I'll pay dissent'?
Should they have called it earlier if he WAS doing it all game? Who decides when enough is enough?

You’re on fire in this thread. So the narrative is now “Coniglio was badgering the umpire all day” so explains why this farcical decision was awarded a free.

You couldn’t make this stuff up. Love BigFooty

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

You’re on fire in this thread. So the narrative is now “Coniglio was badgering the umpire all day” so explains why this farcical decision was awarded a free.

You couldn’t make this stuff up. Love BigFooty

What's that got to do with me? I didn't invent the scenario.
Jon Ralph reported it.

 

[HarryFlashman]

What's that got to do with me? I didn't invent the scenario.
Jon Ralph reported it.

That’s fair, but JR makes shit up & it’s a bullshit argument. We would have burned the place down & been insisting on a royal commission if the call was on us instead.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

How did it not match what Cogs did?
He said he had his arms out and yelled 'how's that not a free kick?'
Looks exactly like what Cogs did.

It's ok to disagree with the decision, but don't try to rewrite history when we can all watch the video.

i think it was less that incident and more so that apparently cogs was doing it all game.

the umpire apparently got the shits and pinged him.

In isolation there is no way that is dissent, but i suppose if you niggle the umpire long enough he is only human too.

 

[smasha]

Another huge grey rule like the stand rule.

 

[Alesana]

i think it was less that incident and more so that apparently cogs was doing it all game.

the umpire apparently got the shits and pinged him.

In isolation there is no way that is dissent, but i suppose if you niggle the umpire long enough he is only human too.

Razor Ray just said on radio that there is no 'accumulation factor'

 

[Orange crush]

Razor Ray just said on radio that there is no 'accumulation factor'

This accumulation factor was hinted at to obfuscate the situation… gws Pooh poohed the suggestion that cogs was badgering the ump

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Razor Ray just said on radio that there is no 'accumulation factor'

than it was just a shit call by the ump.

 

[flyinghi64]

The explanation given was that he questioned it after the decision was made.
THERE WAS NO DECISION MADE, IT WAS PLAY ON.

 

[JackFlash]

The weak at the knees AFL once again defends the indefensible, it's quite bizarre...

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

The explanation given was that he questioned it after the decision was made.
THERE WAS NO DECISION MADE, IT WAS PLAY ON.

Isn't play on a decision? The umpire decided there was no free kick and called it as such.

 

[Skystyler]

i think it was less that incident and more so that apparently cogs was doing it all game.

the umpire apparently got the shits and pinged him.

In isolation there is no way that is dissent, but i suppose if you niggle the umpire long enough he is only human too.

thats the narrative the ump wants us to believe. Cogs and the giants say thats utter bullshit, and from what I've observed I'm siding with them.
I think the ump over-reacted at the time (easy to do and its his call anyway) and then when shit hit the fan he or someone made this shit up to give him some cover.

 

[Area51]

I didn't see this game or any other game other Tigers games this year or last year mostly for various reasons but I had a look at the footage for this incident and I can confirm that it's one of the reasons I no longer have interest in anything other than my team. I used to miss it but now it doesn't even cross my mind to watch another game. There is literally zero interest. I go to games but only what my membership gets me into. No more away games. I no longer wish to contribute any money to the wider AFL than is the bare minimum through a standard 11 game membership.

But it's great that the AFL are going to get more people umpiring, after all, what is sport if it's not about having more umpires umpiring more shit vague rules.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Because he put his hands up and said “how was that a free”.

Snowflake generation

I remember one game in local U17s game when I received a 50m penalty against me for simply glaring at the umpire.
That was about 17 years ago, so was simply absurd at the time, but maybe not so much anymore.

 

[Cringle]

Even if COGs was badgering the umpire all game (whatever that even means).

It shouldn’t have had any influence to whether or not that was a free kick.

Dissent is arguing about a free kick paid or not paid.

It isn’t or shouldn’t be players asking the question.

COGs asked the question, however, the Umpire felt like the way he asked via his arm gesture and tone was dissent.

I don’t think there should be any room for assumption.

Argue = pay a free/50m.
Ask = provide justification if applicable.

Or has the rule now become there is no conversing with the umpire?

 

[John Who]

Why I strongly dislike the dissent rule:

• it’s an emotive/subjective rule
• different umpires will have different tolerances to a player’s apparent dissent
• an umpire’s mood can change from week to week and can affect their tolerance to a player’s apparent dissent
• an umpire’s fatigue level will increase throughout the match and can decrease his/her tolerance to a player’s apparent dissent
• an umpire’s subconscious bias may allow him/her to give a free more easily to his/her favoured team using this dissent rule

Basically, when a rule is more subjective than objective, confusion ensues, players get enraged, fans get enraged. Nobody wins except the umpires and the players receiving the free kicks from this rule.

 

[qman]

AFL is taking every bit of emotion from the game, only a matter of time before crowds won't be able to boo and yell LOL

And before they stay home.

 

[melbun]

I remember one game in local U17s game when I received a 50m penalty against me for simply glaring at the umpire.
That was about 17 years ago, so was simply absurd at the time, but maybe not so much anymore.

Ha! I had a possession free kick against me. For lying on top of the ball, when unconscious.

 

[jackenny]

Not a fan of the media / AFL House / Umpiring Department gaslighting Cogs by saying he was badgering the umpire all game and suggesting an ‘accumulation factor’. Very disrespectful if BS. Would be genuinely pissed off with that if I was Cogs or GWS.

The silence from AFL House and the umpiring department is damning. AFL have a responsibility to Cogs to make sure his reputation isn’t being unjustly damaged. If they aren’t refuting it, then it’s either true or the AFL are neglecting their responsibilities to one of their players in favour of protecting a controversial umpiring decision. Not cool IMO. Players Association should give the AFL a tap on the shoulder.

As for the decision on face value, I agree with it. But umpires need to pay that free kick every time. If they want to remove all player dissent, that’s how you do it. None of this vague BS they’re peddling atm (emotional, in the moment, etc). As it currently stands, the AFL seems to want to get rid of abusive dissent but wants to keep passive aggressive/G-rated tantrums. It’s just weak. Cut the crap and state outright that players can’t say boo.