Time to bring in a challenge system

[daniel_4tw]

Last night we saw another ‘we can review it but didn’t’ situation. A poor umpiring decision that impacted the game even though the AFL says they will review.

The other obvious one was the Keays goal called a point that cost Crows a finals spot.

There’s been plenty of influential decisions that leave players, clubs and fans powerless because umpire has final say.

Rather than saying the AFL will review these calls or will coach the umpires after the game, is it time to give power back to the players or clubs?

Give each club 1 challenge per quarter to challenge an umpiring decision. It’s then reviewed. If correctly overturned they keep their challenge, otherwise they can’t challenge again until the next quarter.

It would stop a lot of these complaints after the game. Clubs will have the option to address it when it matters, umpires will be held more accountable, and we’ll get fairer decisions. And in the end isn’t that what we want?

A lot of other sports have introduced it in various forms and I think it’s time to AFL says that integrity is important and does the same.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

When a solution that doesn't make things worse than the problem is suggested, I'm all ears.

Obviously what would end up happening - using last night as an example - is Geelong would just throw away a pointless review in the dying minutes to allow players to get back and try to preserve the lead. And this would happen every single game and pretty close to every quarter.

Umpires make mistakes, just like the countless mistakes that the Adelaide and Geelong players also made, which also impacted the result. I'd prefer a review system anytime Mark Blicavs

46

Mark Blicavs

Age

35

Ht

198cm

Wt

101kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.5

4star

K

6.6

3star

HB

7.9

5star

M

4.1

4star

T

4.2

5star

MG

114.1

2star

D

11.1

3star

K

7.1

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

3.9

4star

T

1.9

3star

MG

114.1

2star

D

8.6

3star

K

2.0

1star

HB

6.6

4star

M

1.8

2star

T

1.6

4star

has a free kick inside 50m for example and just ask the ump if we could please have a ball up at the same spot instead.

With the Atkins one especially, the umpire probably should have been able to infer from Atkins scrambling to get to it as it dribbled over the line that he was probably the guilty party. But it has to be an independent review system, otherwise teams will immediately exploit it as a tactical advantage.

 

[Magpie Since 1986]

Needs a review system to prevent cheats like Atkins conning dumb umpires

 

[Sentinel]

A player review system doesn't work in a sport like AFL where there are 50 shades of grey to almost all decisions and the play moves on so quickly. The AFL have already said that they will review last touched decisions, much like score reviews, given these are some of the few decisions in our game which can generally be conclusive and not grey. The problem is that the review system for both is flawed.

 

[joe444]

How about time to:

• include the rule in the published 2026 AFL laws of the Game (it's not there!)
• apply it the way they said they would (SANFL would have called a throw in for unintentional disposal/deflection)

Somehow neither surprise me under the clowncar on fire admin we have.

 

[Magpie Since 1986]

How about time to:

• include the rule in the published 2026 AFL laws of the Game (it's not there!)
• apply it the way they said they would (SANFL would have called a throw in for unintentional disposal/deflection)

Somehow neither surprise me under the clowncar on fire admin we have.

If they have to decide if it's in unintentional disposal or not we've literally reverted back to the old deliberate out of bounds , that kinda wouldn't surprise me with this league though

 

[Underarm]

How about time to:

• include the rule in the published 2026 AFL laws of the Game (it's not there!)
• apply it the way they said they would (SANFL would have called a throw in for unintentional disposal/deflection)

Somehow neither surprise me under the clowncar on fire admin we have.

So add more grey to the rules. Brilliant.

 

[MisterMarcus]

It will become like basketball where reviews are treated like "time outs", and the last 10 minutes go for half an hour...

 

[kozi]

1 challenge and if you get it wrong that’s it. But if the team gets it right they retain it

 

[Toump Ass]

Been saying this for years.
Reckon this isn't too hard to implement.

 

[420]

The AFL seems to be abusing the score review system in 26 (more crypto sponsors =$$$) so the argument of the challenge system slowing the game down doesn't hold water. A team may use it in the final dying seconds to flood back but that could be a tactical decision, don't challenge a FK during gameplay and retain it as an unofficial timeout.

With the umpiring standards getting worse and the leagues refusal to do anything substantial about it, a challenge system is the only way forward.

1 challenge per team, if successful it's retained. Cannot challenge more than twice in a single quarter. The teams bench can relay it to the interchange unpire and he can call it thru the mic.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

It's bad enough we have myopic goal umpires who need to review obvious decisions, we don't need more time being wasted while they sit around pontificating player complaints.

 

[kaiserchief13]

AFL wont like it as then umpires can't have their influence on results

 

[CrowToon]

AFL playing a VERY dangerous game by saying they will look at the ability to hold the play.

ARC needs to be given the ability to call something back even if play has restarted or else what you'll get is a system where a player will just take a quick kick and further game the system.

Or legislate a massive penalty if the player restarts play and the call should've gone the opposite way.

It's just more toothless crap.

 

[Bluelegs]

When a solution that doesn't make things worse than the problem is suggested, I'm all ears.

Obviously what would end up happening - using last night as an example - is Geelong would just throw away a pointless review in the dying minutes to allow players to get back and try to preserve the lead. And this would happen every single game and pretty close to every quarter.

Umpires make mistakes, just like the countless mistakes that the Adelaide and Geelong players also made, which also impacted the result. I'd prefer a review system anytime Mark Blicavs has a free kick inside 50m for example and just ask the ump if we could please have a ball up at the same spot instead.

With the Atkins one especially, the umpire probably should have been able to infer from Atkins scrambling to get to it as it dribbled over the line that he was probably the guilty party. But it has to be an independent review system, otherwise teams will immediately exploit it as a tactical advantage.

The solution to this problem is a game wide stand rule when a challenge is called.

I am not a crackpot.

 

[Generalissimo]

I'd prefer a peremptory umpire veto. Every week when the umps are selected, each team can veto one of those umps if they want. No justification necessary. You'd soon find umps making better decisions because making it all about yourself would soon mean you don't get out there.

 

[Romeoh1]

Nope.

 

[boncer34]

It will become like basketball where reviews are treated like "time outs", and the last 10 minutes go for half an hour...

Yes. 1 challenge will take 10 minutes to review.

 

[carndapies]

The solution to this problem is a game wide stand rule when a challenge is called.

I am not a crackpot.

I like your thinking.

A “freeze rule” could be introduced where during a review, music is played and all players are required to remain completely still. Any player observed by the umpire to move (even slightly) would be required to leave the field for 10 minutes.

 

[masai tu]

When a solution that doesn't make things worse than the problem is suggested, I'm all ears.

Obviously what would end up happening - using last night as an example - is Geelong would just throw away a pointless review in the dying minutes to allow players to get back and try to preserve the lead. And this would happen every single game and pretty close to every quarter.

Umpires make mistakes, just like the countless mistakes that the Adelaide and Geelong players also made, which also impacted the result. I'd prefer a review system anytime Mark Blicavs has a free kick inside 50m for example and just ask the ump if we could please have a ball up at the same spot instead.

With the Atkins one especially, the umpire probably should have been able to infer from Atkins scrambling to get to it as it dribbled over the line that he was probably the guilty party. But it has to be an independent review system, otherwise teams will immediately exploit it as a tactical advantage.

On the Atkins one, all the ump had to do was blow his whistle and stop the clock. Ask the reviewers to have a look, quick review, clock back on and play.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Yep, agree wholeheartedly. Clear blunder and hopefully just some teething issues.

Geelong got very lucky and could easily have lost, but also dominated two quarters of the game (with a bit of an arm wrestle for the rest) and (very biased opinion) deserved to win.

 

[wilsonmatic]

Yay.. let's bring in another stupid rule. Then hopefully another stupid rule after that to level out the problems created by the first stupid rule. Great suggestion

 

[FlowersByIrene]

If they have to decide if it's in unintentional disposal or not we've literally reverted back to the old deliberate out of bounds , that kinda wouldn't surprise me with this league though

Hardly, there's a clear difference between an actual handball or kick and the ball bouncing off someones shin next to the boundary.

 

[SC_Power]

The solution to this problem is a game wide stand rule when a challenge is called.

I am not a crackpot.

Razorray Squarepants likes this.

 

[SC_Power]

Yay.. let's bring in another stupid rule. Then hopefully another stupid rule after that to level out the problems created by the first stupid rule. Great suggestion

I agree, the last touch rule is too intelligent for the AFL.

I mean, why run when you can STAND!