Toby Greene makes contact with umpire - Update: Suspension Increased to 6 weeks on Appeal

What will happen to Toby?

  • Gone - 4 weeks or more

    Votes: 129 24.3%
  • Gone - 1-3 weeks

    Votes: 278 52.5%
  • Fine only

    Votes: 99 18.7%
  • Innocent - play on.

    Votes: 24 4.5%

  • Total voters
    530
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

hcd199

Club Legend
Apr 29, 2009
2,219
1,738
Hobart
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Waterford GAA, Glenorchy, Hob (BBL)
I think three weeks is just about the absolute minimum 'reasonable' penalty here, but the way it played out is concerning. Glancing over some of the details from today's hearing, it seems clear that there's a lot that's a bit compromised here - Stevic's testimony seemed weirdly equivocal (my impression was almost that he wasn't too bothered personally but felt he had to take something of a stand for the sake of the profession, or perhaps it was suggested to him that he ought to do so), the fact that GWS argued for a massive fine is further evidence of the farce that 'financial penalties' have always been, and ultimately, when one side sets the benchmark at six weeks and the other at none, and the tribunal hands down three, they should know full well that it looks like a mongrel compromise rather than a considered balancing of factors (doubly so when the argument from one side is so dubious - you really want to contend that Greene didn't realise what he'd done or was doing, whilst engaged directly in argument with the specific person he went on to not avoid making contact with?!).

So I'm broadly okay with the end result, if not the process - presumably, it's either three weeks, or longer following an AFL appeal, and both of those seem reasonable enough to me. It's probably a vain hope, but perhaps this whole process will lead to us actually starting to take these off-the-ball/non-football acts more seriously - it's a gallingly obvious misapplication of the punishment process to see players miss matches (or having to fight to get off at the tribunal) for little more than going hard at the ball, whilst others are merely 'fined' for eye-gouging, stomach punches, etc.
 

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 13, 2015
27,734
29,933
AFL Club
Hawthorn
You're big on "look over there at something else" aren't you?

You are taught from a young age as a footballer that you don't make contact with an umpire. You just don't do it.

The fact that you think the AFL is not doing enough regarding CTE doesn't change that.
They have allowed a bunch of intentional contact pass with minor punishment over the last few years.

So they wait until finals to decide to do something?

The AFLPA should step in if they had any balls. Which sadly they dont.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Sweet Jesus

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 20, 2014
25,649
21,097
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
Isn't the AFL literally the prosecution?
Presumably it's more like the AFL's football operations department.

Is there some independent body that has nothing to do with the AFL making the judgement?

The tribunal is also appointed by the AFL, no?

If there's meant to be some sober, impartial process, you can't have the CEO saying "nah it should be 6 weeks". He's effectively directing the tribunal. I don't think that's fair.

He should have offered a boilerplate response about protecting umpires while refusing to discuss the specific sanction in a case pending appeal.
 
Last edited:

z547043

Debutant
Aug 17, 2009
88
131
AFL Club
Geelong
So Greene should have grabbed the umpire and it would have only been a fine.

But brushing passed him so lightly the umpire didnt have an issue with it must be 3 or even 6 weeks.

While potentially CTE causing concussions from dangerous tackles are ignored.

Clearly the AFL have their priorities right.
Happy to discuss the AFL potentially missing the mark on dangerous tackles in an appropriate thread. It has no relevance or bearing here.

We’ll have to disagree on the severity and manner of the umpire conduct. Bear in mind the majority agree it was at the upper end of the threshold of deliberate umpire conduct and also all the other incidents listed received a punishment that most would accept was appropriate for the action.

Again, equating this contact towards the umpire to contact towards a player is missing the point entirely. It’s important for all levels of the game and even others that the governing body of Australia’s national sport sends a message that this is not acceptable behaviour and won’t be tolerated.
 
Last edited:

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 13, 2015
27,734
29,933
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Happy to discuss the AFL potentially missing the mark on dangerous tackles in an appropriate thread. It has no relevance or bearing here.

We’ll have to disagree on the severity and manner of the umpire conduct. Bear in mind the majority agree it was at the upper end of the threshold of deliberate umpire conduct and also all the other incidents listed received a punishment that most would accept was appropriate for the action.

Again, equating this contact towards the umpire to contact towards a player is missing the point entirely. It’s important for all levels of the game and even others that the governing body of Australia’s national sport sends a message that this is not acceptable behaviour and won’t be tolerated.
But it was tolerated when a bloody Neale grabbed an umpire. Dusty has done it too.

2 guys who are always a chance for a Brownlow got significantly less penalty...
 

KAG11

Cancelled
May 31, 2021
2
5
AFL Club
Sydney
Lmao the older kids used to walk into us younger lads with their shoulders like that in high school all the time, in my opinion it's an intentional tough-guy act. There might not be much in it from an impact point of view but Greene is taking the piss if he's claiming that wasn't deliberate.
That's so funny because I have always said that Greene reminds me of a school yard b
So Greene should have grabbed the umpire and it would have only been a fine.

But brushing passed him so lightly the umpire didnt have an issue with it must be 3 or even 6 weeks.

While potentially CTE causing concussions from dangerous tackles are ignored.

Clearly the AFL have their priorities right.
This and the other commentary claiming that "there was nothing in it" makes me think I have encouraged my 5 year old into the wrong code! The umpire is sacrosanct and this sort of BS should be punished severely. Of course contact with the head, is the utmost priority as far as physical safety, but respecting the umpire is the highest priority on the ethical side.
 

z547043

Debutant
Aug 17, 2009
88
131
AFL Club
Geelong
But it was tolerated when a bloody Neale grabbed an umpire. Dusty has done it too.

2 guys who are always a chance for a Brownlow got significantly less penalty...
It wasn’t tolerated, they were punished. If either had infringed in such a disrespectful, confrontational and aggressive manner like Toby, they would have received a similar punishment.

I accept it can be argued that Neale probably deserved a greater sanction, but so can Greene’s incident.
 

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 13, 2015
27,734
29,933
AFL Club
Hawthorn
It wasn’t tolerated, they were punished. If either had infringed in such a disrespectful, confrontational and aggressive manner like Toby, they would have received a similar punishment.

I accept it can be argued that Neale probably deserved a greater sanction, but so can Greene’s incident.
It isnt disrespectful to grab an umpire by the arm? So grabbing an umpire is at the lower end of naughtiness and so you should only get a small fine?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sttew

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 28, 2006
22,599
21,340
Who's asking?
AFL Club
Geelong
Whilst I think Greene got off light I do not like the idea that the AFL can appeal. The AFL should remain as impartial as possible.
The AFL is like the State. It has the right to appeal a Tribunal decision just as the player / team does but only on defined grounds. It’s the only way the system can work.

The fact the Tribunal didn’t give Greene 6 weeks as Gleeson wanted tells me the process works.

At the end of the day I suspect Gill was posturing when he spoke about the inadequacy of the penalty last night. I don’t think there will be an appeal by the AFL or by Greene/GWS. The rules will be tightened up and we all move on
 

The Cryptkeeper

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 9, 2006
17,093
19,468
Left of centre.
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Super Tottenham....from the Lane.
The AFL is like the State. It has the right to appeal a Tribunal decision just as the player / team does but only on defined grounds. It’s the only way the system can work.

The fact the Tribunal didn’t give Greene 6 weeks as Gleeson wanted tells me the process works.

At the end of the day I suspect Gill was posturing when he spoke about the inadequacy of the penalty last night. I don’t think there will be an appeal by the AFL or by Greene/GWS. The rules will be tightened up and we all move on
Perhaps mate but the AFL has form. The successfully had Bachar Houli’s suspension doubled a few years back when they didn’t like the outcome.

I expect an appeal.
 

DT_35

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 14, 2010
12,717
9,464
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Denver, Liverpool
this narrative shits me. If you think it’s not at least a week off, then god help you, and thereafter club affiliation is almost irrelevant (Melbourne fans are more conflicted than we are).

I’d like to see the full 6 weeks. Need to have some lines in the sand in our game.
lol I think it’s minimum 4 weeks, my comment is more to the point of Geelong fans were in here straight away 😅
 

Sttew

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 28, 2006
22,599
21,340
Who's asking?
AFL Club
Geelong
lol I think it’s minimum 4 weeks, my comment is more to the point of Geelong fans were in here straight away 😅
How was it ironic that Geelong supporters posted in this thread? As others including myself have said this was always going to be a suspension, so whether it was 2, 4 6 or 8 weeks was neither here nor there. Just because Geelong plays GWS this week does that mean we shouldn't comment? I think you'll find supporters of all clubs have entered into the debate
 

z547043

Debutant
Aug 17, 2009
88
131
AFL Club
Geelong
It isnt disrespectful to grab an umpire by the arm? So grabbing an umpire is at the lower end of naughtiness and so you should only get a small fine?
No, there’s probably an element of disrespect in Neale’s actions. However, simply because two actions contain elements of disrespect does not make them equal or automatically comparable.
 

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 13, 2015
27,734
29,933
AFL Club
Hawthorn
No, there’s probably an element of disrespect in Neale’s actions. However, simply because two actions contain elements of disrespect does not make them equal or automatically comparable.
So you agree that sometimes its okay to be grabbing the umpire? Or in Dusty's case give them a bit of a shove?
 

The Cryptkeeper

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 9, 2006
17,093
19,468
Left of centre.
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Super Tottenham....from the Lane.
So you agree that sometimes its okay to be grabbing the umpire? Or in Dusty's case give them a bit of a shove?
That's not what the poster said at all.

The Greene incident was significantly worse than Neale's. Then you add Greene's record which is the worst in current football and you get the outcome that was forthcoming.
 

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 13, 2015
27,734
29,933
AFL Club
Hawthorn
That's not what the poster said at all.

The Greene incident was significantly worse than Neale's. Then you add Greene's record which is the worst in current football and you get the outcome that was forthcoming.
So if Neale had done what Greene did then it would be maybe just a week because he is a usually a good guy?

This is exactly the problem with the AFL. There are so many grey areas that they have built in to allow them to decide whatever outcome they want based on whatever they think will work best for them.

The AFLPA should be demanding clear and concise rules which treat every player equally. But they wont, because half their funding comes from the AFL.
 

Ambrosia

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 11, 2010
14,051
8,840
AFL Club
Essendon
Having not thought about it too much I just thought it would be 1 week. Players shouldn’t make intentional contact with umpires regardless of how minimal it is.

Feel like 3 weeks was more because they wanted to make sure he didn’t play again this year.
 

The Cryptkeeper

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 9, 2006
17,093
19,468
Left of centre.
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Super Tottenham....from the Lane.
So if Neale had done what Greene did then it would be maybe just a week because he is a usually a good guy?

This is exactly the problem with the AFL. There are so many grey areas that they have built in to allow them to decide whatever outcome they want based on whatever they think will work best for them.

The AFLPA should be demanding clear and concise rules which treat every player equally. But they wont, because half their funding comes from the AFL.
Maybe Neale gets 2 weeks and Greene gets a 50% loading because of his record.

Why do you think courts take into consideration a guilty person's record before they hand down their sentence?

If you were an active participant in life then you'd know that is how the system works. And more importantly, how it also should work. Recidivists pay higher tolls for their crimes.
 

The Cryptkeeper

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 9, 2006
17,093
19,468
Left of centre.
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Super Tottenham....from the Lane.
Having not thought about it too much I just thought it would be 1 week. Players shouldn’t make intentional contact with umpires regardless of how minimal it is.

Feel like 3 weeks was more because they wanted to make sure he didn’t play again this year.
No, 3 weeks is because he has a record as long as the Hume Freeway.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad