Is it time...

[westdog54]

... that we put a red card in the pocket of the umpires?

Every year we seem to have on field incidents so abhorrent to get this discussion going again.

I'm struggling to think of another professional sport on the planet that doesn't have the option to send a player from the field for an act of foul play.

I'm struggling even more for a legitimate excuse for it not to happen in the AFL, particularly given it happens at EVERY other level of the sport.

It need not mean a team plays short. You could replace the player on the field and still send the offending player to the dressing rooms.

Happy, and genuinely curious, for an argument to the contrary.

[bornadog]

I would support it but I have no confidence in the AFL or umpiring department they would get it right

[bulldogtragic]

I support red and yellow cards. But I'd want a mandatory rugby (I think it's the code) like review immediately after the incident to confirm what the saw, was what actually happened to avoid staging/acting etc.

[westdog54]

I support red and yellow cards. But I'd want a mandatory rugby (I think it's the code) like review immediately after the incident to confirm what the saw, was what actually happened to avoid staging/acting etc.

Our game could borrow LOADS from Rugby and this is a prime example.

You could be certain at least one of the boundary umpires would have seen the incident.

[bulldogtragic]

Our game could borrow LOADS from Rugby and this is a prime example.

You could be certain at least one of the boundary umpires would have seen the incident.

As I've said before, I've umpired goals, boundary and field umpire before up to some TAC stuff a long, long time ago. I've issued reports from all three roles. Sometimes you see stuff that others can't. From next year, there's four field umpires, four boundary umpires, two goal umpires, an emergency field, boundary and goal umpire, plus a score reviewer in the box watching the play. That's 11 umpires that can be on the field of play, two more stationary on the wing, plus an eye in the sky. That's 14 sets of eyes. If they could formalise a process beyond reports at the breaks, to various umpires coming together and using the eye in the sky to confirm, then we could have a proper way about getting thugs out of games. Not only 'sin binning' the individual with a mandatory report, but making the team play a player down is a hell of a deterant. If done right, conceived right, implemented right and executed right, then I don't see the down side of going to cards. With the last few years of really bad dog acts, it's probably overdue to be honest.

[Ozza]

I don’t really like the thought of a third umpire doing some tribunal type adjudicating on the run. I know a Gaff type incident is pretty obvious that he is guilty and gets weeks - but most incidents involving someone getting knocked out are not as clear-cut.

Very rare for an incident as blatant as Gaff’s to occur - I don’t believe you bring in a card system that can potentially create big problems and errors based on a couple of blatant incidences per year.

I think the league has an ordinary track record of bringing in new rules or measures without considering the practical applications well enough, and this would be another one.

[Twodogs]

I don’t really like the thought of a third umpire doing some tribunal type adjudicating on the run. I know a Gaff type incident is pretty obvious that he is guilty and gets weeks - but most incidents involving someone getting knocked out are not as clear-cut.

Very rare for an incident as blatant as Gaff’s to occur - I don’t believe you bring in a card system that can potentially create big problems and errors based on a couple of blatant incidences per year.

I think the league has an ordinary track record of bringing in new rules or measures without considering the practical applications well enough, and this would be another one.


Yep, I don't trust the current AFL admin to get something as important as thus right.

By the time it was introduced it would be something like the Toyota Red Card (doesn't exist) system and a bunch of Gil's and Hockings' mates would all have been unnecessary jobs in the implementation and functioning of it, it would be worse than useless.

[westdog54]

I don’t really like the thought of a third umpire doing some tribunal type adjudicating on the run. I know a Gaff type incident is pretty obvious that he is guilty and gets weeks - but most incidents involving someone getting knocked out are not as clear-cut.

Very rare for an incident as blatant as Gaff’s to occur - I don’t believe you bring in a card system that can potentially create big problems and errors based on a couple of blatant incidences per year.

I think the league has an ordinary track record of bringing in new rules or measures without considering the practical applications well enough, and this would be another one.

Ok, first things first: there is no "third umpire system" in rugby when it comes to foul play. The referee on the field views the same footage as the TMO and makes the Final decision on what card, if any, to issue.

Second, what 'practical applications' are there to sending a player of the field for an act of foul play? Serious question.

Third, straight red cards and ejections are rare in any sport that uses them. That's not a reason for the option not to be there. As an example, there have only ever been two issued in World Cup Finals and both were entirely justified. It has only happened once in over 50 Super bowls.

Fourth, the potential for an error is not in itself as excuse not to make a change. Not by a long shot.

[Twodogs]

Ok, first things first: there is no "third umpire system" in rugby when it comes to foul play. The referee on the field views the same footage as the TMO and makes the Final decision on what card, if any, to issue.

Second, what 'practical applications' are there to sending a player of the field for an act of foul play? Serious question.

Third, straight red cards and ejections are rare in any sport that uses them. That's not a reason for the option not to be there. As an example, there have only ever been two issued in World Cup Finals and both were entirely justified. It has only happened once in over 50 Super bowls.

Fourth, the potential for an error is not in itself as excuse not to make a change. Not by a long shot.

That was a tradional welcome in the region Zinadene is from.:D

I think there were more than 100 FA cup finals before anyone was ever sent off. It was a United player whose name I can't remember. They wouldn't let him collect his winners medal either.

[FrediKanoute]

I think you can have a red card (no happy with yellow/sin bin concept), but it would have to be strictly for incidents like the Gaff, Hall type - clearly violent, not in the course of play.

[westdog54]

That was a tradional welcome in the region Zinadene is from.:D

I think there were more than 100 FA cup finals before anyone was ever sent off. It was a United player whose name I can't remember. They wouldn't let him collect his winners medal either.

Could you imagine a world where Ryan Shawcross stays on the field after breaking Aaron Ramsay's leg?

[Twodogs]

Could you imagine a world where Ryan Shawcross stays on the field after breaking Aaron Ramsay's leg?


I'm not happy with having to share oxygen wth that little Herbert at all, so my answer is no.

*!*!*!*!ing caveman.

[westdog54]

AFL to consider red-card rule for 2019 - http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-10-03/afl-to-consider-redcard-rule-for-2019

I highly doubt the change will happen but I'll be watching this space nonetheless.

The fact that they are considering getting around it by allowing a player injured by an act of foul play to be replaced by a substitute reeks of Steve Hocking trying to show everyone how damned clever he is.

[Ghost Dog]

I would support it but I have no confidence in the AFL or umpiring department they would get it right

Well said.

[Ghost Dog]

I think you can have a red card (no happy with yellow/sin bin concept), but it would have to be strictly for incidents like the Gaff, Hall type - clearly violent, not in the course of play.

Yeah for assault type incidents there is a real risk of people seeking revenge, or it generally getting further out of control. Hall needed to be sent off. He's that sort of player who might think ' f*** it I end my career here and take others with me'.

[ledge]

Well said.

What sport does get it right , soccer and rugby are known for terrible decisions.
We do have the support of cameras who could possibly look at it in replay so an error isn’t made.

[EasternWest]

I think if they do it, Umpires should be able to access video of the incident to make sure it truly warrants the penalty.

[hujsh]

I think if they do it, Umpires should be able to access video of the incident to make sure it truly warrants the penalty.

Perhaps make it a joint decision with the video review ump?

[EasternWest]

Perhaps make it a joint decision with the video review ump?

Good idea. I just think it's a big call, so they need to get it right.

[westdog54]

What sport does get it right , soccer and rugby are known for terrible decisions.
We do have the support of cameras who could possibly look at it in replay so an error isn’t made.


I think if they do it, Umpires should be able to access video of the incident to make sure it truly warrants the penalty.

Rugby is getting better at this.

The referee can consult the TMO and they watch the same footage on the big screen.

The TMO can make a recommendation but the final decision for a sanction sits with the referee.

There was an incident in a recent rugby match between Australia and Argentina where Israel Folau was yellow carded for a tackle in the air (10 minutes in the sin bin). Upon viewing the replay it was apparent Folau had been pushed into the tackle by an Argentinean player.

The referee reversed the decision, brought Folau back onto the field and awarded the penalty to Australia.

[EasternWest]

Rugby is getting better at this.

The referee can consult the TMO and they watch the same footage on the big screen.

The TMO can make a recommendation but the final decision for a sanction sits with the referee.

There was an incident in a recent rugby match between Australia and Argentina where Israel Folau was yellow carded for a tackle in the air (10 minutes in the sin bin). Upon viewing the replay it was apparent Folau had been pushed into the tackle by an Argentinean player.

The referee reversed the decision, brought Folau back onto the field and awarded the penalty to Australia.

Sounds a bit too much like a common sense approach. So it'll never happen.

[hujsh]

Sounds a bit too much like a common sense approach. So it'll never happen.

Good point. Where's the manufactured drama?

[Ozza]

I find it a terrible idea. The blatant incidences like Gaff’s this year are extremely rare - so it would be a big measure to bring in to address a very infrequent occurrence. Most other instances are not so clear cut and bringing it in just lends itself to regular controversy.

The push to add more an more rules and complications to an already complicated game is something I am opposed to.

[ratsmac]

Just a thought.

If the red card comes in, what about if the red carded player to be taken out of the game but that team can still play with 18 players on the field. I find it can be too harsh on a team to play with 1 less player on the field. Maybe cut the offending teams rotations as well. Otherwise leave it as is.

[FrediKanoute]

Can you imagine in a Grand Final, Wood getting a red card for taking Hannebury out at the knees......that's what would happen. You will get an umpire in the heat of the moment make a snap decision. Video ref will show it was line ball and uphold the decision and the end result is it costs a team a flag. Later the AFL comes out and says that the red card was harsh, but within the boundaries of a correct decision.

The game has done without a red card. Through he 70's and 80's where acts of thuggery were common the game survived. We have 1 thuggish act a season at best and now we need a red card?

[KT31]

If the off field umpire had a say and it was trailed for a season to iron out the kinks, I think the idea has alot of merit.
What is really turning my stomach is the AFL having the "coward punch King " Matthews come out and speak in favour of it.
It's akin to Wayne Carey coming out and speaking against abuse against women, following up with a family morals speech.

[Twodogs]

If the off field umpire had a say and it was trailed for a season to iron out the kinks, I think the idea has alot of merit.
What is really turning my stomach is the AFL having the "coward punch King " Matthews come out and speak in favour of it.
It's akin to Wayne Carey coming out and speaking against abuse against women, following up with a family morals speech.

Yep, a little thug like Matthews has a damn cheek even talking about something like this. The way he played the game excuses him from any further comment about thuggishness.

Shut the *!*!*!*! up Lethal.

[bornadog]

I find it a terrible idea. The blatant incidences like Gaff’s this year are extremely rare - so it would be a big measure to bring in to address a very infrequent occurrence. Most other instances are not so clear cut and bringing it in just lends itself to regular controversy.

The push to add more an more rules and complications to an already complicated game is something I am opposed to.

This ^^

I can't see why we need a send off rule, it is not as if it is an epidemic.

[josie]

If one of our players was king hit behind play within 1st 5 mins I would want opposition to lose offender for remainder of match. I think if it absolutely clear cut eg Gaff, Matthews a red card is a good thing. Problem will be if the shades of grey if player sent off unfairly. They have red card in vfl - I recall big Will being sent off but I do not think anyone was unconscious. Presume hardly if ever used at vfl level so why not for afl? So, recalling the wonderful Gough 1980s federal election campaign....yes, it’s time.

[Ozza]

If one of our players was king hit behind play within 1st 5 mins I would want opposition to lose offender for remainder of match. I think if it absolutely clear cut eg Gaff, Matthews a red card is a good thing. Problem will be if the shades of grey if player sent off unfairly. They have red card in vfl - I recall big Will being sent off but I do not think anyone was unconscious. Presume hardly if ever used at vfl level so why not for afl? So, recalling the wonderful Gough 1980s federal election campaign....yes, it’s time.

The thing is - it is very rarely clear cut. And your example demonstrates how ridiculous it is in the VFL if indeed Will was sent off by the umpire that day - because the outcome of the tribunal was that he was cleared and did not serve a suspension.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

I think if the introduction of a send-off was introduced on the basis that it is intended only for use in those rare instances of clear cut violent acts, eg Gaff, Bugg, Jonas, Hall, then I think that's fine.
Anything more than that and it starts getting tricky. I'd hate to see a situation where a send-off is applied and that player is subsequently cleared at the tribunal.
Limit it to account for the severe and rare egregious cases that are beyond any doubt, then I'm okay with that.

[soupman]

The Gaff ones are obvious. What about other ones?

Does Hall get sent off for the headlock? It didn't really hurt him and was provoked but it was clearly not a footballing act and had malice.

What about the Brodie Holland Montgomery bump? In play and a footballing action but no intention of getting the ball and a dirty act.

What about Ryan Hargrave breaking Heath Blacks jaw? It's in a melee but it did cause serious damage.

I am worried that as always it's another rule left to interpretation except in this case the consequences are larger than a free kick.

[Twodogs]

The Gaff ones are obvious. What about other ones?

Does Hall get sent off for the headlock? It didn't really hurt him and was provoked but it was clearly not a footballing act and had malice.

What about the Brodie Holland Montgomery bump? In play and a footballing action but no intention of getting the ball and a dirty act.

What about Ryan Hargrave breaking Heath Blacks jaw? It's in a melee but it did cause serious damage.

I am worried that as always it's another rule left to interpretation except in this case the consequences are larger than a free kick.


Was the Ryan Hargrave punch during a quarter time break? I'm just trying to remember it. It landed pretty sweetly IIRC.

[boydogs]

Biggest thing with this is whether to replace the player, or leave them 1 short (17/18 or 21/22)

Red carding the obvious big hits is a no brainer

[westdog54]

Just a thought.

If the red card comes in, what about if the red carded player to be taken out of the game but that team can still play with 18 players on the field. I find it can be too harsh on a team to play with 1 less player on the field. Maybe cut the offending teams rotations as well. Otherwise leave it as is.

If you read my OP that is the approach I advocate.

[ratsmac]

If you read my OP that is the approach I advocate.

So you did. I missed that bit sorry, well I second it.:D

[Twodogs]

So you did. I missed that bit sorry, well I second it.:D

Red card for you.