Send off rule.

[Twodogs]

Predictibly sections of the the meeja have gone reactionary over the Hall incident and are calling for a send off rule in the AFL.


Personally I'm strongly against it. We seperate the policing and judicial systems for a good reason and giving an umpire these powers make them judge, jury and executioner.



I dont see how it would have made any difference on saturday night anyway because I dont think any of the field umpires saw it.

[aker39]

I dont see how it would have made any difference on saturday night anyway because I dont think any of the field umpires saw it.

Stuart Wenn reported it on the spot.

[westdog54]

Predictibly sections of the the meeja have gone reactionary over the Hall incident and are calling for a send off rule in the AFL.


Personally I'm strongly against it. We seperate the policing and judicial systems for a good reason and giving an umpire these powers make them judge, jury and executioner.



I dont see how it would have made any difference on saturday night anyway because I dont think any of the field umpires saw it.

The way I see it, it operates at every level of Australian Rules football other than in the AFL.

Pretty sure a field umpire saw it too, Twodogs. Came straight over and pulled out his book.

If you look at the NRL, they're even reluctant to send a player to the sin-bin for something that's fairly serious. It has to be ridiculously bad for a player to actually be sent from the field for the game. Punching, elbows, headbutts, kneeing etc.

[Desipura]

too much of a grey area to be introduced for mine. I can just see clubs using it as a tactic.
Say Jonathon Brown is having a day out as he often does and in a melee he lays a punch but misses. Whats to stop the opposition player going down ala soccer style. Brown would be out for the rest of the game and the opposition player may or may not be able to come back onto the ground.

[hujsh]

I can't come up with a way that won't

a) give the umpire the power to ruin a game with a bad decision

or

b) be taken advantage of by one of the teams

or

c) have little to no impact and just be useless

[LostDoggy]

Totally agree. One appalling incident and the media reacts like it is an every day happening.

The fact that he will miss half of the season should act as an adequate deterrent against another player thinking of emulating his performance.

[LostDoggy]

If a send off rule were introduced I think it would establish a 'double jeopardy' for the player sent off. First, they'd be sent off, and then they would also, presumably, have to face the Tribunal for the same offence.

Adopting a send-off rule would require serious re-adjustment of the Tribunal points weighting system, and raises questions about whether a matter should even be heard by the Tribunal if the player was sent off. What if the match review panel considers that a player should have been sent off, but wasn't? Does the match review panel then take over the umpire's role?

There is also the possibility of inconsistent penalties for the same offence. For example, say there's a bit of push and shove. An umpire could choose to send a player off, with no tribunal appearance or further punishment for such a trivial matter. Another umpire might allow the player to stay on the field but then report the incident- the player might be rubbed out for one match by the Tribunal.

In soccer the sending off is the punishment. There may also be a mandatory number of games a player then misses because of the send off- but that is the product of a formula, not a separate Tribunal hearing.

Let sleeping dogs lie- how would you expect a sleeping dog to tell the truth?

[The Underdog]

One thing I was thinking about is the effect of a send off on the contest. Wouldn't the team with 17 for ten minutes just spend those 10 minutes with 16 guys in the back half, trying to hold on until they had the 18th back on. God forbid what kind of game you'd see if someone got sent off for the whole match. Admittedly they would struggle but it would be an awful spectacle.
There's been too many dodgy send offs in soccer to even think about bringing it in.
We have a system of punishment which for all it's flaws has led to a much cleaner game, there's no need to mess with it due to one incident, which will be punished anyway.

[LostDoggy]

The Barry Hall was an obvious one. How was he allowed to play the rest of the game just other knocking an opposition player out for the match? What stopping players from doing in important games and influencing the result?
The umpires are there to administer the rules. If the rules allow sendings off then why shouldn't the umps be allowed to do it? They report players now don't they?
Its not like soccer anyway, its just 1 less on the interchange, just like what has happened to the opposition.

[LostDoggy]

I dont see how it would have made any difference on saturday night anyway because I dont think any of the field umpires saw it.

I think he was reported on the spot. Nothing wrong with a video ref at the end of the first quarter or half saying no thats a red card.
It would have made a heap of difference say if Hall knocked out Judd in the 06 GF in the first quarter.

[The Underdog]

I think he was reported on the spot. Nothing wrong with a video ref at the end of the first quarter or half saying no thats a red card.
It would have made a heap of difference say if Hall knocked out Judd in the 06 GF in the first quarter.

And Hall would have missed the first 10 weeks of 07 and forfeited match payments equalling a large amount. Don't forget that this is their job and they lose a fair whack of money by not playing. Also would have been labelled a thug and had many many penalty points hanging over his head.

I just don't see the need for it and the penalty is too great if the umpire gets it wrong. We got through the years where this was a weekly occurence without it and now that this kind of incident happens once every 5 years I don't see why we'd need it know.

And Ernie, I can't believe you're advocating giving the umpires more authority to mess up...

[LostDoggy]

too much of a grey area to be introduced for mine. I can just see clubs using it as a tactic.
Say Jonathon Brown is having a day out as he often does and in a melee he lays a punch but misses. Whats to stop the opposition player going down ala soccer style. Brown would be out for the rest of the game and the opposition player may or may not be able to come back onto the ground.

Agreed.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Strongly against it.

The vast majority of reports come from the video on Monday, so sometimes you're going to get off?

I would like to see one week of any suspension held over until the next time the two sides play so at least the side offended against gets some benefit of the suspension.

[westdog54]

If a send off rule were introduced I think it would establish a 'double jeopardy' for the player sent off. First, they'd be sent off, and then they would also, presumably, have to face the Tribunal for the same offence.

So? If the offence they've committed is bad enough for them to be sent from the field, its their own bloody bad luck!!

Adopting a send-off rule would require serious re-adjustment of the Tribunal points weighting system

Rubbish. The MRP/Tribunal operate independently from the umpires. Some incidents reported by the umpire are dismissed by the MRP. A send-off would be no different.

What if the match review panel considers that a player should have been sent off, but wasn't? Does the match review panel then take over the umpire's role?

No. They continue to do their own job, as do the umpires.

There is also the possibility of inconsistent penalties for the same offence. For example, say there's a bit of push and shove. An umpire could choose to send a player off, with no tribunal appearance or further punishment for such a trivial matter. Another umpire might allow the player to stay on the field but then report the incident- the player might be rubbed out for one match by the Tribunal.

Give the umpires some credit!! They're not going to send players off for push and shove. If they did they'd have no place being a top level umpire, simple as that. And as for inconsistencies between officials, well Christ, that's happened for decades in every sport known to man.

In soccer the sending off is the punishment. There may also be a mandatory number of games a player then misses because of the send off- but that is the product of a formula, not a separate Tribunal hearing.

That in itself is an issue that Soccer is still yet to confront.

Posts like this one sum up the hysteria that is started whenever any sort of change to the umpires role or umpiring in general is suggested. Quite frankly it makes me sick.

[LostDoggy]

So? If the offence they've committed is bad enough for them to be sent from the field, its their own bloody bad luck!!

And how, then, does the Tribunal rule on something that is outside their jurisdiction, if it is the umpires that are doing the sending off? Remember- the umpires are dishing out a punishment, not simply making a report for the MRP to look at later. Back to the same point about double jeopardy.

Rubbish. The MRP/Tribunal operate independently from the umpires. Some incidents reported by the umpire are dismissed by the MRP. A send-off would be no different.

A send off is not a report. It is the meting out of a punishment, and therefore alleviates the need for any kind of 'report'.

No. They continue to do their own job, as do the umpires.


Of course.

Give the umpires some credit!! They're not going to send players off for push and shove. If they did they'd have no place being a top level umpire, simple as that. And as for inconsistencies between officials, well Christ, that's happened for decades in every sport known to man.


I agree, but push and shove was just an example (first one I could think of) of what would attract only a minimal suspension. Perhaps there are better examples. As for inconsistencies, of course there are inconsistencies between umpires, and between tribunal members and results, but that's not what I was talking about. I was referring to separate processes being applied to the same set of facts, and between two entirely different types of officials. Umpires and panel members are not just generic 'officials' as you seem to think. They are independent of each other, as you have acknowledged elsewhere, which is why their respective roles need to be clarified.

That in itself is an issue that Soccer is still yet to confront.

Posts like this one sum up the hysteria that is started whenever any sort of change to the umpires role or umpiring in general is suggested. Quite frankly it makes me sick.

Sheesh! I was just throwing in a few ideas about process. Feel free to disagree, as you have. Your comments are valuable. It's just that I would have thought you'd be hard pressed to detect any 'hysteria' in the post- it certainly wasn't posted with any particular axe to grind. I think you were looking for a red rag, and if that's the kind of thing that make you sick, then your boundaries obviously need a sterner test.