Umpire descent

[kell]

I won't watch this rubbish anymore. I have no interest in watching a game where the outcome is arbitrarily determined by an umpire forming a view regarding dissent. If the AFL have trouble recruiting umpires at the local level because of poor public behaviour, then there are numerous option to address that situation. Simplify the rules; report threatening criminal behaviour to the police etc. This umpire dissent is causing a descent in the viewing quality of the game and is a misguided and ineffective exercise in social engineering.

Good night. I'm off to bed! Hope the Saints win.

[skeptic]

The McKenzie was was quite bad I thought but IMO the message is clear…
Don’t ever talk to an umpire

[WellardSaint]

Dissent.
A 'descent' is moving downwards, like a hill, or an aircraft dropping altitude.

But I suppose 'descent' re umpiring might be the standards just plummeting lol

[The_Dud]

18.8.2 Free Kicks - Umpires
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player or Official who:

(d) disputes a decision of an Umpire;

Seems pretty straight forward.

Terrible rule, BUT very dumb from McKenzie, I’m sure it was drilled into them all week.

[perfectionist]

Dissent.
A 'descent' is moving downwards, like a hill, or an aircraft dropping altitude.

But I suppose 'descent' re umpiring might be the standards just plummeting lol

I might be wrong, but I think the poster meant to use "descent" as a play on words.

If a player claims that he touched the ball, is that dissent?

What if a player is kicked in the hand, but a free is missed and he shakes his hand because of the pain?

[CURLY]

Dissent.
A 'descent' is moving downwards, like a hill, or an aircraft dropping altitude.

But I suppose 'descent' re umpiring might be the standards just plummeting lol

I might be wrong, but I think the poster meant to use "descent" as a play on words.

If a player claims that he touched the ball, is that dissent?

What if a player is kicked in the hand, but a free is missed and he shakes his hand because of the pain?

Or touches the ball on the goal line. Does he stand there like Humphrey Bear.

[Beno88]

very dumb from McKenzie

You’ve never played competitive sport, have you?

[CURLY]

very dumb from McKenzie

You’ve never played competitive sport, have you?

It’s obvious yeah.

[The_Dud]

very dumb from McKenzie

You’ve never played competitive sport, have you?

Well, not since Tuesday

[CarlTaughtMeEnglish]

18.8.2 Free Kicks - Umpires
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player or Official who:

(d) disputes a decision of an Umpire;

Seems pretty straight forward.

Terrible rule, BUT very dumb from McKenzie, I’m sure it was drilled into them all week.

Watching it my first thought was D McK was trying to prevent the umpire from giving fifty by justifying why he on with the contest after the mark, by saying he thought it touched the ground and wasn’t expecting it to be paid. As it turned out the umpire didn’t care about that.

[ace]

The McKenzie was was quite bad I thought but IMO the message is clear…
Don’t ever talk to an umpire

Never talk to umpires.
Never talk to police
Then you develop a them versus us mentality.
Then no one will want to become an umpire because they are shunned.

I think this is a stupid idea by a stupid administrator
The same stupid person who cleaned out the experienced players from North.
He didn't have sufficient brains to realise he needed senior players to teach his new recruits.
Maybe he suffers the after effects of concussion.
Whatever he is doomed to create a mess for the AFL at least as big as the mess he left behind at North.

[bangaulegend]

I personally hate it but hey it is here to stay & we just have suck it up & move on . The line in the sand has been drawn & we would fools if didn't take it seriously

[Teflon]

Nanny state AFL crap
Unworkable but very pc and woke and “sounds good”
You’d think Penny Wong/Kevin Rudd came up with it
Be a massive shame if this starts to influence results or a GF

[The Fireman]

this could be the turning point ....

[saynta]

The McKenzie was was quite bad I thought but IMO the message is clear…
Don’t ever talk to an umpire

Never talk to umpires.
Never talk to police
Then you develop a them versus us mentality.
Then no one will want to become an umpire because they are shunned.

I think this is a stupid idea by a stupid administrator
The same stupid person who cleaned out the experienced players from North.
He didn't have sufficient brains to realise he needed senior players to teach his new recruits.
Maybe he suffers the after effects of concussion.
Whatever he is doomed to create a mess for the AFL at least as big as the mess he left behind at North.

[saynta]

They need to work on their prior opportunity too. That free against McKenzie was pure bulls***. Second goal gifted to GWS by umpires trying to assist one of the AFL's love childs over the line

You can make players, clubs and coaches comply and also the media arselickers, but if you want the supporting public to jump on board, the umpiring needs to improve. IMHFO that is.

Nobody wins support with poor effort.

[perfectionist]

I'd be interested in why this was paid. If there was prior opportunity, then I didn't see it. The other reason could be no reasonable attempt to dispose of the ball, that is, the player has to try to get the ball out of the tackle, even if the ball is pinned by the tackle. Fake attempts can be pinged.

[saynta]

Jimmy Bartel, a GWS board member has stated that the decision against McKenzie was wrong. I don't know which one he was referring to, the prior opportunity or the fifty metre penalty. Both disgusting decisions in my opinion.

[kell]

Thank you, perfectionist. I did choose the word "descent" intentionally as a play on words. That is apparent if you read the OP.

What if the coach throws their arms in the air in the box in response to an umpiring decision. Will there be a penalty?

Imagine how boring sport would be if a tennis players was not able to question an umpire's call? A soccer players not being able to question a referee's decision? A cricketer unable to appeal to an umpire for an LBW and show disappointment when their appeal is declined. All these sports are capable of managing the issue why not AFL House for AFL Rules?

I can't help but think that this overreach is trying too hard to appeal to the big techs for broadcasting rights by sanitising the game. The rule as it is currently being administered is wrong and also highlights problems with the current Constitution.

[Mr Magic]

Jimmy Bartel, a GWS board member has stated that the decision against McKenzie was wrong. I don't know which one he was referring to, the prior opportunity or the fifty metre penalty. Both disgusting decisions in my opinion.

The 50m paid against him

[Wayne42]

The AFL are trying to eradicate Umpire dissent from the game in the hope dissent is removed or lessened at all levels of the game.

The game of football is struggling to attract umpires, umpiring is a real health hazard at lower levels, both physically and mentally, why
would anyone bother becoming an umpire just so they can endure an umpiring lifetime of abuse.

If there are no umpires at lower levels then there won't be any at AFL level, then what. The AFL is saying they are 6000 umpires short. That is
a huge vacancy to fill.

How do they word the Ad, they could start it with...do you have a thick skin, are you bothered by constant abuse ?

[st.byron]

I think the rule is good.
Letter of the law DMac questioned the decision.
Harsh, but fair according to the new rules.
Just watched Ratts presser and the last question is about the DMac 50.
Ratts just bluntly says that the players clearly know the rules and they just need to focus on the play.
I can understand that it seems harsh, a decision like the DMac 50, but personally I like it heaps better without the players carrying on when they don't like the decision. Just get on with the game. Simple.
Another change I'd like to see brought in is something another poster has suggested (can't recall who right now) and that's for the umpires to stop calling the players by their names.
Just say the team and the number. For e.g. "Free kick St.Kilda number 26". Take the faux matey-ness out of it.

[Mr Magic]

I think the rule is good.
Letter of the law DMac questioned the decision.
Harsh, but fair according to the new rules.
Just watched Ratts presser and the last question is about the DMac 50.
Ratts just bluntly says that the players clearly know the rules and they just need to focus on the play.
I can understand that it seems harsh, a decision like the DMac 50, but personally I like it heaps better without the players carrying on when they don't like the decision. Just get on with the game. Simple.
Another change I'd like to see brought in is something another poster has suggested (can't recall who right now) and that's for the umpires to stop calling the players by their names.
Just say the team and the number. For e.g. "Free kick St.Kilda number 26". Take the faux matey-ness out of it.

meher Baba is the poster you're referring to.
My only issue is that the AFL Umpiring department needs to get all the umpires onto the same page with this rule.
Only some umpires are paying it - others are choosing to ignore it.

[st.byron]

I think the rule is good.
Letter of the law DMac questioned the decision.
Harsh, but fair according to the new rules.
Just watched Ratts presser and the last question is about the DMac 50.
Ratts just bluntly says that the players clearly know the rules and they just need to focus on the play.
I can understand that it seems harsh, a decision like the DMac 50, but personally I like it heaps better without the players carrying on when they don't like the decision. Just get on with the game. Simple.
Another change I'd like to see brought in is something another poster has suggested (can't recall who right now) and that's for the umpires to stop calling the players by their names.
Just say the team and the number. For e.g. "Free kick St.Kilda number 26". Take the faux matey-ness out of it.

meher Baba is the poster you're referring to.
My only issue is that the AFL Umpiring department needs to get all the umpires onto the same page with this rule.
Only some umpires are paying it - others are choosing to ignore it.

Thanks Magic. Yes it's Baba who's been suggesting that. Good idea I reckon. Stopping dissent removes the element of personal interaction from the players towards the umpires. It should also be removed going the other way. Stop personal 'matey' interaction from the umpires to the players. They're there to apply the rules impersonally, no need to be calling the players by their first names like they're mates.
Completely agree that consistency is vital. There has to be for any rule to work. Especially when the penalty is so signficant - for e.g Ward getting a goal from DMac's 50 last night.

[kell]

I would be grateful if someone would direct me to any substantive credible evidence that would support the claim that D'mac's conduct, i.e. advising the umpire that the ball had hit the ground, would dissuade people umpiring in the junior ranks? D'macs type of conduct would be totally acceptable in any other reputable sport. The way this rule is being administered does nothing for the reputation or promotion of the game.