+- Carlton Supporters Club (http://new.carltonsc.com)
+-- Forum: Princes Park (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Robert Heatley Stand (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-14.html)
+--- Thread: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal (/thread-3789.html)
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - Professer E - 05-17-2018
I'd have no dramas if May had received a week as well, but as it stands this entire exercise is yet another AFL sham where the CFC cops it.
Duck you Whateley. I hope the karma bus collects you and the crap club you support.
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - Lods - 05-17-2018
(05-17-2018, 07:45 AM)PaulP link Wrote:I think the principle should be no physical contact between players and umpires, irrespective of whether the former or latter initiates the contact. The problem is that AFL footy is a contact sport, and it's simply not possible to avoid contact all the time. The AFL simply needs better and more sensible protocols and processes for dealing with it, not the 3 ring circus nonsense we've just endured.
To be perfectly honest I don't think any of the incidents of the last two weeks are worth a suspension.
At no time would the umpires have felt threatened ...some didn't even (apparently) remember the contact.
A sliding scale of fines should be sufficient.
Players and umpires will always come into contact
When there is either obvious malice or force then the suspensions can come into play.
That could equally apply in junior leagues...none of those incidents would cause undue concern for a junior umpire.
It could be easily covered with a free+50metres.
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - BluePhantom - 05-17-2018
(05-17-2018, 07:39 AM)Lods link Wrote:I reckon it's the most forceful of the lot...actually pushes the umpire back
http://www.afl.com.au/video/2018-05-12/may-makes-umpire-contact
Surprised the AFL is still letting us see that footage :o
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - BluePhantom - 05-17-2018
Touch an umpire its a free kick and a 50.
Touch an umpire with malicious intent where the ump feels threatened the a red card and their off for the game.
Simple! :
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - PaulP - 05-17-2018
(05-17-2018, 08:00 AM)Lods link Wrote:To be perfectly honest I don't think any of the incidents of the last two weeks are worth a suspension.
At no time would the umpires have felt threatened ...some didn't even (apparently) remember the contact.
A sliding scale of fines should be sufficient.
Players and umpires will always come into contact
When there is either obvious malice or force then the suspensions can come into play.
That could equally apply in junior leagues...none of those incidents would cause undue concern for a junior umpire.
It could be easily covered with a free+50metres.
I agree lods. But having a rule that says no contact at least makes clear the principle. If there's no rule, or a rule that allows "friendly contact" or "incidental contact", I just think it has the potential to get farcical. Are you allowed to ruffle the umpire's hair when a decision goes your way, because you're pleased with the outcome ? That's not threatening or menacing.
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - Lods - 05-17-2018
(05-17-2018, 08:06 AM)PaulP link Wrote:I agree lods. But having a rule that says no contact at least makes clear the principle. If there's no rule, or a rule that allows "friendly contact" or "incidental contact", I just think it has the potential to get farcical. Are you allowed to ruffle the umpire's hair when a decision goes your way, because you're pleased with the outcome ? That's not threatening or menacing.
High Contact...free kick ;D
The rule is still there.
Touch an umpire and it's a fine..possibly a big one depending on the contact.
At the very least, as BP says, free kick+50.
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - PaulP - 05-17-2018
(05-17-2018, 08:13 AM)Lods link Wrote:High Contact...free kick ;D
The rule is still there.
Touch an umpire and it's a fine..possibly a big one depending on the contact.
At the very least, as BP says, free kick+50.
Agree with all that lods. I'm really quite embarrassed by all the nonsense of the last few days. Overkill is an understatement.
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - Lods - 05-17-2018
(05-17-2018, 08:22 AM)PaulP link Wrote:Agree with all that lods. I'm really quite embarrassed by all the nonsense of the last few days. Overkill is an understatement.
Yep
An awful lot of fuss for a total of a 'one' match increase in penalty.
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - BluePhantom - 05-17-2018
We should've gone into the hearing using the classic line of 'It's the vibe of it all, it's Mabo'... would've come out grinning the other side?
Re: Blues Brothers trip to the tribunal - ElwoodBlues1 - 05-17-2018
On Wednesday night, Geelong superstar and AFL Players' Association president Patrick Dangerfield labelled the Tribunal's decision to clear Ed Curnow of intentional umpire contact "farcical" in the wake of Cats spearhead Tom Hawkins' one-match suspension on the same charge.
Thanks Danger and good on you for looking after your fellow player in your role as pres of the players association and now defacto tribunal advisor.....