04-02-2023, 05:57 AM
(04-02-2023, 04:46 AM)ElwoodBlues1 link Wrote:From SEN: Umpire audio released overnight suggests there was no ugly language from the former GWS skipper and was only penalised because of his action.
Well if that is the case, then I'll certainly modify my perspective. Perhaps the commentator who said expletives were involved was speculating? That made sense to me -- the penalty -- if the player had added some spice to the questioning, or was aggressive. On the replay Coniglio certainly was animated... perhaps too much so.
The AFL will possibly support the umps decision, as, by the letter of the law, he was correct, especially if Coniglio was belligerent in his delivery/questioning (which he appeared to be by the vision). Either way, a high price for dissent and a far cry from a 50 metre penalty. Clarification is needed for we supporters (and players) as to what happens if the ball is 'dead' and a player dissents.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

