| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MagpieDynasty 
Joined: 09 Oct 2004
Location: Adelaide
|
| Post subject: Careless contact charges - Umpires |  |
|
Following this round there were no less than 5 Careless Contact charges laid generating $5k into the AFL coffers - or is that the Umpires end of season trip fund?
Do the clubs cover these fines does anyone know or is it up to the players to set up a direct debit 
My point is with the game as it is today with far greater numbers around the stoppages, this is will be a nice little earner for the AFL.
Does anyone recall the last time an umpire was injured as a result of 'careless contact', i can't? I don't want to see an umpire hurt at all, after all it's his work place too, i'm just not clear on what level of contact needs to be made to justify a sanction. Do the Umpires make the report or is it all up to the review of each game by an independent observer?
_________________
The new Magpie Dynasty is just a season away!! |
|
|
|
 |
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I was thinking the AFL should introduce Disrespectful Contact charges to stop the disease of players ruffling opponents' hair after a goal. I mentioned Daniher & Hooker previously, and in the game on Sunday Vlastuin, I think, did this to Mayne. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ yes, thatd be great. I was appalled by the decision against .dunn yesterday, for this type of bump after a goal or a miss has become commonplace, yet it is never paid as a second free, especially in so critical a position.
I have no problem with punishing it in some form, because its unsportsmanlike conduct, a very bad role model for kids playing the game, and it generally brings the game into disrepute. But it should be stamped out via consistent sanctions, not plucked out occasionally as it was yesterday.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
piedys 
Heeeeeeere's Dyso!!!
Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Location: Resident Forum Psychopath since 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | ^ yes, thatd be great. I was appalled by the decision against .dunn yesterday, for this type of bump after a goal or a miss has become commonplace, yet it is never paid as a second free, especially in so critical a position.
I have no problem with punishing it in some form, because its unsportsmanlike conduct, a very bad role model for kids playing the game, and it generally brings the game into disrepute. But it should be stamped out via consistent sanctions, not plucked out occasionally as it was yesterday. |
At worst it should be a free kick out of the centre, instead of the next ball up.
If the dickhead umpire [pick one...] had reversed it, would Dunne have been given the free? Ummm... so we can take a free kick from defence instead of getting it from the middle? Ummm... Hello... rules committee...?
_________________
M I L L A N E 4 2 forever |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The free kick against Dunn shouldn't have been paid.
Once Dunn was knocked over by several Richmond players instantly after his bump on Higgins, then Richmond's free kick should have been nullified.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Jezza wrote: | The free kick against Dunn shouldn't have been paid.
Once Dunn was knocked over by several Richmond players instantly after his bump on Higgins, then Richmond's free kick should have been nullified. |
Agreed.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| When? When was this exactly? |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
