Penalties excessive
Mike Sheahan | April 24, 2008
DEEP in the first quarter at Telstra Dome on Sunday, the 50m penalty had been as productive as any player in the Richmond-Bulldogs game. Two of the first five goals came from 50m penalties, and another 50 produced a behind.
Shane Edwards (Richmond) and Bulldog Lindsay Gilbee kicked the goals, while Gilbee's teammate Dylan Addison fluffed his opportunity.
The three 50m penalties came inside seven minutes.
One was wrong - the 50 in Edwards' favour against Tim Callan - the other two arguable, as Terry Wallace is believed to have suggested to Jeff Gieschen this week.
All three were grossly excessive in the context of the perceived error.
Callan was deemed to have made unnecessary contact with Edwards when he wasn't "in the marking contest".
The reality was the Bulldog defender might reasonably have expected he would get to the contest.
In the event, he made only incidental contact with an arm to the body.
Edwards didn't go to ground, nor was he wacko.
I, like most football lovers, support the moratorium on rule changes, but there is a strong case to say the game needs a 25m penalty.
That the laws committee should address the issue in its post-season deliberations. That it be trialled in the 2009 NAB Cup.
Fifty metres, or in the Gilbee case, 70m, is far too severe for a minor infraction.
In numerical terms, the umpires seem to have reached a fair balance this year - but they should have discretion on this one.
The penalty has to fit the crime.
When a player blatantly hits, holds or retards the player who has won the ball, drag him the 50.
When a player errs with incidental/reasonable contact going about his job, or slips over the mark, apply a 25.
I was fiercely critical of umpires when they allowed players to grab players who had marked up to 5m away, but there has been an over-correction.
Perhaps the umpires need to be reminded of the origins of the 50m penalty in 1988.
It was introduced to stop clubs, specifically Kevin Sheedy's Essendon, deliberately holding up play.
The Bombers would throw opponents to the ground, hold them interminably, or run metres over the mark to claim them, knowing they were risking nothing more than a 15m penalty to allow their teammates to cover players upfield.
It was totally appropriate to legislate. Now, it is paid for the slightest breach.
Not for the first time in recent seasons, we say it is a body-contact sport, that players can make errors of judgment.
Richmond coach Terry Wallace isn't often caught by the cameras wearing his heart on his sleeve.
As the umpire dragged Matthew White (with a mental tape measure that didn't operate for the first 20m), the Wallace expression went from quizzical to "what the . . .".
He seemed to mouth something like "you're (indistinguishable) kidding".
If a penalty was applicable, 25m was plenty.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,23590026-19742,00.html
