By Luke Holmesby
5:35 PM Tue 13 October, 2009
PLAYERS staging for free kicks could be fined under a proposal put before clubs as part of an AFL review of the tribunal.
The AFL has written to all 16 clubs as part of a review of the tribunal to obtain feedback on eight major points, with one of the biggest talking points sure to be fines for staging.
Football operations manager Adrian Anderson contacted the clubs to get their feedback on the tribunal this year.
Anderson will ask the clubs if players should be fined for obvious staging. There has never before been a rule on staging for free kicks.
The review will also look at assessing misconduct for making unnecessary contact with an opponent's face after Carlton captain Chris Judd was suspended for three weeks for interfering with Brisbane Lion Michael Rischitelli in the Blues’ elimination final loss.
The review will explore sanctions for umpire contact after 28 players were charged with making contact with an umpire this year while sling tackles will also be looked at.
An expanded tribunal jury has been floated, as has the idea of the tribunal covering intra club matches after Setanta O’hAilpin’s extraordinary attack on Blues teammate Cameron Cloke at the start of this season.
Past player records and Brownlow eligibility will also be reviewed.
"The 2009 year was an outstanding year for the game on the field," Anderson said.
"Allowing for that, there were a number of instances from the 2009 year that are worth re-examining and asking our clubs if we should consider any changes under our rules."
The topics the AFL has put up for discussion are:
1. Misconduct staging. Should players face a financial sanction for obvious staging?
2. Umpire contact. 2009 saw 28 players charged for making negligent/reckless/intentional contact with an umpire. A number of players continue to set up behind the umpire. Are the current sanctions adequate?
3. Player prior record. The maximum loading a player can receive for offences during the past three AFL years is capped at 50 per cent. Should a player who has been suspended for more than five matches in the previous three years face a higher loading than 50 per cent?
4. Brownlow eligibility. Players are currently ineligible for the Brownlow Medal if they are found guilty of an offence if the base points are 100 or more. The consequence of this is that many players who can accept reprimands (eg for an offence worth 125 points) are deemed ineligible for the Brownlow even though they have not been suspended. 125 points will usually be applicable only in cases where the offence is at the lower end of the scale. There is no proposal to change the requirement that the Brownlow is an award for the “best and fairest”. Is it appropriate however to permit players found guilty of offences worth 125 points (for which they could usually accept a reprimand with a guilty plea) to remain eligible for the Brownlow Medal? Should a player who has not been suspended be deemed ineligible for the Brownlow Medal?
5. Misconduct for making unnecessary and unreasonable contact to the face. Such contact to an opponent’s face has been viewed seriously in the past due to the need to protect player’s eyes and the damage done to the image and reputation of the game by players making unreasonable or unnecessary contact to the face of an opponent. The penalty is currently equivalent to rough conduct and charging. Are the current sanctions appropriate?
6. Sling tackles. Should we deal more strictly with dangerous sling tackles?
7. Jury members. Would it be more beneficial to have a regular panel of three jury members each week where available or is the rotation system more appropriate?
8. Intra-club matches. Should incidents from intra-club matches be dealt with under the AFL tribunal system?
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/86043/default.aspx
