Umpiring today/ Sugar will cop a fine/ RFC cops $7,500 fine

[letsgetiton!]

Would the AFL and Geischen then like to explain why Umpire No. 31 has been dropped again if the umpiring was okay ?! What a crock!

This guy was dropped after our Sydney game because he stuffed up on the holding the ball decisions. He then is brought back for our West Coast game on Saturday, stuff ups and gets dropped again and yet we get fined  . 

we must all get ontoi SEN tomorrow, try and talk to that **** KB, get on teh good oil and the run home, we should all bombard them with phones calls asking them the exact same thing

  "Would the AFL and Geischen then like to explain why Umpire No. 31 has been dropped again if the umpiring was okay ?! What a crock!

This guy was dropped after our Sydney game because he stuffed up on the holding the ball decisions. He then is brought back for our West Coast game on Saturday, stuff ups and gets dropped again and yet we get fined  " [/size]

[mightytiges]

As I said this is crap and Richmond should protest and appeal. A $7,500 fine for just telling the truth  .

[WilliamPowell]

Well I suppose the one bright spot is the fact that Suga hasn't received so much support on the forum for gawd knows how long

 

[one-eyed]

Tigers hit with $10,000 fine
richmondfc.com.au
Thursday, May 3, 2007

RICHMOND has been fined $10,000 for skipper Kane Johnson’s criticism of the umpires after last weekend’s clash against the West Coast Eagles.

Johnson approached the umpires at half time of the Eagles game and followed up with further criticism of the men in white at the post-match press conference.

The AFL wrote to Richmond earlier this week after determining that Johnson’s actions and comments were prohibited under AFL Regulations 16.1 and 16.3, respectively.

AFL football operations manager Adrian Anderson said Richmond had been fined $5000 for each two offences, totalling $10,000. However, $2500 of the fine for approaching the umpires has been suspended for three years.

"Regulations such as these exist because of the need for the AFL competition to set a positive example on conduct towards umpires,” Anderson said.

“Abuse and misconduct towards umpires has impacted negatively on the recruitment and retention of umpires throughout Australia."

http://richmondfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/6301/Default.aspx?newsId=42542

[mightytiges]

Ch 9 are claiming there's "anger at Punt Rd tonight" over the fine.

[one-eyed]

Kane Johnson's costly critique
04 May 2007   Herald-Sun
Damian Barrett

BY APPROACHING the umpires at halftime during the match on Saturday and then criticising them for a lopsided free-kick count, Richmond captain Kane Johnson gave the AFL two reasons to take action against his club.

Last night it provided 10,000 reasons not to do it again.

The AFL fined the Tigers $5000 for the approach to umpires and another $5000 for the press conference criticism.

The penalty was mitigated when $2500 of the umpire-approach fine was suspended for three years.

Richmond football director Greg Miller said the Tigers would cop the fine, but said it was harsh.

"We think it is a bit excessive, but what can we do?" Miller said. "Not much. We won't be appealing."

Miller queried the magnitude of the fine in light of football's recent controversial off-field problems.

"Given Kane's record and the way other things are happening in the footy world at the moment, it's probably a bit surprising to most people, wouldn't you think?" Miller said.

"Kane has an outstanding record, he is not an antagonist, he does the right thing . . . 10 grand is up there."

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,21668447%255E19742,00.html

The AFL has ordered Richmond to pay the fine, and the Tigers are prevented from appealing against the decision.

AFL football operations manager Adrian Anderson said in a statement that the league needed to set a positive example about how players treat umpires.

He added that abuse and misconduct towards umpires had a negative impact on recruiting and retaining umpires.

AFL umpires' manager Jeff Gieschen has strongly defended the performance of Wenn, Ryan and Pannell.

However, Pannell has been dropped to an emergency for Saturday's Essendon-Hawthorn game at the MCG.

http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/johnson-fined-for-umpire-criticism/2007/05/03/1177788305015.html

[one-eyed]

Wallace will hold a press conference later this afternoon. He's expected to say we will pay the fine.

[one-eyed]

He shouldn't but Sheeds might cop a fine too for his after game comments on the umps and the 'push in the back' rule.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport/Sheedy-critical-of-handsinback-rule/2007/05/05/1177788470326.html

[mightytiges]

Apparently the Eagles have had 158 free for and 98 against so far this year. That's 10 frees extra every week  .

[one-eyed]

Tiger umpire dropped
06 May 2007   Sunday Herald Sun

ONE of the officiating umpires in last week's Richmond-West Coast clash has been dropped to the VFL.

Richmond captain Kane Johnson was fined $5000 for criticism of umpires Stuart Wenn, Shaun Ryan and Troy Pannell (pictured left with Matthew Richardson).

Pannell has been demoted to umpire the VFL today despite umpires boss Jeff Gieschen giving the Tiger clash umpires an overall performance a pass mark.

AFL spokesman Patrick Keane said it was simply part of the normal rotations.

"He is one of six new umpires who will be given a spell," Keane said. "He'll do one or two weeks in the VFL."

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,21678869%255E19742,00.html

Also Rodney Eade could be in trouble too for saying virtually the same thing as Sugar said last week....

"The holding-the-ball rule was a bit confusing at times," he said. "It tends to be paid more at home grounds than it does to the away teams."

Asked if the umpires appeared to enjoy umpiring the Eagles, Eade responded: "I had better not comment on that."

But he went on: "I think we got pinged a fair bit for holding the ball, which is OK, but exactly the same the other way didn't seem to be a free kick."

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/eade-treads-fine-line-on-free-kicks/2007/05/05/1177788470347.html

[one-eyed]

Michael Voss has stuck up for Sugar over his aftermatch umpiring comments....

Richmond captain Kane Johnson voluntarily fronted the media last Saturday after a narrow loss to West Coast — the Tigers' fifth in a row. He answered questions honestly and openly. Now he has been asked by the AFL to explain his comments about the umpiring and faces a $5000 fine.

He expressed some opinions about a 29-13 free kick count against his side. But he didn't denigrate anyone personally. Some might even say he was doing his job.

The Sunday Herald Sun reported that Johnson "launched an extraordinary attack on umpiring standards". Did he really? Or did he express in a calculated, controlled fashion a frustration shared by his coach, his teammates and Richmond fans?

Most coaches may consider the "fifth quarter" a burden, but it is an important part of our game. That's why it's obligatory for coaches to give news conferences after games. And it is why some clubs are sending players as well to face the media.

It's a chance for key people inside the game to explain events to those outside the game. So that when fans read the paper, watch the news or listen to radio the next day, they know a little more about what happened. And why it happened.

We need that. We need personalities who are prepared to speak honestly and openly, with insight and understanding. We cannot afford to legislate in blanket fashion against anything and everything remotely critical of umpires or other aspects of the game.

If the comments are outrageous, or get personal, then sure, the AFL should act. But was Kane Johnson outrageous or personal?

What might he say next time he's asked to front the media? And if it's not safe for the captain to speak because he's worried about saying the wrong thing, what hope do other players have?

So the fans lose out. They don't get an explanation for a result or a tactic or some other aspect of a game because coaches or players are afraid of the consequences of saying the wrong thing.

Generally, umpires don't have a huge bearing on a result. For every umpiring error, there are many more errors by players that have a bigger impact. Umpires are unavoidably thrust into the spotlight by their own actions — when they blow the whistle. Because the game stops. Suddenly, the focus is on them and their decision.

There is no whistle when a player doesn't man up or when he misses a target with a handball. So unless the incident is picked out later, there's no scrutiny. The game moves on. The less the umpire blows his whistle, the less we notice him and we believe the better job he has done.

Yet when the free-kick count is 29-13, that is a talking point. The fans want to know why. It's a reasonable question that deserves a reasonable answer. It is OK for the coach or captain to say: "It was nothing to do with the umpires — we were just undisciplined too often and gave away a lot of silly free kicks!"

So why isn't it OK to say in a reasonable manner that the players were frustrated by some interpretations and would be seeking an explanation from the umpires.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/fans-lose-out-if-clubs-cannot-speak/2007/05/05/1177788463591.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1