State of Umpiring [merged]

[one-eyed]

The AFL's broad view is that players shouldn't put themselves in the position that saw Coniglio handed a dissent penalty. GWS will ask the AFL for clarification. The AFL stopping short of a definitive decision either way ahead of review tomorrow.

https://twitter.com/RalphyHeraldSun/status/1642364842282721281

[Chuck17]

The AFL should also review how umpires put themselves in such a position to have their decisions questioned when they make such absolute poostuff decisions

[crackertiger]

That decision was disgraceful. If the AFL has any spine they would admit the umpire was wrong. Then send him to the VFL based on form.

[Chuck17]

That decision was disgraceful. If the AFL has any spine they would admit the umpire was wrong. Then send him to the VFL based on form.

Yep should go to the tribunal and cop four weeks minimum

[camboon]

Show a person with an ego who took a player questioning a decision as a personal insult
If they can’t be fair independent arbitrators, they shouldn’t be given the role, and now we have 4 ego maniacs , like Ray Chainbelain

[wayne]

That decision was disgraceful. If the AFL has any spine they would admit the umpire was wrong. Then send him to the VFL based on form.

If they had any spine, they would admit the rule is poo and get rid of it.

[Andyy]

That decision was disgraceful. If the AFL has any spine they would admit the umpire was wrong. Then send him to the VFL based on form.

If they had any spine, they would admit the rule is poo and get rid of it.

Yep.

Umps could previously give a 50m penalty for umpire abuse so I don't see why we need one for dissent.

Makes the players all robots.

[pmac21]

It does really annoy me when players put their arms out for deliberate out of bounds every time the ball goes over the line.   

[Chuck17]

It does really annoy me when players put their arms out for deliberate out of bounds every time the ball goes over the line.

Yep resembles a soccer game

[one-eyed]

AFL Head of Umpiring Dan Richardson has released the following statement on the dissent rule.


https://twitter.com/DavidZita1/status/1642776228611657728

[Chuck17]

BLAH BLAH BLAH

[Lozza]

The admitting that footy isn't black and white, isn't that an indictment of the rules themselves. If the rules of the game were more clearly written then the amount of interpretation, that is the amount of grey, would be reduced significantly in the first instance making it a bit easier for the umpires to adjudicate.

[one-eyed]

Former veteran AFL umpire Dean Margetts disagrees with the league’s defence of the dissent free kick paid against GWS star Stephen Coniglio.

Margetts, who now works as Umpiring Operations Manager for the WAFL, believes the AFL has created a free kick that is impossible to adjudicate consistently.

“I have to disagree with the AFL on this one,” Margetts told SEN’s Sportsday WA.

“In my 20 years and 370-odd games I never felt offended or affronted by a player with a passionate plea with their arms out. It’s usually like an emotional plea.

“Look, if a player comes at you pointing and screaming and the mouthguard is coming out – absolutely, that’s demonstrative behaviour for sure, but in the Coniglio case it wasn’t on the TV, it wasn’t on the screen and I think you had to zoom in from behind the goals to even find it.

“I think if we’re not paying that, I’ve got absolutely no doubt in my mind that we’re not saying that’s a missed dissent free kick.

Full article: https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/04/03/former-afl-umpire-disagrees-on-leagues-dissent-ruling/

[Hard Roar Tiger]

Put Margetts in charge.
Please.

[one-eyed]

"No one has any idea" - Jack Riewoldt says that players are confused around the dissent rules.

Watch: https://twitter.com/FOXFOOTY/status/1643194948307816449

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

‘Scratching my head’: AFL star admits ‘no one has an idea’ after controversial dissent call

Fox Footy from Fox Sports
April 4th, 2023 10:01 pm

Richmond spearhead Jack Riewoldt believes “no one has an idea” of what constitutes umpire dissent after the controversial free kick against Stephen Coniglio in Round 3.

The free kick against Coniglio came at a crucial stage of Carlton’s win over Greater Western Sydney on Saturday, with the AFL on Monday releasing a statement from umpiring boss Dan Richardson.

In that statement, Richardson said while players and coaches “get emotional, or become overly expressive when under pressure, “we also have umpires with differing levels of temperament”.

However Richardson declared: “If there was no challenge to the decision, regardless of personal opinion on the threshold, then no free kick could or would have been paid.”

Riewoldt told AFL 360 the decision against Coniglio had left him confused over the threshold for dissent.

“No one has an idea because the umpires, they’ve admitted each umpire has got a different emotional reaction to players, so how are we to know whether we catch someone on a bad day or a good day?”, he said.

“There’s moments after that dissent free kick where players are doing the exact same thing and we don’t get the same result. So I’m scratching my head.

“I would’ve said way worse things and done more demonstrative stuff to senior umpires and just had a normal conversation or just asked a question, which you do sometimes - there’s four umpires, one is genuinely around the centre of the ground or with the forwards - (asking) ‘Why is that a free kick?’

“That’s a bit of a natural reaction, but that could be deemed as dissent, which is the Coniglio example there. I’m still scratching my head about it and I think most of the footy public are as well.”

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-news-2023-umpire-dissent-stephen-coniglio-free-kick-jack-riewoldt-comments-reaction-gws-vs-carlton-arms-out/news-story/dcacbdbeff444997ba90fd7be39da3d7