There are few sporting leagues in the world that do not have a send-off rule and the AFL is one of them.
Football, rugby union, rugby league, hockey, water polo, basketball… you name it, it is hard to find a code that does not have some form of send-off or ejection rule that is enforceable throughout its grades from elite to juniors.
The fact there is not one in the AFL seems very odd.
In fact, it seems odder when you consider every grade of Australian Football beneath the AFL actually has one in place.
It is codified in the official Laws of the Game under Law 20, titled the ‘Order Off Law’.
Clause 20.2 (Order Off for Remainder of Match) reads as follows:
In addition to being reported, a field or emergency field umpire shall order the Player reported from the playing surface for the remainder of a match if the player is reported for any of the following reportable Offences:
(a) Intentionally, recklessly or negligently making contact with or striking an umpire;
(b) Attempting to make contact with or strike an Umpire;
(c) Using abusive, insulting, threatening or obscene language towards or in relation to an umpire;
(d) Behaving in an abusive, insulting, threatening or obscene manner towards or in relation to an umpire;
(e) Intentionally, recklessly or negligently kicking another person;
(f) An act of misconduct if the Umpire is of the opinion that the act constituting misconduct is serious in nature.
It sits there in black and white in the Laws of the Game.
As too does clause 20.1 which stipulates that, ‘This Law 20 applies to all competitions other than the AFL competition’.
But why?
It seems strange the highest level of the code which has the most experienced and, one should imagine, most proficient umpires in the sport, opts not to give them the power to send players from the field.
Most sports use an ejection rule as the ultimate deterrent to penalise a team on the day for extreme behaviour and actions by one of its players.
Suspensions are all well and good, but they are imposed after the event and, as such, do nothing on the day to penalise a team that has acted inappropriately.
Let’s just consider, in isolation, the instance of the AFL grand final – the sport’s ultimate prize.
Cast your mind back to the 2004 grand final, in which Port Adelaide ended Brisbane’s streak of three successive premierships.
Early in the match, Lions’ full-forward Alistair Lynch instigated a one-on-one fight with Port fullback Darryl Wakelin.
While Lynch swung infinitely more punches than he landed, he still incurred the wrath of the umpires and, by extension, the AFL Tribunal.
Despite announcing his retirement following the match, he was nonetheless hit with a 10-match suspension for being found guilty of two counts of striking and four counts of attempted striking – all as a result of the one stoush.
He was also fined $15,000 on top of the suspension – the largest fine dealt to a player for 14 years.
At the time, tribunal chairman Brian Collis said the penalties meted out were more hefty than would normally have been the case with the extra loading applied as a result of the grand final being the showcase event of the season and “ought to set an appropriate example for young players watching the game”.
Wakelin played out the match, and did so without having suffered any side effects from the altercation with Lynch, going on to receive his premiership medallion.
However, what if he hadn’t – what if Lynch had knocked him out and as a result ruled Wakelin out of the last three-plus quarters of the match?
Many AFL followers will remember Barry Hall’s king hit on West Coast’s Brent Staker in 2008.
The Swans’ full-forward KO’d Staker with a punch to the jaw, earning himself a seven-match suspension, while Staker was carried from the field.
How would a similar act be viewed if it was to happen in the opening minutes of a grand final?
One team would be a player down with still nearly two hours to play as a result of a case of out-and-out thuggery.
A subsequent suspension is little solace to the affected team and its supporters, especially if the player responsible, a la Lynch, retires after the match.
Or what if a player, either in a grand final or otherwise, chose to do what Essendon’s Phil Carmen did in a VFL match in 1980 and head-butt an umpire?
He subsequently received a 16-match suspension, but one could very well argue such an act should carry an immediate penalty on the day as it would in every other sport.
Surely the umpires should have the ultimate and immediate sanction available to them for such malicious incidents, whether they occur in Round 1 or the last Saturday in September at the MCG, just as they do in every grade below the AFL.
Some people rail against the introduction of a send-off rule at AFL level for two reasons.
Firstly, they argue that there would be cases where a player was sent from the field only to be cleared of any guilt or wrongdoing at the subsequent tribunal hearing.
I say so be it.
Myriad other sports have faced that very issue for decades and seem to have come to terms with it.
Secondly, many say AFL umpires will become overly officious and use it too often.
From my experience of seeing the rule in operation that is certainly not the case.
The WAFL introduced the send-off rule for the 1993 season.
In the 20 years that umpires have had it available as a sanction, it has been invoked less than ten times or, in other words, around once every two seasons.
I don’t see why umpires at AFL level would find it needs to be used more often.
In over 450 matches I have commentated in the WAFL since the penalty has been in place I have only ever witnessed it enforced first-hand on two occasions – hardly what you would deem an epidemic, as some fear it would be at AFL level.
While it would be used very sparingly and only in extreme circumstances it should still be available for AFL umpires to utilise.
If it is good enough for every other level of Australian Football in the country surely it is good enough for the AFL.
Matt Major
Guest
Mate, there is one. http://www.aflrules.com.au/afl-game-rules/part-d-pre-match-provisions/afl-rules-order-off-law/ Section 20.2 of afl rules state what can provoke it.
geoff
Guest
by refusing to adopt a send off rule that would have applied to many recent assaults on the field the AFL is again taking the soft option and effectively endorsing violence in the game many of these assaults if occurred outside the game would bring criminal charges and a possible jail term by putting the head in the sand the AFL stands out as the only major sport administrators in the world without the fortitude to address the problem when eventually someone is injured for life [ or worse ] people will say " how was this allowed to happen " and the guilt will be borne by the inept AFL administrators
Martyn50
Roar Rookie
The warning that Australian football has is a fifty meter penalty for those who cant keep there heads. Normally they will be dragged by the coach for a chat. To highlight a few incidents over the past 10 years does not make the Australian game full of thugs. At the top level the game has been cleaned up considerably over the past 25 years
johnb747b
Guest
I believe that there is a strong case for a yellow/red card regime in AFL. The yellow serves as a warning, the red says that a player has either been a slow learner or has done something really nasty. A sin bin system allows an offender to cool down and to get a word in his shell-like from his coach. It concentrates the minds of his fellow players and the fans to have to cope with his absence for 10 minutes. Both of these methods are likely to have the effect of restraining hotheads. An act of extreme violence should attract a send-off. There is no justification whatsoever for allowing an offender at this level to remain on the paddock. Yes, umpires will occasionally make mistakes but on balance we entrust them with the conduct of the game and have to accept their decisions, made mostly on the spot. I recall being penalised in an intercollegiate rugby match on Sydney Uni no 1, years ago. Conditions were atrocious, strong winds and driving rain. I fielded a kick through, was set upon by a Wallaby candidate who made life uncomfortable for me, then I was penalised for not releasing the ball. Not releasing the ball? I couldn't draw breath let alone release anything. And how does one 'release' the ball with a 6'6" monster lying all over you? 'That was a bit rough', I said to the ref when I could get to my feet. 'You could be right, son', he replied, 'but that's the way I saw it at the time'. End of story! The principle for me remains: it is manifestly unfair for a player to deliberately hurt an opponent, to send him into the far blue yonder, while being able to remain on the paddock in good condition and without immediate penalty. Cards/sin bin/send off rule will not be the end of the game as we know it. The sky will not fall in. Thugs, however, might be deterred from setting out to hurt and that can only be a good thing.
Martyn50
Roar Rookie
You say " the affected player has been injured and forced off the ground " What if a player is not seriously injured and only Faking like they do in soccer?
Martyn50
Roar Rookie
In a game known for its violence. Excuse me. Examples please. No actors in the Australian Football League
Martyn50
Roar Rookie
In a game known for its violence. Excuse me. Examples please. No actors in the Australian Football League
Martyn50
Roar Rookie
Seems that you have never played or umpired the Australian game. Any player can question an umpire at any time providing the player talks in a civil manner and at the same time is not wasting time by doing so.
Mikey
Guest
Brad, the rules don't allow the players to question umpires decisions - otherwise players would complain about 99% of decisions. When I was a kid in the 70's I remember a commentator on a footy panel state that football umpiring was the worst standard it had ever been and something had to be done about it! At the time I assumed that what was said must have been true because i hadn't been around for previous era's. However I think i have heard similar comments to that one just about every year since! So I have come to the belief that umpiring is a lot more difficult than it looks. And I think the game today is a lot harder to umpire than it was in the 70's (albeit that we now have 3 umpires now and not just 1 as it was back them) All umpires make mistakes and some umpires make more than others. And I criticize some of their decisions as much as anyone but - as I said - I think it is a pretty tough job.
Brad
Guest
Yes, really! How many 50m penalties are given every week because a player questions an umpires (often poor) decision? The 50m penalty paid against Michael Barlow on Friday night against the Bombers showed exactly how precious umpires are (and I'm an Essendon supporter!)
Ashley
Guest
It might be hard for the 'send off' rule to work... What should happen is the perpetrator should be out of the game for at least as long as his victim. Im thinking Chris Judd's chicken wing effort.... Not much different to hall vs staker. The intent to injure someone and make them less effective or the team needs to be looked at. If your do something to someone and it goes pear shaped and they miss 14 weeks then tough luck... So do you! What do you think glenn?
Mikey
Guest
"Umpires are already too precious" Really Brad? I would have thought that people that are criticized by at least 50% of the audience every time they make a decision would need to have a pretty thick skin. Umpire bashing is everyone's favourite past-time (as if we believe we could all do a better job) but I think we should at least respect them for having the fortitude to put up with being abused every weekend. I have called umpires a lot of things over the years - but I would never call them precious!
Brad
Guest
"Would you trust Razor Ray with a red card?" Hell no! The current batch of over zealous clows that umpire the AFL don't need any more power at their disposal!
Brad
Guest
"So, if an umpire is assaulted on the field the player should not be removed from the ground?" I see your worst case scenario, and raise you a more plausible scenario: Do you think a player should be sent off if he tells the umpire he made a "f***ing s**t decision"? I'm pretty sure that would be covered by Clause 20.2 (c). Umpires are already too precious. They certainly don't need to be given the power to send a player off everytime they feel "insulted".
Brad
Guest
"We have to remember that kids are watching games" Brilliant. So the two main arguments for a send off rule are: 1. everyone else has the send off rule, so why don't we? and 2. won't someone please think of the children. "They could effectively give a game to an older retiring fringe player as a ‘hit-man’ to come in and do enough damage to turn the tide of the game" The AFL/VFL has existed for 110+ years without a send off rule and this tactic has never existed, can you give me a half decent reason why it's suddenly going to start now?
Brendsn
Guest
Stick to keeping Kerry o'keefe under control glen opps u can not do that either. In local footy I was one of 3 people who were hit befor the ball was bounced in a grand final. It was tough. But I am concerned about umpires being judge and jury. What Phil Carmel did was wrong but that boundary umpire and I mean this was hoping something would happen after he got hit by car men's hand he put his face right up to Carmen what do u do report Neil blame for hitting southby
Dizzy
Guest
The perfect example was Friday night. Ryder knocks mcpharlin out illegally and then goes on to be a key player and kick the winning goal. There should be a video umpire at each game and he should have 5 mins to make a decision as to whether the incident is clear enough to be a send off.
handles
Guest
I agree with Tom. What are the chances that an umpire would have had a good enough view of the Solomon Ling incident to send him off? Rugby Union is replete with examples of games ruined by the send off rule. I don`t agree with the idea that players, in today`s video review age will be less inclined to this type of behaviour if they think they will get sent off. Lynch was in his last game, perhaps he was the exception.} Warburton`s send off in Auckland 2011 ruined that game as a competition, and cost Wales an appearance in the RWC final. And don`t even get me started on the ridiculous red card handed out to Drew Mitchell, which ruined a Bledisloe Cup game in 2010. (Admittedly we were well behind when he was marched). In the case of Warburton, 50,000 Welsh fans had paid a fortune to be there and watch the game. The tackle was dangerous, and a sanction and lost games was without doubt appropriate, but ruining the showpiece game for everyone was not.
Eliah James
Roar Rookie
Stavros, I think you should look more towards RU and RL's use of the send-off rule than of soccer. Yellow card infringements in soccer are (on the most part) much less serious than RU or RL (to any football fans about to accuse me of being a 'sockah hater', I currently play, and am a passionate SFC supporter). If you look towards the incidents for sin-bins and send offs in both rugby codes, it makes much more sense how it would apply in AFL. Of course, the 50m penalty seems to be the AFL's version of a yellow card offence. On the other hand, Glenn, I couldn't agree more and have been wondering how many other people have been wondering this same thing. Great article.
Me Too
Guest
I am in two minds. Most definitely believe a player committing an extreme act of violence should be removed - the team now have one less player on the bench. My concern is the same as an earlier poster - I can't think of any sport with so much inconsistency in the umpiring.