Every level of Australian football has a send-off rule bar one – the AFL. The question is why?
It makes no sense at all that the peak league in the sport is the only one that does not allow umpires the option to send players from the field for blatant and wilful acts of violence.
Surely, if any umpires are sufficiently equipped to make the correct call with regard to send-offs it is those in the AFL.
Last week Gold Coast’s Steven May was suspended for five weeks for a sickening charge on Brisbane’s Stefan Martin late in the second quarter at the Gabba.
Rather than determining a sanction, the Match Review Panel sent May directly to the AFL tribunal for its consideration.
At the hearing, May pleaded guilty.
The incident itself was ugly – May ran the past the ball, left the ground and hit Martin in the head with his shoulder with a force that was adjudged severe by the tribunal.
The Lions’ ruckman was immediately rendered unconscious and taken from the field on a stretcher, unable to return to the field after half-time.
The match day officials reported May at the time of the incident.
It was all the umpires could do with the exception of issuing a free-kick and a 50-metre penalty.
Had there been a send-off rule in place, May could well have been given his marching orders.
I doubt had such an option been available and invoked many would have complained.
Nowadays we hear ad nauseum about teams being under the pump due to a reduced interchange bench which affects rotations and the ability of a team to properly rest its players.
Injury is part and parcel of the sport, given its sheer physical nature.
The vast majority occur as a result of incidental contact within the natural playing of the game.
There are others that do not as they are the result of acts that are committed outside the both the laws and spirit of the game.
However, no matter the level of intent and damage rendered to an opponent the match day punishment can never exceed a free-kick and 50-metre penalty.
In some circumstances – and they are thankfully remote in nature – such a scant penalty is in no way commensurate with the crime.
What if May’s actions were to occur in the opening minutes of a grand final, or worse still, another player was similarly ruled out of the game as a result of a similar incident?
One of the more blatant acts of disrepute in recent times on an AFL field was the felling of West Coast’s Brent Staker by Sydney’s Barry Hall at the SCG in 2008.
Many metres off the ball, Hall simply punched Staker in the jaw.
Staker’s eyes rolled back in his head and he was out cold before he even hit the ground.
Hall was suspended for seven weeks as a result of his blatant strike on an unwitting opponent.
Bizarrely, the suspension mattered little to Hall and Sydney for later in the same game the full-forward broke his wrist on a metal railing on the fence behind a soft advertising board.
Incidents like Hall’s result in no significant penalty on the day while the team on which it is perpetrated loses a player for the remainder of the match as the result of a calculated act.
Many will argue that the introduction of a send-off rule in the AFL would result in mass ejections.
Anecdotal evidence would show that to be a totally erroneous theory.
I have commentated WAFL games weekly since the league adopted the send-off rule in 1993.
I have witnessed firsthand it being invoked twice in that entire period, the last time being over 18 years ago.
So, in the past 450-odd WAFL games I have commentated I have not seen the send-off rule used at all.
Its introduction into the WAFL has hardly resulted in a flurry of send-offs.
But, importantly, the rule is there and available to the umpires should they deem a malicious act warrants its application.
The rugby codes and soccer, along with many other team sports, have a send-off rule enshrined through all levels of their sport.
It is time the AFL did likewise.
I am not aware of any other code that allows for a send-off rule in all levels other than the highest in its sport.
Being sent from the ground and barred from returning for malicious acts at least provides some offset to the team that has lost a player as a result of a violent act.
Whilst it would seldom be applied it should nonetheless be part of an AFL umpire’s options when dealing with untoward violence on the field.
When all said and done, AFL umpires are more highly trained than their counterparts in lower grades.
Surely, they can be entrusted with the responsibility of applying a send-off rule.
R2k
Guest
I think this is an important debate to have and I hope you've enjoyed it as much as I have. I completely agree with the grand final changes - it reduces issues for interstate teams, prevents scheduling conflicts and provides a host of other positives. I agree with Samantha - there are no potential fallbacks or downsides that outweigh the positives. I've outline my reasons pretty thoroughly throughout my replies. The Nrl and super rugby are two different games to afl. In AFL there is always a player off the ball - in the other two most of the players are at all times situated incredibly close to the play the ball and unless extreme offside occurs there is little chance of an off the ball incident. The major issues for sending off in these two codes are the consistency of the decisions. Just merely look at all the articles in both sections of this website complaining about the referees every single week. My main personal issue with the NRL and Super Rugby are these seemingly endless periods of breaks. In rugby union the trainers run on seemingly every 3 minutes for an injury and the game stops while everyone has a drink of water and a chat. In rugby league if someone believes illegal play occurred in the tackle they stay down and replay the incident for the next minute - the majority of the time awarding a sometimes incredibly soft penalty. These delays are the reasons I don't enjoy these codes anywhere near as much anymore. We don't have pauses in afl bar the obvious quarter times and the occasional incredibly serious injury. If sending off is bought in with as many off the ball niggles and scenarios the game has how long before we stop the game every few minutes to check on an off the ball incident. How long before the staying down for a light shoulder comes in? You've seen two send offs and they've by all means been done very well. Have you ever seen a poor sending off in afl? I've seen one extremely poor one in New Zealand which most definitely changed the outcome of a match. The ensuing circumstances damaged the league severely. As you've said agree to disagree. Thanks for the debate. Might have to sign up now haha
Handles
Roar Guru
So is your argument that a send-off is only appropriate in the case where a player injured as a result of foul play can not take further part in the game? I hadn't picked that up in any of your previous contributiuons.
Lroy
Guest
Feel free to quote some stats backing up your argument. Your saying that at one point the Sharks had three guys in the bin and till won against the Crusaders. I call bullshit on that.
Vocans
Guest
The point is that any serious jurisdiction should have a plan for every possible contingency. The World Series had not been rigged before 1919. Did that stop it happening? : oh nobody's done it before (whereas taking a player out is famous in our game, even lauded in some places) so it will never happen! That's foolish. Constitutions, like the rules of a game, do their level best to protect the rights of citizens against all foreseeable possibilities. The Americans would have been glad if they never had to impeach a tyrannical President, and it turned put they've had to do it a few times in 200+ years. Good it was provided for in the Constitution, eh? Same for this - remember Alistaitr Lynch who had nothing to lose and everything to gain?
Mango Jack
Guest
It was a classic, wasn't it? For pure drama, that hit and Dermott's response by kicking a goal, was just brilliant.
D Fitz
Roar Rookie
Samantha, You make the following extraordinary statement: "There is absolutely no chance that the GF replay rule change will cost a team a game. It has zero grey area. There are no negatives. No downsides." A perfect rule ?? Indeed it is 100% certain that the GF replay rule change will cost or deny one of the two teams a flag or premiership. If that result is achieved in the two extra periods of ten minutes then so be it. However, if the result is achieved by continuing play beyond the second extra period of ten minutes, one team could have an unfair advantage resulting in them winning the game and premiership. You say (using emotive language) that Glenn's proposed send off rule is SHROUDED IN A MASSIVE GREY AREA but that depends on exactly the form in which the rule is introduced. Safeguards could be included to minimise to acceptable levels the danger of an unfair outcome. Glenn has identified a problem and seeks to resolve that problem with a new send-off rule. If his proposed new rule is worse than the problem then it will not be introduced. But if the proposed new rule has adequate safeguards then it should be adopted .
Samantha
Roar Rookie
Glenn Mitchell
Expert
I take it you do not believe the AFL should have done away with the grand final replay that strongly disadvantages interstate teams because it has happened only once since 1977. Just because incidents happen rarely it does not mean that laws/rules should not be made for them. Given your vehement belief that a send-off rule should not be introduced at AFL I take it you feel all elite levels of other codes such as the NRL and Super Rugby are wasting their time by having it. With respect to what constitutes a send-off offence guidelines can be written. That is how other sports operate including lower levels of Australian Football .... if you want umpire abuse as part of it you enshrine it, if you don't it is not part of the rule. We shall just have to agree to disagree R2k. I simply believe some incidents deserve a player to be sent from the field and my experience of it at WAFL level it is used very rarely but it is available for incidents of a serious nature. I think we are short changing AFL umpires by thinking that a send-off rule cannot be managed when it is at the elite level in almost every elite level of other codes. Thanks for the robust debate. It is what 'The Roar' is all about.
Glenn Mitchell
Expert
How does video coverage and awaiting the assessment of it at a tribunal benefit the team on the day who loses a player due to a violent act? It does not resolve the fact that a team has to play with reduced numbers.
richo
Guest
i think you have this article mixed up with NRL articles
handles
Guest
Video allows appropriate review of potentially illegal actions, usually from multiple angles, in a courtroom-like setting, by people who have experience in playing the game. It allows mitigating factors to be considered, and appropriate sanctions determined. It provides real and appropriate deterrance against violent acts, and all this without the risk of a bad decision influencing the outcome of a game. In short, it has everything to do with it. As this level of analysis is not generally available in lower levels of the sport, a send-off rule is required, which is the consistency point you keep banging on about.
handles
Guest
There are plenty of other rules differences. Playing with a rotation cap of 60 in the SANFL and 5 on the bench on the VFL are much bigger differences.
handles
Guest
That is a completely bankrupt argument Glenn. I don't want send offs because they negatively influence the balance of the game, and the potential for error is too high, and you are relying on an imperfect view from an umpire with many other things to worry about. Furthermore, the only potential benefit is the possibility of reduced violent acts, and you have failed to demonstrate any cases of violence (with the possible exception of Lynch on Wakelin) that would have been avoided. Violent illegal acts are punished in AFL. They are analysed on video, discussed in an appropriate venue where mitigating factors are considered, and appropriate penalty is handed down. As for your 'one punch' analogy, l would be extremely concerned if a policeman, running around 40 metres away from the nightclub, talking to someone else, was given the power to send people directly to jail for a year when they thought they saw a punch thrown.
Pumping Dougie
Roar Guru
I guess that opens up a can of worms about then having to send the instigator off, if the video review reveals something worthy of a red card for another player. But this wouldn't be a bad thing either.
geoff
Guest
FWIW i think the send off rule is no longer required at AFL Level as there are fewer if any thuggish acts. The lynch and barry hall acts rarely happen if at all but would certainly of warranted sending off if there was such a rule. I do believe lower levels require send off rules as there are many thugs out there. Few or no cameras and zero or very little protection for umpires. The anzac day melees were soft and this is due to fines cameras and scrutiny etc...which are absent from lower leagues
Agent11
Guest
I would think the rugby codes suffer the most from being a player down as the defensive structure is usually in a line, which means one side will always have an overlap of attackers. In soccer you can just reshuffle your formation and bring a forward back into the midfield or backs. I am not sure how being a man down would affect an AFL team, have never seen it. But I would think you could just reshuffle similar to soccer?
Paul W
Guest
Jeez Mary brutalised, not sure what game you're watching.
D Fitz
Roar Rookie
Glenn, Red card player sent off and immediately replaced from bench. Team not playing short but has only 21 players for remainder of match.
Liam
Guest
"Multiple weeks off have not stemmed the flow of this kind of thing." Prove it. Make a statistical argument that states, unequivocally, that increased suspension has not stopped people from engaging in acts deliberately designed to injure. Injury and contact is part of the sport. If you seek to change that, then you seek to change the sport I enjoy, a sport which is being changed every year to mixed results. This year, we got free flowing attacking football; last, we had crazy amounts of congestion, stoppage after stoppage. In short, with any given rule change, there needs to be some reason/proof as to why the rule is being changed, and how it will work. With this particular rule, it is relatively rare to see players leave the field without returning due to the deliberate acts of a single player, who will be punished severely. That being said, why is it that May gets 5 weeks for an offense worthy of Byron Pickett?
R2k
Guest
Well you've ignored all the other points that I bring up which would potentially give a side an unfair one man advantage and the potential associated issues with it - but even in the Alastair Lynch case you'd have to send both men off because Darryl Wakelin wasn't injured and returned with punches of his own. Even the the first punch thrown was a forearm shot into the chest from memory not a closed fist to the head. Separately do we just send the first puncher off even if he's been say provoked by a slur or an earlier attack. Will we get a case where people niggle notorious hotheads as a tactic for a send off? What in your opinion describes a malicious act? Would every single umpire share that opinion and police the exact same way? Look the only legitimate case we've bought up is the Barry hall Brent Staker one which was indeed sad and unfortunate - and then Barry hall got rubbed out for 7 weeks one of the longest tribunal suspensions in my recent memory. But do you send him off for the Shane Wakelin incident in 2010? Where Wakelin himself has admitted to diving because it looks bad on tape - or does he have to be unable to play for the whole game for the card to come out? Do we send him off for the Matt maguire punch to the gut because he stayed down until a trainer got to him allowing for multiple replays even if Maguire wasn't hurt for the entire game? Do we send Scott Thompson of the kangaroos off for inciting him in 2010? That's my point - there can be so many different interpretations of a sending off rule that could be used - some with more evidence than others - but there is no way if you bring this rule in its going to be used as a 'level' in a player for a player system