How is it enforcing the rules as written when the wrong player deliberately attempts to deceive?
How is it enforcing the rules as written when the player attempts to return the ball to an opponent she thinks is the recipient of the free kick?
How is it enforcing the rules when a team gets a 50m penalty from deliberate deception?
Does the rule say anything about being deceived? I don't see the section that says you must return the ball directly to the correct player unless you have been tricked?
I also can't see the part that says no penalty if you return the ball to the player you think is the recipient?
This so-called deliberate deception is a non-issue. It's part of the cut and thrust of sport. Players try and put each other off with words all game, every game. Are you not going to pay holding the ball when the opposition tells a player with the ball they are clear? What about when a 50 is given away because one of the players calls play on? It might not be to everyone's taste but it is part of the game, within the rules and if you get sucked in then more fool you.
The rule says "Where a field Umpire has awarded a Mark or Free Kick to a Player, or a Player is preparing to bring or bringing the football back into play after a Behind is scored, a Fifty Metre Penalty in favour of that Player will be awarded if the field Umpire is of the opinion that any Player or Official from the opposing Team:
(e) has not returned the football directly and on the full to the Player awarded the Mark or Free Kick;"
So let's enforce the rules as written. Was a free kick or a mark paid? Yes. Did the player return the football directly and on the full to the player awarded the free kick? No. Then the umpire will, not may, will award a 50m penalty.
Pontificate much? Jesus mate. The reason there is "an unhelpful discourse" is because people like you refuse to accept that umps get it wrong, a lot. The reason we disagree is because you refuse to admit there are grey areas. That the rules allow for the ump not to pay that free and still be following both the spirit and the intention of the rule. You refuse to concede even that tiny bit of ground. That is why we disagree. That isn't a societal collapse. It's you being inflexible.
On the contrary, I accept umpires make mistakes all the time and it is a natural and normal part of the game that should be accepted in the same way a player's skill error is, as an inevitable art of the game, not a chance to throw a tantrum like a 2 year old and call them cheats.
The reason I'm inflexible here is because it is a cut and dried decision. Couldn't be more straightforward. And I don't like people using a player's mistake or misunderstanding of the rules as a chance to bash umpires. They make plenty of mistakes in every single game but this isn't one of them.
When you look at that rule it is absolutely crystal clear. It is only when you add irrelevant factors like what the opposition player did that you can try and shift the responsibility to the umpires.
