Umpire Abuse | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Umpire Abuse

The Big Richo said:
I'm only asking why it was paid because I don't know.

You're saying only an umpire's sycophant would justify the decision so surely you must know why it was paid?

Unless of course you and lots of others on here are going off half-cocked with no more idea than I have as to why it was paid.
Click to expand...

BS, you argue to the contrary on almost every single topic on this forum and insinuate that the rest of us are idiots.

Only an umpire sycophant would try to justify a player expressing frustration with a decision deserves a 50m penalty.

The umpires are clearly cracking down on any sort of dissent and it's a solution looking for a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
The Big Richo said:
Still curious as to why someone who was in a position to hear what was being said in Max Gawn, didn't come over and ask Petracca what that was for, but instead gave him a demonstrative dressing down?

I guess some questions just don't have answers.
Click to expand...
What did he say to Petracca ? And what did Petracca say back to him?
 
The Big Richo said:
I'm only asking why it was paid because I don't know.

You're saying only an umpire's sycophant would justify the decision so surely you must know why it was paid?

Unless of course you and lots of others on here are going off half-cocked with no more idea than I have as to why it was paid.
Click to expand...
Someone on Ralph Malph's twitter said it was against McDonald who raised his arms after the free was called. But, why did Petracca stand the mark and why did Gawn speak to Petracca? My irk is why get so PEDANTIC on a player's question or simple expression?? Where is the 'abuse'??
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
The Big Richo said:
The AFL CEO felt it was enough of an issue to apologise for it today, can't remember that happening.




No, I cut through the everything Richmond is great, everyone else at every club is inferior, media is biased, AFL are morons, umpires are hopeless etc etc tedious rubbish that adds nothing to decent, thoughtful conversation about footy.

And this is a classic example. I'm not justifying a decision, I'm asking why it was paid. And no-one can tell me because they don't know either and yet are still kicking the umpires about it. It's as mindless as mindless criticism can be.

For all anyone on here knows the 50 was against Tom McDonald who was standing there calling the umpire a *smile*. Or someone else we couldn't even see. As Jason Dunstall said when the other commentators said there wasn't much in it we don't know what was said.



No idea but I thought the body language was quite instructive. As did the commentators.



You can see McDonald raise the arms in the replay and he is also having a fair bit to say. *smile* decision though, if you can't call the umpire a *smile* for a decision on a contest you weren't even in then what is the game coming to?
Click to expand...
That’s right. You have no idea. Just as you’re claiming other posters have no idea what Petracca may have or didn’t say to the umpire.

Also, one of the commentators - Hudson - said “ Did he say that much though ?”

Your balance is out of kilter, clearly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The Big Richo said:
No, I cut through the everything Richmond is great, everyone else at every club is inferior, media is biased, AFL are morons, umpires are hopeless etc etc tedious rubbish that adds nothing to decent, thoughtful conversation about footy.

And this is a classic example. I'm not justifying a decision, I'm asking why it was paid. And no-one can tell me because they don't know either and yet are still kicking the umpires about it. It's as mindless as mindless criticism can be.

For all anyone on here knows the 50 was against Tom McDonald who was standing there calling the umpire a *smile*. Or someone else we couldn't even see. As Jason Dunstall said when the other commentators said there wasn't much in it we don't know what was said.
Click to expand...

I don't know exactly what he said, and neither do you. But he must have called him a *smile* *smile* or something else rather egregious for the 50m to be paid so suddenly. And in light of this new edict from AFL house that umpires shall not be abused, I suspect there was a whistle-happy umpire who thought they'd use the power of god and smite a bloke for getting shitty at a poor decision because their feelings were hurt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
TigerForce said:
Someone on Ralph Malph's twitter said it was against McDonald who raised his arms after the free was called. But, why did Petracca stand the mark and why did Gawn speak to Petracca? My irk is why get so PEDANTIC on a player's question or simple expression?? Where is the 'abuse'??
Click to expand...
It’s confirmed that the 50m was against McDonald. AFL love creating confusion. Have they ever thought that maybe simplifying the game would reduce this angst and the the flow on effect would be less vitriol towards umpires?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Smoking Aces said:
It’s confirmed that the 50m was against McDonald. AFL love creating confusion. Have they ever thought that maybe simplifying the game would reduce this angst and the the flow on effect would be less vitriol towards umpires?
Click to expand...
Well there you go.
 
Smoking Aces said:
It’s confirmed that the 50m was against McDonald. AFL love creating confusion. Have they ever thought that maybe simplifying the game would reduce this angst and the the flow on effect would be less vitriol towards umpires?
Click to expand...
Yep. It's not hard is it??
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Redford said:
That’s right. You have no idea. Just as you’re claiming other posters have no idea what Petracca may have or didn’t say to the umpire.

Also, one of the commentators - Hudson - said “ Did he say that much though ?”

Your balance is out of kilter, clearly.
Click to expand...
What balance?

Clearly the AFL and their employees do not make mistakes.

Gil apologised apparently. For what and to whom I’m not quite sure. But TBR will have the answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
MD Jazz said:
What balance?

Clearly the AFL and their employees do not make mistakes.

Gil apologised apparently. For what and to whom I’m not quite sure. But TBR will have the answer.
Click to expand...
Read Gill's statement. It's very clear who he's apologising to and what he is apologising for. His statement is readily available to read.
 
Tigers of Old said:
How long until crowd members are ejected for venting their frustration at umpiring?
Click to expand...
I could almost be sure that what the AFL is doing here is actually going to make umpire abuse worse at the real level that it’s a problem - grass roots football and not senior AFL football - and will, as is often the case with the AFL, backfire completely on them.

If they were really serious about umpire abuse and getting more umpires into the game, they’d be tipping millions into the feeder leagues around the country. But they’re not. They’re just taking a bs route and virtue signalling via the main level where it’s far far less of a problem.

Classic disingenuous AFL.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
It might be best if Jack wears a gimp gag mask on the ground this year
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
I am on board with paying a 50m penalty for demonstrable dissent with an umpires decision, BUT ..............

Paying a 50m for asking why a decision went against someone is completely over the top. I would have thought that a player asking what he did wrong is a genuine attempt to better understand the interpretation and to improve himself?

I'm all for wiping out (to the extent that it can be done) the abuse of umpires at all levels but this will make things worse not better.

I know we live in different times where there are a lot of precious people in society but surely senior AFL umpires are not that much of snowflakes that the rolling of eyes is taken as dissent? Used to be that umpires used to give as good as they got and thick skins were common.

Are they now going to be mind readers? How do they know that the player is unhappy with the decision or his own poor execution of a skill like tackling?

Thank God we play the second game of Round 1. If ours was the opener we'd get a massive reaming. Now we might still be a bit sore but I'm hoping there will be an adjustment in the 24 hours between the opener and ours :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Quickdraw said:
Thank God we play the second game of Round 1. If ours was the opener we'd get a massive reaming. Now we might still be a bit sore but I'm hoping there will be an adjustment in the 24 hours between the opener and ours :cool:
Click to expand...

On the back of last night's game it's good Melbourne go first. We can expect an instant correction by the time we play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
You must log in or register to reply here.
< Round 1 (2022) - other games | Covid top up list >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom