MRP / Trib. 2018 MRP - Carlton Tribunal News & Reports
- Thread starter Aphrodite
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Gethelred
Moderator
- May 1, 2016
- 30,678
- 59,480
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #252
I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
Professional umpires means collective training; every week, the umpires train on what/how to view frees, best positions, how to work together to catch all angles. It means that you can instigated collective interpretations of the rules, instead of having as many different adjudications as there are umpires. It means you can work with individuals to see how they respond to things like parochial crowds, and help them to ensure that they don't pay decisions merely because the crowd is baying for it.
It means that you can change the culture of umpiring, if you choose. You're an umpire, are you not? I've heard from others that umpires are promoted and demoted based purely on seniority, not their skill at adjudicating the game.
It means that they base themselves in 1 city, before flying out to their games on weekends/thursday night. It means that they can have the full confidence of the AFL behind them, instead of the passivity that has greenlit the current status quo of derision and angst.
And finally, it could hardly be any worse than the state of umpiring right now.
Dramoth
Premium Platinum
To be honest, if I was the Carlton lawyer, I would be going in there appealing the severity (or lack thereof) of the punishment regarding the May contact with an umpire. And I would be presenting the Gregson incident with a please explain note... especially after his team mate Hawkins got pinged for a week.
The AFL needs to stamp on the trial by media hard. It isn't the media's place to make decisions like that and they shouldn't be constantly going on about it to try and influence the MRO and the tribunal. It used to be if a player was reported by the umpires, the media wasn't allowed to constantly replay the incident.
The AFL needs to stamp on the trial by media hard. It isn't the media's place to make decisions like that and they shouldn't be constantly going on about it to try and influence the MRO and the tribunal. It used to be if a player was reported by the umpires, the media wasn't allowed to constantly replay the incident.
Dramoth
Premium Platinum
Umpire 22, the one who Ed made contact with took away 3 scoring opportunities in the first quarter from us.
First St.Kildas effort against Murph last year and now this,seriously,the Curnows should get off as an effort by the AFL to apologise for providing a “decent” working place!
I demand action!!
I demand action!!
Interesting the Lamb stuff comes out into the public domain, me thinks Carlton are going to use that somehow...in the case of Charlie u could argue he was in fact protecting the umpire knowing what had been said and the way Lamb had responded.
I dare say the Ed one had something to do with this information as well
I dare say the Ed one had something to do with this information as well
Congratulations - you have passed Legal & Media Strategy 101!
No doubt this will be one of the central arguments to this evening's proceedings.
The second one will be the immediate example of the May case as a precedent of containing a more deliberative type of contact and arguably more force that resulted in zero suspensions. Having the extra day between the cases is an advantage to be exploited that we wouldn't have had, if we'd been on the docket last night.
- Oct 10, 2016
- 3,101
- 7,405
- AFL Club
- Carlton
No its a lifetime ban
- Mar 26, 2015
- 12,680
- 23,061
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Melb Tigers, Bendigo Braves, Aussie NBA
Depends on how vigorous the shake is.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #260
And we're off :-
Umpire didn't feel under threat
AFL Legal Counsel Andrew Woods:
Agreed the umpire's position is he doesn't recall the contact occurring. He didn't say anything to anyone at the time and didn't feel under threat due to the incident. His phrase was he "Doesn't have a problem with what occurred".
The umpire won't need to be heard from tonight.
the above is positive so far
AFL Legal Counsel Andrew Woods:
Agreed the umpire's position is he doesn't recall the contact occurring. He didn't say anything to anyone at the time and didn't feel under threat due to the incident. His phrase was he "Doesn't have a problem with what occurred".
The umpire won't need to be heard from tonight.
the above is positive so far
Is that for E or C?
- Aug 30, 2017
- 1,429
- 7,341
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Tasmania
- Aug 30, 2017
- 1,429
- 7,341
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Tasmania
Said he can’t recall the contact and “had no problem with it”
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #265
C is up first.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #269
- Mar 26, 2015
- 12,680
- 23,061
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Melb Tigers, Bendigo Braves, Aussie NBA
The problem for me is, and the way it should be, I don't know one umpire from the next. Apart from Razor Ray (as if an umpire should be so well known that they have a nickname), I couldn't tell you who is who and I have no idea who is umpiring our games each week.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #271
Barry Davenport
Senior List
- Jun 10, 2014
- 186
- 597
- AFL Club
- Carlton
thats really the litmus test for all these instances. Well it should be..we shall see
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #275
Similar threads
- Locked
