Opinion Andrew Gaff's hit - should we introduce a red card system?

[Seedsfan]

No grand finals have been decided through dirty thuggery? Are you SURE?

As has already been explained, clearly a 3rd umpire doesn't need to stop play to investigate an incident. Play can continue for 1-2 minutes while the umpire watches the reply and makes a decision then the on-field umpire relays that at the next stoppage.

Well it can’t actually the play will need to be stopped. How are you going to get the player off the field without stopping it? Just some really poorly thought out knee jerk reactions

 

[Seedsfan]

Let me know how you feel if Cotchin does a Gaff to Pendles in the Grand Final this year.

If that happens we deal with it and move on.

Now Kappa brings up currently your 22nd best player could king hit the opponents best and serve no in game penalty. But when do we see someone sent out there to hit someone off the ball? What Jonh Greening back in the early 70s.

Now on that logic say in the grand final this year we are playing and the opponents 22nd best player king hits Pendles even if he gets red carded we still are at a massive disadvantage.

If you bring it in for an off the ball hit that takes someone out of the game how long until it is just for anything that takes someone out of the game?

We do not need it, they have it in the NRL yet you see as many punches thrown there if not more than the AFL so does it act as a deterrent? No, if someone is going to **** up in the heat of the moment the last thing that is on there mind is the fact they may get sent off.

Now for everyone saying it can be investigated by a third umpire without the play stopped. Yeah right. Imagine if Gaff was to run on and kick a goal while his opponent was lying on the ground unable to defend him while an investigation was ‘ongoing’. That would be amateur hour and would/could not be allowed to happen. So it would become seriously disruptive to play.

Can people please take a second to stop and think before they get all outraged and demand change?

 

[Kappa]

Well it can’t actually the play will need to be stopped. How are you going to get the player off the field without stopping it? Just some really poorly thought out knee jerk reactions

Did you even read my post? The 3rd umpire can decide if a send off is valid during play, after the decision is made the field umpire produces the card at the next stoppage. It's REALLY not that hard. Stoppages in play happen constantly in AFL

 

[Kappa]

As fair as someone being sent off wrongly....which will happen, make no mistake.

Why have any rules then? The umpires can just make mistakes. May as well just remove any rule the umpire can get wrong

 

[loki04]

Let me know how you feel if Cotchin does a Gaff to Pendles in the Grand Final this year.

CFC this is not like some new potential tactic that's just been made possible, how many grand finals has there been since it became AFL? 28?
How many have had your scenario? And would red carding have prevent them? No they wouldn't of.
1990 and 2004 are the only ones I can recall and 2004 Lynch blew his hammy new his day was done so red card system doesn't stop that.

People are getting caught up in hysteria over this and red carding would not deter a team if this was a tactic they want to employ. Neither will it stop heat of the moment angry testostorone and adrenaline filled young men.

 

[jmac70]

Why change the rules because of one stupid act?

 

[MyManLynch]

I don't think that's how it would have to work.

The play can go on while the Third Umpire checks footage. The decision can be made once the full review has been made, but doesn't necessarily need to hold up play.

Yes, once the review is complete, the Third umpire (or review umpire) informs main field umpire, then at the next stoppage, the Red Card is issued, player leaves the field immediately.

 

[Seedsfan]

Why have any rules then? The umpires can just make mistakes. May as well just remove any rule the umpire can get wrong

That can not possibly work. What happens if the player being reviewed goes on to kick a goal during the review and is then red carded? It is amateur hour and makes everyone in the game look stupid

 

[Baltimore Jack]

It’s not about the ones they play it’s about all the unnecessary stops in play we will have to look at shit. It is a terrible idea

There won't be any stops if its done by a match day referee

 

[CFC2010]

CFC this is not like some new potential tactic that's just been made possible, how many grand finals has there been since it became AFL? 28?
How many have had your scenario? And would red carding have prevent them? No they wouldn't of.
1990 and 2004 are the only ones I can recall and 2004 Lynch blew his hammy new his day was done so red card system doesn't stop that.

People are getting caught up in hysteria over this and red carding would not deter a team if this was a tactic they want to employ. Neither will it stop heat of the moment angry testostorone and adrenaline filled young men.

I know it wont stop it but I don't think the "Gaff's" should be advantaged while the "Brayshaw's" sit on the bench for the rest of the game.

I would be livid if it happened to my team in a Grand Final and we lost the game.......…...actually scrap that I would be hysterical.

 

[Kappa]

That can not possibly work. What happens if the player being reviewed goes on to kick a goal during the review and is then red carded? It is amateur hour and makes everyone in the game look stupid

What if there is no red card and he goes on to kick 5 goals for the rest of the game??? Makes the game look pretty stupid when you can get an advantage for your team by sniping the opponents with no repercussions until after the game ends.

You seem to think because you can think of abstract scenarios where the red card system isn't completely perfect that makes it worse than what we have now, which is just nonsense. It's objectively a much fairer system and will also result in less hospitalisations of players.

 

[Seedsfan]

What if there is no red card and he goes on to kick 5 goals for the rest of the game??? Makes the game look pretty stupid when you can get an advantage for your team by sniping the opponents with no repercussions until after the game ends.

You seem to think because you can think of abstract scenarios where the red card system isn't completely perfect that makes it worse than what we have now, which is just nonsense. It's objectively a much fairer system and will also result in less hospitalisations of players.

Lol, do you actually believe that? Because what do you base that on? Do you think it ever crossed Gaff’s mind that he wouldn’t get sent off. You see as many if not more big punches in the NRL and they have a send of rule so what effect does it have as it does not seem to work as a deterrent.

There is a reason we don’t have a red card system as the game does not need it and it would not benefit the game at all

 

[Seedsfan]

Yes, once the review is complete, the Third umpire (or review umpire) informs main field umpire, then at the next stoppage, the Red Card is issued, player leaves the field immediately.

No it can’t actually. If you are going to send someone off you can not be deciding that while the game goes on.

 

[Seedsfan]

There won't be any stops if its done by a match day referee

Yes there will ffs

 

[ThexderX]

What if there is no red card and he goes on to kick 5 goals for the rest of the game??? Makes the game look pretty stupid when you can get an advantage for your team by sniping the opponents with no repercussions until after the game ends.

You seem to think because you can think of abstract scenarios where the red card system isn't completely perfect that makes it worse than what we have now, which is just nonsense. It's objectively a much fairer system and will also result in less hospitalisations of players.

What if there is no red card and he goes on to kick 5 goals for the rest of the game??? Makes the game look pretty stupid when you can get an advantage for your team by sniping the opponents with no repercussions until after the game ends.

You seem to think because you can think of abstract scenarios where the red card system isn't completely perfect that makes it worse than what we have now, which is just nonsense. It's objectively a much fairer system and will also result in less hospitalisations of players.

At what point does the evening things up stop?

So if someone delibetately pushes someone in the back and the players pops a hammy, do we send off the pusher to even the game up?

Define what act constitutes a send off.

This rediculous idea that the game always has to be even...there is and will always be unevenness....part of the romance of the game.

 

[ThexderX]

Why does being rare mean it shouldn't be a rule? What's wrong with a good rule that only comes into effect rarely?

Decision time...does Nathan Brown get sent off for his bump tonight on Saad?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

From the stories I have been told, not sure we were beyond reproach in '58?

You go, and take a good hard look at yourself in the mirror.

Then you give yourself a good upper cut.

Don’t try that idle gossip, heresay on our esteemed posters.

Next thing you’ll suggest Hooker Harrison was giving the knuckle.
Or the weed was doing rough stuff.

Perish the thought.

 

[CFC2010]

Decision time...does Nathan Brown get sent off for his bump tonight on Saad?

No

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

You go, and take a good hard look at yourself in the mirror.

Then you give yourself a good upper cut.

Don’t try that idle gossip, heresay on our esteemed posters.

Next thing you’ll suggest Hooker Harrison was giving the knuckle.
Or the weed was doing rough stuff.

Perish the thought.

Barassi was asking for it!!!

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Barassi was asking for it!!!

Deserved it too.

 

[jonbe54]

At what point does the evening things up stop?

So if someone delibetately pushes someone in the back and the players pops a hammy, do we send off the pusher to even the game up?

Define what act constitutes a send off.

This rediculous idea that the game always has to be even...there is and will always be unevenness....part of the romance of the game.

Pure and utter sophistry, a push in the back is a physical confrontation whereas a punch to the face hard enough to kill some teeth is a quite simply criminal assault.

You can dance around the truth all you want but if that had happened on the street Gaff would have been facing serious time behind bars - and deservedly so.

Red card or not, stop trying to gild the Lilly - Gaff ASSAULTED his opponent - period.

 

[loki04]

Pure and utter sophistry, a push in the back is a physical confrontation whereas a punch to the face hard enough to kill some teeth is a quite simply criminal assault.

You can dance around the truth all you want but if that had happened on the street Gaff would have been facing serious time behind bars - and deservedly so.

Red card or not, stop trying to gild the Lilly - Gaff ASSAULTED his opponent - period.

At worst he would of got community service and fine.

Likely his lawyer gets him off on self defense for a deranged madman preventing him being able to walk down the street whilst physically assaulting him with body hits and bumps for over 50m whilst other means to deter him go ignored.

Stop bringing off field scenarios into a on field issue. The circumstances are vastly different to off field.

 

[noideaatall]

Should Nathan Brown have been given a red card?

 

[MyManLynch]

No it can’t actually. If you are going to send someone off you can not be deciding that while the game goes on.

Oh yes you can...main umpire hears decision (from 3rd umpire), next stoppage Red Card issued (shown on scoreboard).
Play resumes after stoppage.
How many times a game will it happen...rarely.
But we need it.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Why change the rules because of one stupid act?

Its the vibe of the thing.