Did the umpire who basically concussed (hit the player in the head with their hip while running) an injured player get fined/reported/suspended as well?
AFLW Rd 9 Essendon vs Richmond Indigenous Round. 26/10 8:15pm
- Thread starter Truetiger
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
Why would they?
I highly doubt the AFL will win this appeal. They have to prove she intentionally pushed the player into the ump. There is no benefit to doing such a thing. Careless, yes; intentional, no chance.
The AFL contended that forcefully pushing an opponent into an umpire is a clear breach of the duty of care owed to umpires.
Richmond submitted that the contact was not intentional but merely careless, as the push wasn't forceful but umpire contact occurred due to the position of the umpire and Sheerin's understanding of an umpire's usual movements in backing out of a stoppage.
The Tigers contended the umpire fell due to location of the contact made to her, which was low down and therefore had a destabilising effect, rather than being due to the force of the push.
The AFL contended that forcefully pushing an opponent into an umpire is a clear breach of the duty of care owed to umpires.
Richmond submitted that the contact was not intentional but merely careless, as the push wasn't forceful but umpire contact occurred due to the position of the umpire and Sheerin's understanding of an umpire's usual movements in backing out of a stoppage.
The Tigers contended the umpire fell due to location of the contact made to her, which was low down and therefore had a destabilising effect, rather than being due to the force of the push.
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
Intentional presumes control over the outcome. Nascrewen was putting in her best work, weight-wise, backing into Eilish to deny her a clear run (or any run for that matter) it's not like Eilish had absolute control. She just wanted the opponent out of the way (possibly entitled to a free - but this is Richmond), and she HAD TO push forward given the pressure coming back toward her. THEY WERE NOT STANDING SIDE BY SIDE, like other pairings.
I do think it was careless, she should control that situation better, and if the maximum penalty on the table is a fine, then that is what it is. However, the potential for injury to the umpire is real, and they are a servant to the game, so I would not be dirty on a week penalty. However, that said, there is no scope for that I believe, so it must be a fine.
I do think it was careless, she should control that situation better, and if the maximum penalty on the table is a fine, then that is what it is. However, the potential for injury to the umpire is real, and they are a servant to the game, so I would not be dirty on a week penalty. However, that said, there is no scope for that I believe, so it must be a fine.
Of course they wouldn't, I wasn't being serious. Just frustrated that almost literally every week, a player gets fined for making contact with an umpire, but then an umpire does the exact same thing.
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
It's extremely rare for an umpire to intentionally touch a player at AFL/W level. They are nearly always the recipient of it.
I do think the AFL gets a little prescriptive at times on contact and might be better advised by the umpire in question. However, I get they are trying to create a safe workplace, and they must. It's law!
Area51
Club Legend
- Jun 6, 2022
- 1,094
- 3,900
- AFL Club
- Richmond
They don't seem to mind compromising our players' safety though - Prestia getting ko'd by dog Stewart. Fail to award free kicks that would protect our players. They pick and choose when they want to follow workplace safety laws.
TigermanM2
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 7, 2013
- 8,344
- 26,798
- AFL Club
- Richmond
If the AFL were serious about stamping out umpire contact they would immediately scrap rules like rucks nominating etc where they actually wait while a stack of players enter stoppages. Just throw the bloody ball up.
Nah, lets just fine everyone instead. I guess it keeps the boardroom liquor cupboard stocked with the finest of the single malts.
Nah, lets just fine everyone instead. I guess it keeps the boardroom liquor cupboard stocked with the finest of the single malts.
Last edited:
EILISH Sheerin is free to play in week 10 after the AFLW Appeal Board dismissed a challenge brought by the AFL in a 45-minute-long hearing on Thursday night.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/1250989
https://www.afl.com.au/news/1250989
Good, as it should be. AFL had little to no chance of overturning this, waste of peoples time and just undermines their appointed panel members. Good to see the Appeal board backed the tribunal, no former player who sits as a member on it would ever view Eilish’s action as deliberate. A fine was sufficient.
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
You just can't compare umpires and players - totally different situations.
Cdog71
Norm Smith Medallist
- Sep 21, 2017
- 5,380
- 11,838
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Never good seeing an umpire take a tumble but seeing the appeal board used all of 45 min to dismiss the three reasons for the appeal.
It’s pretty disappointing the AFL chose to do it.
The disconnect between the AFL the game and the support structures around the game, its sh.t.
It’s pretty disappointing the AFL chose to do it.
The disconnect between the AFL the game and the support structures around the game, its sh.t.
Area51
Club Legend
- Jun 6, 2022
- 1,094
- 3,900
- AFL Club
- Richmond
So how are the legal obligations to provide a safe workplace any different?
Was patently ridiculous, to demonstrate intentional would need to see sheerin maliciously push her opponent , complete off the ball, instead she was clearing the way after being blocked , no one in right mind would determine that was deliberate
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
You will have noticed that players tackle each other, whereas that is not part of the umpires brief. That's probably enough to comment on for both of us.
