Red cards in AFL?

[dave123]

Questions: does a player have to be permanently out of the game for a red card to apply? How do you determine that level of severity at the time of the incident? Might there be cases where players begin feigning concussion in order to draw a red card for an illegal act behind the play? Regardless, what if the injured player is permitted to come back on the field after the 20 minute mandatory break? Should the other team remain at a numerical disadvantage?

As far as I'm concerned this opens a Pandora's box of issues. It's laughable to suggest that soccer offers a successful example of the application of red cards, where players are constantly flopping for free kicks like they've been shot and officials make inconsistent calls that unfairly cost sides games.

Can you tell me how you flop a busted jaw and hag your teeth missing

A doctor could simply talk to the umpires in umps dugout ...umps watch the replay in that dugout

Decision made


So tell me how would a player fake a busted jaw and teeth missing ....

Unless he’s from Collingwood .......sorry thread needs some humour ...lol but you get my point ....

 

[dave123]

Look at bigger picture people

Kids watching this ....you do that at Auskick you get sent off

Also if the game continues to have these incidents parents choose others sports for their kids over AFL.

It’s not a good look ....

 

[Tbonefreo]

Drs are not the most truthful people on the planet. I would not trust their word in the context of a gf/important contest.

Those guys are on the take as much as anyone.

 

[Westicle]

A Modest Proposal to implement red cards to Australian Football without significant umpiring discretion being required:

Thesis: A no-fault red card system could be implemented without a connotation of punishment or wrong-doing as a display of sportsmanship and show of solidarity for the injured player. Where any player is removed from the game as the result of a head injury caused in a contest with an opposition player, both players involved in the contest shall sit out the game unless they are both medically cleared to return.

Rationale: There are several very different reasons to implement a red card system that are not necessarily all aligned.

1. Specific deterrence: eg. Andrew Gaff is a dog, he should be punished.
2. General deterrence: eg. Players who know certain actions may result in a red card will be likely to avoid those actions.
3. Fairness: eg. Fremantle has lost a player from the game and now plays at a disadvantage.

It is important to distinguish between these goals when considering appropriate incentives.

Point 1 is arguably covered by the Tribunal function of the AFL - if we disregard points 2 & 3, there is no need for a "red card system" as we can punish specific players for their actions as harshly as needed. If you're not concerned about general deterrence or fairness of the specific game this is the end of the conversation.

Point 2 is trickier, as the Tribunal does provide a disincentive to play in ways that harm other players. However if you are Matthew Lloyd in your last game of AFL football trying to win the flag for your team, a suspension might be irrelevant to you. It also is a strong incentive for all players to meet the duty of care they owe to other players as their fortune is tied together regardless of intent.

Point 3 argues strongly in favour of this system. Entirely disregarding points 1 & 2, a concern many people have with concussion/head injury is the fairness or equality of the contest. A contest is fair when both sides have equal numbers of conscious players. This is achieved by maintaining consistent players numbers and has no reference to punishment or fault. Ultimate good sportsmanship would suggest the team advantaged by such a situation would voluntarily sit a player out (also demonstrating a real concern for the welfare of the injured player, rather than the continuing contest).

Finally, this (largely) removes the need for subjective interpretation by the umpires as to when a player is withdrawn from the game. If there is any contest resulting in a concussion/head injury, both teams lose a player. Obviously the bona fides of any player's health concern would be relevant, and the AFL could severely punish a team which exploited the rules by eg. faking a head injury. But there would be no need for a subjective interpretation of the rule on the field.

Examples: (in light of my own team's experience):

In the first quarter of the 2017 preliminary final, whilst contesting the ball Trent Cotchin makes negligent contact with Dylan Shiel resulting in a concussion. The MRP later determines that he contested the ball fairly and was not at fault. In this case, specific deterrence is not relevant and the only outcome is that GWS plays without their best midfielder. Under the above proposal, as the (not at fault) player involved in the contest with Shiel, Cotchin is required to sit out the game unless Shiel is fit to return to the field. Richmond and GWS both play with 21 players and neither team is disadvantaged by the injury. There is no fault or punishment implied by this outcome and it is unrelated to any MRP/Tribunal referrals which may result from the same incident.

In the first quarter of round 14, 2017, Bachar Houli swings his arm behind him and knocks out Jed Lamb, who does not return to the game. Richmond receives an advantage playing against 21 men for the remainder of the game. Houli is later cited by the MRP for intentional high contact and suspended for four weeks. Under the above proposal, both Lamb and Houli would sit out the game so Carlton is not disadvantaged. The Tribunal would then consider the incident independently (although the fact that Houli has already sat out the initial game may be taken in to consideration as "time served" by the Tribunal if relevant).

In all cases it is hoped that the players will sub-consciously recognise that their fate during the game is tied to the safety of the opposition players and encourage them to do their utmost not to do anything which might impact the long-term health of their colleagues. In addition, they have the opportunity to consider/receive updates on the well-being of the injured player which they would not have if they continued playing.

Conclusion: This is a wild departure from the common understanding of red cards. It may not be popular, especially if it is misunderstood as a form of punishment. It is my hope that people can focus on the fairness of the contest and the long term health and safety of players, and recognise that removing an uninjured player from the game is a small price to pay for achieving those goals. Eventually it might even be appreciated as a codified gesture of good sportsmanship and respect between all players.

I'm sure this will spark some heated discussion, but please bear in mind:

• The intention behind the proposal is NOT punitive - the fact that "innocent" players may sit out a game of football is a feature of the system, not a side-effect;
• The intention behind the proposal is to not unduly prejudice a team when a player suffers a head injury and hopefully create a huge incentive for players to protect each other as a side-effect;
• The proposal co-exists with the existing MRO/Tribunal, which is the only system with jurisdiction to determine guilt or punitive outcomes; and
• Footy is only a game, and sitting out isn't the end of the world - it happens every time a player is seriously injured.

 

[liz]

Daft notion if you ignore the culpability of the opposition player in causing the head injury. The underlying premise of fairness presumes that all players are created equal and that it just comes down to numbers. That is clearly not the case, so is it fair that a star player from one team should have to sit out a game because they’re involved in accidental head contact to a minor player from the other side?

What if the player who gets injured initiates the action and comes off second best?

And while head injuries that cause a player to sit out the remainder of a game are unfortunate, why is this any different to any other game ending injury in terms of equal number of players on the two teams? If a player twists and injured his knee or ankle badly, should the closest opposition player then be forced to Ali’s sit out the rest of the game? If not, why not?

 

[Ron The Bear]

My first thought is that it's open to manipulation. The 22nd-best player from side A drops his head into the best player from side B and cops a knock. Club doctor subsequently rules he is unfit to return. Net win to side A.

If change is needed, punish harder. Too late to change the rules for Gaff, but 8- and 10-week suspensions weren't uncommon in the early years of the game.

And/or allow an unlimited number of substitutions (as opposed to interchange).

 

[sataris]

I also would like to see Multi-ball.

 

[And_ROOS]

Why aren't clubs allowed to draw from the emergency list. What happened to Brayshaw was horrid, and in circumstances like that he should have been swapped out.

Allow clubs to swap an incapacitated player with someone off the emergency list during matches if it occurs due to something illegal by the opposition.

I.e head knock concussion? Accident, it happens, no emergency allowed.
Gaff punches out Brayshaw, allow Fremantle to replace him with one of their emergencies at the game.

 

[Sherrinator]

Why aren't clubs allowed to draw from the emergency list. What happened to Brayshaw was horrid, and in circumstances like that he should have been swapped out.

Allow clubs to swap an incapacitated player with someone off the emergency list during matches if it occurs due to something illegal by the opposition.

I.e head knock concussion? Accident, it happens, no emergency allowed.
Gaff punches out Brayshaw, allow Fremantle to replace him with one of their emergencies at the game.

No brainer

 

[dave123]

Drs are not the most truthful people on the planet. I would not trust their word in the context of a gf/important contest.

Those guys are on the take as much as anyone.

The afl employs 9 for all 9 games....

 

[HTT]

I don't think we need red cards or any sort of send off rule

A) It's a contact sport, sometimes people get hurt. Stiff. Deal with it.
B) There's no issue with clubs sending out hitman type players to take out an influential opposition player, there's no premeditated acts to deter. It's only spur of the moment acts. Would the thought of a red card have deterred Gaff? He clearly felt pretty bad after it, if his own emotions didn't come into his mind before swinging an arm, would a red card have? I doubt it. Point out to me an incident that would have been deterred by a red card in recent years.
C) It would literally have to be for absolute no-brainers. 1 or 2 per year incidents tops. Otherwise we enter an area where things become inconsistent - especially if we're lumping it on umpires who already struggle to officiate our stupid rules.

 

[mr bagcroft]

I don't think we need red cards or any sort of send off rule

A) It's a contact sport, sometimes people get hurt. Stiff. Deal with it.
B) There's no issue with clubs sending out hitman type players to take out an influential opposition player, there's no premeditated acts to deter. It's only spur of the moment acts. Would the thought of a red card have deterred Gaff? He clearly felt pretty bad after it, if his own emotions didn't come into his mind before swinging an arm, would a red card have? I doubt it. Point out to me an incident that would have been deterred by a red card in recent years.
C) It would literally have to be for absolute no-brainers. 1 or 2 per year incidents tops. Otherwise we enter an area where things become inconsistent - especially if we're lumping it on umpires who already struggle to officiate our stupid rules.

This will go well for you. Hang in there.

 

[Power Raid]

offer the player a red card and if they don't accept it and then found guilty at the tribunal, triple the penalty

 

[Power Raid]

I don't think we need red cards or any sort of send off rule

A) It's a contact sport, sometimes people get hurt. Stiff. Deal with it.
B) There's no issue with clubs sending out hitman type players to take out an influential opposition player, there's no premeditated acts to deter. It's only spur of the moment acts. Would the thought of a red card have deterred Gaff? He clearly felt pretty bad after it, if his own emotions didn't come into his mind before swinging an arm, would a red card have? I doubt it. Point out to me an incident that would have been deterred by a red card in recent years.
C) It would literally have to be for absolute no-brainers. 1 or 2 per year incidents tops. Otherwise we enter an area where things become inconsistent - especially if we're lumping it on umpires who already struggle to officiate our stupid rules.

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/PrecedentAULA/2011/9.pdf

 

[HTT]

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/PrecedentAULA/2011/9.pdf

How many incidents from the past decade would a red card deter?

 

[Vapor]

I don't think we need red cards or any sort of send off rule

A) It's a contact sport, sometimes people get hurt. Stiff. Deal with it.

Rugby Union, Rugby League, American Football and Ice Hockey are contact sports and all have some type of red card or ejection.

Why is Australian rules football so special?

 

[HTT]

Rugby Union, Rugby League, American Football and Ice Hockey are contact sports and all have some type of red card or ejection.

Why is Australian rules football so special?

Australian rules is not any of those sports. I'm assuming all those have various reasons for introducing those rules. I'm also assuming players don't get ejected in those sports to deal with it being 'unfair' for the other to be one done
Is there a safety issue that red cards would fix? I don't think so.

 

[And_ROOS]

What I find interesting is people instantly dismissing cards saying it won't work in our code, I play in a pretty decent league that makes use of yellow cards (12 minutes off or so) and red cards (off for rest of match).
The umpires only bring out the red for the absolute worst offences. And the yellows come out for people that do stupid stuff that could potentially cause harm. I don't think the AFL would need the yellow card, but the red cards work. I have played in teams where our opponent has a player with a screw loose and he is a danger to other players. They inevitable do something stupid like a hit behind play, and they usually get caught and sent off. Doesn't happen too frequently, but enough that a red card is warranted.

Same for the AFL. A Gaff like incident doesn't happen too often, but imagine back in 2004 if Lynch had knocked out Wakelin in the GF. Whats the point in a 10 game suspension for a player retiring that season. If they had won the flag then who would have cared. But send him off and it puts the opposition down a rotation.
Red card should then also incur a 7 game suspension automatically. That stops people from going "lets get a shit player to knock out a good one" despite the fact that never happens in the AFL anyway.

 

[Power Raid]

How many incidents from the past decade would a red card deter?

I'm not sure red cards are a deterrent, as most red card-able offences are committed by people who can't control their emotions, behaviour and actions. It's a little like a child who loses control, where time out isn't a deterrent but a mechanism to mitigate further issues.

This is why I referenced the criminal liability for the AFL bosses. It's all about covering their arse, which is completely appropriate in today's society and football now being a place of work.

 

[Whiskers]

What I find interesting is people instantly dismissing cards saying it won't work in our code, I play in a pretty decent league that makes use of yellow cards (12 minutes off or so) and red cards (off for rest of match).
The umpires only bring out the red for the absolute worst offences. And the yellows come out for people that do stupid stuff that could potentially cause harm. I don't think the AFL would need the yellow card, but the red cards work. I have played in teams where our opponent has a player with a screw loose and he is a danger to other players. They inevitable do something stupid like a hit behind play, and they usually get caught and sent off. Doesn't happen too frequently, but enough that a red card is warranted.

Same for the AFL. A Gaff like incident doesn't happen too often, but imagine back in 2004 if Lynch had knocked out Wakelin in the GF. Whats the point in a 10 game suspension for a player retiring that season. If they had won the flag then who would have cared. But send him off and it puts the opposition down a rotation.
Red card should then also incur a 7 game suspension automatically. That stops people from going "lets get a shit player to knock out a good one" despite the fact that never happens in the AFL anyway.

Agree
I don’t see red cards being new to our game or much of a change at all. Cards exist in our game, just not in this league.
A red card is hardly a massive step.

 

[turtles]

Media and fans are outraged by the MRP and tribunal when the have days to review it. They are also outraged by umpiring decisions and third umpire calls.

If you want a red card rule then you have to be willing to accept poor decisions on when the umpires or third umpires have to make the decision in real game time with little to no time to review it or gather clear evidence.

I am not opposed to it, but the umpires have been put under too much pressure, giving them more and more rules to officiate.
Forcing them to make this decision in game will lead to correct and incorrect red cards/non red cards.

 

[Snarls Barkley]

I’m still in the ‘no’ camp but I’m not totally against it if it was introduced.

Still think there is too many grey areas and I don’t trust the decision makers to get the send off decisions right. We still can’t get the score reviews right so I wouldn’t trust a video umpire to make the right calls either.

What constitutes a red card? Think everyone agrees that the Gaff, Hall, Bugg punches would definitely be red. Is Jeremy Cameron’s a red? I thought that was just as deliberate but many would argue he was making a football play and shouldn’t be a red. Is Nyhuis tackle on Gray a red? Is Dangerfield’s tackle on Kreuzer a red?

 

[Underarm]

offer the player a red card and if they don't accept it and then found guilty at the tribunal, triple the penalty

You don't work for Metro do you?

 

[Tbonefreo]

The afl employs 9 for all 9 games....

 

[Channels]

I’m still in the ‘no’ camp but I’m not totally against it if it was introduced.

Still think there is too many grey areas and I don’t trust the decision makers to get the send off decisions right. We still can’t get the score reviews right so I wouldn’t trust a video umpire to make the right calls either.

What constitutes a red card? Think everyone agrees that the Gaff, Hall, Bugg punches would definitely be red. Is Jeremy Cameron’s a red? I thought that was just as deliberate but many would argue he was making a football play and shouldn’t be a red. Is Nyhuis tackle on Gray a red? Is Dangerfield’s tackle on Kreuzer a red?

I agree with this post, too many grey areas because of the MRP lotto.

Another example is Burton knocking out Higgins earlier this year. Could have tackled, chose to bump, general consensus was 3-4 week suspension yet cleared by the MRP. Biggest issue will be a red card offence yet subsequently cleared by the MRP.