Video technology has come a long way. Is it time for an AFL sin bin?

[WillHayward]

Introduce a sin bin to AFL, says Malthouse

AFL coaching legend Mick Malthouse says the league should introduce a sin bin rule.

www.zerohanger.com

So Im only talking about where an on the spot review shows an absolutely blatant act of thuggery and where a player is taken out of a game.

I'm thinking of incidents like Simpkin, Andrew Brayshaw

8

Andrew Brayshaw

Age

25

Ht

185cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

9.3

5star

M

2.6

3star

T

4.8

5star

CL

2.1

4star

D

18.4

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

10.8

5star

M

3.3

3star

T

4.8

5star

CL

3.1

4star

D

12.6

4star

K

6.0

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

2.6

3star

T

4.0

5star

CL

0.8

3star

and Brent Saker.

 

[Underarm]

Just like any review system, once you introduce it, umpires will feel like they have to use it, and eventually you'll end up with people being Ejected for 1-2 week hits (which might be overturned at the tribunal).

So when you consider what the system will eventually become, and you compare to how few dog acts that take a player out each season, it doesn't seem worth it.

 

[go_the_dockers]

As long as it is done using a replay, then no issues.

Webster should have been Red carded (no replacement), as should have Powell Pepper.

I think this is the quickest way to cut out the actions.

I think just save it for major incidents e.g. expecting 3 or more weeks at the tribunal.

 

[Jezzitizle]

Whilst I think the team of the victim deserves having that ability to level a game, I can’t see it being well implemented. There will v major controversies each week.

The only case it might work would be off the ball hits, high bumps are Russian roulette.

The other thing is we can’t unfairly penalise the big vic clubs, by taking away their favouritism at the match review panel.

 

[basashi]

Even with the video technology I do not tust the AFL to apply the rule fairly

 

[tombomb]

Please god, no.

There is already enough discussion about umpiring in the media.

Adding in 'should player X have been sent off?' and all the other issues around it would be insufferable.

 

[Back One Out]

I'm only talking about where an on the spot review shows an absolutely blatant act of thuggery and where a player is taken out of a game.

I'm thinking of incidents like Simpkin, Andrew Brayshaw and Brent Saker.

Agree in principle. It's crazy that AFL teams are not properly penalised for thug acts within each game. We're the only sports league in the world that allows a player to violently attack an opponent outside of the rules and not be sent off, disqualified, etc. Every other Australian football comp has the send off rule... But not the AFL... Weird.

The problem with changing the rules however is you say it's only "blatant acts of thuggery"... But we both know it will only be a matter of time before whiny fans and media are howling for players to be sent off for every minor transgression. Thin edge of the wedge, etc...

Cοckheads like Jon Ralph and Damian Barrett will be all over the airwaves whining about the inconsistency and demanding red cards for mistimed bumps. That's the last thing our great game needs... Let's not give the stagers, floppers and actors any further encouragement to con umpires and cheat their way to a numerical advantage...

The blatant acts of thuggery are so relatively infrequent, that it's probably best just to deal with them harshly via tribunal & suspensions whenever they occur. I don't think we really need to increase the penalties as a deterrent. It's more about the inherent unfairness of a team being left 1 player short during a game. It probably should be evened up via red card.

If we could somehow make it a set-in-stone rule that the sin-bin & video review will only ever be used to send off thugs for deliberate violent acts which cause severe injury (knockout punches, broken jaws, etc) then I wouldn't be against it.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

It's well overdue.

Why should a team get penalised twice for having their own player knocked out?

1. They're down a concussed player for the rest of the match, while the offending player continues to allow normal rotations for his team.

2. Their immediate opposition for a spot in the Top 8/Top 4 often becomes the major beneficiary from having the suspended player missing the following week if they play that team.

 

[ScrappyDo]

Introduce a sin bin to AFL, says Malthouse

AFL coaching legend Mick Malthouse says the league should introduce a sin bin rule.

www.zerohanger.com

So Im only talking about where an on the spot review shows an absolutely blatant act of thuggery and where a player is taken out of a game.

I'm thinking of incidents like Simpkin, Andrew Brayshaw and Brent Saker.

In principle it's time. However in reality l don't think it can be properly applied.
If you gat a situation like Maynard's collision with Gus Brayshaw then you could almost guarantee he would have been sent off, which would have been wrong.
Harsher penalties have seen striking virtually eliminated so that would the obvious first step. See what happens from there.

 

[WillHayward]

I like the idea of umpires being probably trained - must be a unanimous decision (3 on-field and 2 video = 5 umpires) - after all 5 have viewed the footage. And injured player must be unable to take the field. Also if player is sent off - then injured player isnt allowed back on (no miraculous recoveries).

I see it only being used maybe once a year at most.

 

[go_the_dockers]

I like the idea of umpires being probably trained - must be a unanimous decision (3 on-field and 2 video = 5 umpires) - after all 5 have viewed the footage. And injured player must be unable to take the field. Also if player is sent off - then injured player isnt allowed back on (no miraculous recoveries).

I see it only being used maybe once a year at most.

Powell Pepper ?
Webster ?


I think it would have been used twice already in preseason. Maybe 8 to 10 times a year.

 

[The 747]

Whilst I think the team of the victim deserves having that ability to level a game, I can’t see it being well implemented. There will v major controversies each week.

The only case it might work would be off the ball hits, high bumps are Russian roulette.

The other thing is we can’t unfairly penalise the big vic clubs, by taking away their favouritism at the match review panel.

#VICBIAS getting an early run this season I see.

 

[NeutralFan]

1000% Yes
Pretty silly to think a jaw punch, blatant snipe to the head doesn't get someone sent off.

Agree it shouldn't be a field umpire decision however, they could send it up to ARC or something and decide how malicious, intended it looks.

 

[RUNVS]

Not a sin bin as such but I like the idea that if a player gets a concussion due to a suspendable act if that player is subbed out the player who caused the concussion is forcibly subbed out too.

 

[NeutralFan]

Not a sin bin as such but I like the idea that if a player gets a concussion due to a suspendable act if that player is subbed out the player who caused the concussion is forcibly subbed out too.

Rather penalize someone based on the action, not the outcome. Concussion isn't a possibility if the offender doesn't do the action at all.

Pickett on Smith had a lot of potential to concuss, even though Smith was able to get up, would've been fine with Pickett sent off.

 

[RUNVS]

Rather penalize someone based on the action, not the outcome. Concussion isn't a possibility if the offender doesn't do the action at all.

Pickett on Smith had a lot of potential to concuss, even though Smith was able to get up, would've been fine with Pickett sent off.

Penalising the outcome though at least ensures a correct decision though as a concussion means (almost certainly) that the other player hit them in the head.

 

[Jezzitizle]

#VICBIAS getting an early run this season I see.

There’s no offseason for vicbias

 

[kaiserchief13]

If red card does the offending players team play 17 on field the rest of the game or just lose that player for the game?

 

[RUNVS]

If red card does the offending players team play 17 on field the rest of the game or just lose that player for the game?

I imagine just lose the player for the game, so they will be down a rotation.

 

[Shane Heard]

It’s a contact sport last time I looked.

Perform an illegal hit and miss games. That’s how it works ..unless you’re Collingwood halfbacker in a preliminary final who is an integral member of said teams back 6.

 

[Daka]

I'm happy for a sin bin to be implemented if it's done with a video review & a 3rd party umpire that is not on-field.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Just don’t think it’s needed. Huge decrease in the sort of incidents that would qualify. Whatever is being done is working.

The reason there’s been such a visceral reaction is it’s so rare.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

No, players will get punished, after the match, don't need umpires messing up the game even more.

 

[Kappa]

No, players will get punished, after the match, don't need umpires messing up the game even more.

The game is already messed up when an act of thuggery is rewarded by a man advantage the rest of the match.

Why should thuggery get a reward and help your team win??

There is no good argument for not having a sin bin in the AFL.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

The game is already messed up when an act of thuggery is rewarded by a man advantage the rest of the match.

Why should thuggery get a reward and help your team win??

There is no good argument for not having a sin bin in the AFL.

Players barely hit each other anymore, so it's not really an issue. It's a much more watered down and "safer" sport than it was decades ago when it was way more brutal. Thuggery? Lol, you're making it seem like there's John Bourke moments every game. There's a perfect counter argument, there's consequences after the match, players barely even hit each other anymore, and umpires are egotistic and make rash decisions. Whispers in the sky is a good example of umpire corruption. Less intervention by umpires the better.