Contact with Umpires

[haloman]

This issue is always a hard one. Umpires are always in the line of fire when they throw the ball up and always will be.........It's part of our game. No one in any sport should be making intentional contact with an umpire......we all know that. Having seen the Kirk and Shaw incidents in the past week the question needs to be asked..........Is it time for umpires to harden the hell up are are the penelties being handed out appropriate for the crime. What the hell is "Negligent" contact anyway? The Kirk one gets me the most. He was clearly wrestling for position with an opponent AND had his eyes on the ball at the time. It was certainly not his intention to make contact with the umpire in question. The Umpire was CLEARLY running backwards and ran straight into Kirks line as he was bumped by his opponent. His coach obviously has no idea what the specific ruling is and niether do the match review committee or the tribunal. What do you think the ruling should be?

[Strawb]

Don't touch them like shaw did. The problem is that the AFL has NO IDEA on how the run a competition. Accidental contact with an umpire like him running backwards and a player hitting him is sometimes unavoidable. But what Shaw did was plain stupid he knows the rules and he shouldn't have touched him.

[haloman]

Yeah I guess that's what I was trying to get at. There is a big difference between Kirks and Shaws but they will probably end up with roughly the same fine with the tribunal now claiming "precident". It anoys me the same stuff happens every year and the only logical rule the came up to try and help the situation they scraped...........Makes no sence. But the AFL rearly does I suppose.

[Pup]

Don't touch them like shaw did. The problem is that the AFL has NO IDEA on how the run a competition. Accidental contact with an umpire like him running backwards and a player hitting him is sometimes unavoidable. But what Shaw did was plain stupid he knows the rules and he shouldn't have touched him.

Rubbish

The Players know where the umpires are running... They have a corridor, the simple fact is the players should not be in it... Simple, every player knows it..!

[Strawb]

Don't touch them like shaw did. The problem is that the AFL has NO IDEA on how the run a competition. Accidental contact with an umpire like him running backwards and a player hitting him is sometimes unavoidable. But what Shaw did was plain stupid he knows the rules and he shouldn't have touched him.

Rubbish

The Players know where the umpires are running... They have a corridor, the simple fact is the players should not be in it... Simple, every player knows it..!

I agree but disagree on umpires running. On Shaw he knew what he was doing he is a knob

[JK]

Don't touch them like shaw did. The problem is that the AFL has NO IDEA on how the run a competition. Accidental contact with an umpire like him running backwards and a player hitting him is sometimes unavoidable. But what Shaw did was plain stupid he knows the rules and he shouldn't have touched him.

Rubbish

The Players know where the umpires are running... They have a corridor, the simple fact is the players should not be in it... Simple, every player knows it..!

It's hard to argue with that given the knowledge players have of where an Umpire is intending to move, but IMHO as usual, the AFL introduced a rule for a reason and then ran too far with it.

How many umpires have been injured over the years in footy due to collisions? I can't recall an incident.

[rogernumber10]

Matthew Nicholls - cracked disc in his back last year when Shane Tuck ran into him (not deliberately).
Matt Stevic - broken ribs last year
Brett Allen - broken ribs twice in his last two years
Bryan Sheehan - career ended when he collected twice in his last three games, due to internal bleeding and being a haemophiliac (spelling????)
Matt James - hip, affected him for two years but now fit again
Derek Humphery-Smith - hip

I can probably give you 8-10 more if I think about it for a while, but there's 7-8 umpires a year that miss anything from 1-2 weeks to a couple of months. It's just they don't get any publicity because they are umpires and nobody notices when they aren't there for a period of time, unless it's Darren Goldspink, who everybody knew.
None of it is deliberate but players keep setting up in the one area that is the umpire's space, going backwards from a bounce.

[JK]

Matthew Nicholls - cracked disc in his back last year when Shane Tuck ran into him (not deliberately).
Matt Stevic - broken ribs last year
Brett Allen - broken ribs twice in his last two years
Bryan Sheehan - career ended when he collected twice in his last three games, due to internal bleeding and being a haemophiliac (spelling????)
Matt James - hip, affected him for two years but now fit again
Derek Humphery-Smith - hip

I can probably give you 8-10 more if I think about it for a while, but there's 7-8 umpires a year that miss anything from 1-2 weeks to a couple of months. It's just they don't get any publicity because they are umpires and nobody notices when they aren't there for a period of time, unless it's Darren Goldspink, who everybody knew.
None of it is deliberate but players keep setting up in the one area that is the umpire's space, going backwards from a bounce.

OK thanks mate, Ill put my hand up and say I wasn't aware of those ... No problem with the rule then

[haloman]

The thing that surprises me here is this corridor behind when the umpire bounces or throws the ball up. I thought that was a good idea. After the Kirk incident the commentators were discussing it and they said the AFL had done away with the rule protecting that space behind the umpire, which is precisely why Kirk was in that space in the first place. I thought that was a good rule. Does anyone know if that is true? If so I find that amazing. I thought protecting the space behind an umpire was a sencable and practicle way to cut down on the incidents. Is it another case of the AFL letting slip a golden opportunity to help out the players and simplify things?

[Punk Rooster]

Matthew Nicholls - cracked disc in his back last year when Shane Tuck ran into him (not deliberately).
Matt Stevic - broken ribs last year
Brett Allen - broken ribs twice in his last two years
Bryan Sheehan - career ended when he collected twice in his last three games, due to internal bleeding and being a haemophiliac (spelling????)
Matt James - hip, affected him for two years but now fit again
Derek Humphery-Smith - hip

I can probably give you 8-10 more if I think about it for a while, but there's 7-8 umpires a year that miss anything from 1-2 weeks to a couple of months. It's just they don't get any publicity because they are umpires and nobody notices when they aren't there for a period of time, unless it's Darren Goldspink, who everybody knew.
None of it is deliberate but players keep setting up in the one area that is the umpire's space, going backwards from a bounce.

with all respect to umpires, & the fact they aren't combatants, this list of injuries is not really comparable to the injuries footballers recieve- if any club had that injurie list for the entire season, they'd be thrilled.

[Rik E Boy]

With the AFL changing the rules every five minutes the last thing the league needs are injuries to the umpires. Shaw is a very silly boy. In the AFL, things become 'flavour of the month' and with the Kirk decision last week this month's flavour might be a very bitter sauce to go on this Pie.

regards,

REB

[rogernumber10]

The thing that surprises me here is this corridor behind when the umpire bounces or throws the ball up. I thought that was a good idea. After the Kirk incident the commentators were discussing it and they said the AFL had done away with the rule protecting that space behind the umpire, which is precisely why Kirk was in that space in the first place. I thought that was a good rule. Does anyone know if that is true? If so I find that amazing. I thought protecting the space behind an umpire was a sencable and practicle way to cut down on the incidents. Is it another case of the AFL letting slip a golden opportunity to help out the players and simplify things?

the rule on the corridor behind the umps got put up at the pre-season commission meeting where rushed behinds rule was bought in. Commission said they didn't want more lines on the ground and that that this was already covered in the rule book. the commission went back to the laws committee, umpires and tribunal and instructed the umpires that they wanted to see free kicks paid if there was contact made to an umpire when it could have been avoided by a player, that they wanted to see players reported if they were going into the space behind umpire when told not to (hence Kirk report) and also wanted to see suspensions if there was anything untoward with an umpire or contact that resulted in a serious injury. Guess we will see what happens Monday, but all clubs got a memo in writing six days before round one that this was coming, instead of bringing in a rule. Hasn't got much publicity until now, when a player has gone to the tribunal instead of the fines that have been handed out for the last 3-4 years. They have moved away from the fines because the contact hasn't stopped over the last couple of years. Hope that covers it.

[rogernumber10]

Matthew Nicholls - cracked disc in his back last year when Shane Tuck ran into him (not deliberately).
Matt Stevic - broken ribs last year
Brett Allen - broken ribs twice in his last two years
Bryan Sheehan - career ended when he collected twice in his last three games, due to internal bleeding and being a haemophiliac (spelling????)
Matt James - hip, affected him for two years but now fit again
Derek Humphery-Smith - hip

I can probably give you 8-10 more if I think about it for a while, but there's 7-8 umpires a year that miss anything from 1-2 weeks to a couple of months. It's just they don't get any publicity because they are umpires and nobody notices when they aren't there for a period of time, unless it's Darren Goldspink, who everybody knew.
None of it is deliberate but players keep setting up in the one area that is the umpire's space, going backwards from a bounce.

with all respect to umpires, & the fact they aren't combatants, this list of injuries is not really comparable to the injuries footballers recieve- if any club had that injurie list for the entire season, they'd be thrilled.

The fact they aren't combatants means they shouldn't get any serious contact injuries. Umpires should only miss games because of form or things like stress injuries - muscle tears etc.

[Punk Rooster]

Matthew Nicholls - cracked disc in his back last year when Shane Tuck ran into him (not deliberately).

with all respect to umpires, & the fact they aren't combatants, this list of injuries is not really comparable to the injuries footballers recieve- if any club had that injurie list for the entire season, they'd be thrilled.

The fact they aren't combatants means they shouldn't get any serious contact injuries. Umpires should only miss games because of form or things like stress injuries - muscle tears etc.

when accidents occurr in general life, both parties are generally at fault- the above with Shane Tuck, surely the Umpire has some responsibility to avoid a collision? I've seen incidences where Umpires have run into players, yet no fines apply. It's this hypocrisy I'm against, not the fact that the Umpirs should be protected.

[footy1992]

when accidents occurr in general life, both parties are generally at fault- the above with Shane Tuck, surely the Umpire has some responsibility to avoid a collision? I've seen incidences where Umpires have run into players, yet no fines apply. It's this hypocrisy I'm against, not the fact that the Umpirs should be protected.

Hypocrisy? OK if your against the fact that umpires shouldn't be protected, how about when a player that makes a fatal mistake during a game they get abused by the entire stadium just like the umpire does? hypocrisy you say?

[haloman]

To me the entire issue of umpire contact is a tricky one for a number of reasons. I can't see how it helps the games image if a player is punished for accidental contact to an umpire EVEN if it causes an injury to that umpire. The fact that they are not combatants really doesn't come into it for UNLESS the contact is intentional. Then throw the book at the offender. Umpires, water boys, runners, trainers............. they all find themselves at times in situations where they are in the thick of the action during a contact sport.............and accidents do happen. For me IF a player can be adjudged to have his eyes and total focus on the ball when contact is made itshould be ONLY a free kick to the oppostion. If the offending players line of site CLEARLY factors in where the umpire is standing and he still makes contact........he should get games because that is careless and reckless IMO.

[HH3]

I think if the players eyes are on the ball...and he has no idea where the umpire is...that he should be fine. footy moves at a pretty fast pace and a player gets paid to attack the footy, he gets paid to chase and tag...all of these things need him to be fully concentrated on the ball. Ive made contact with the umps in amateur games and always apologize and they're fine with it. usually have a bit of a laugh about it.

I think they should have kept the corridor behind the umpire rule. I cant really understand what the above posts are saying about it. Did they lose it or keep it? They dont need lines all over the ground for it...usually even in my games the ump tells us where hes gonna back up at EVERY bounce. cant be that hard to do in AFL.

Also, there was an incident last year with Hodge...he HUGGED an umpire and there was no free kick. The umpire laughed along with Hodge. I think all Shaw was doing was tapping the umpire to get him to look at him, but thats a lot different from what Hodge did...it couldve been seen as hostility rather then "affection".

[JK]

Also, there was an incident last year with Hodge...he HUGGED an umpire and there was no free kick. The umpire laughed along with Hodge. I think all Shaw was doing was tapping the umpire to get him to look at him, but thats a lot different from what Hodge did...it couldve been seen as hostility rather then "affection".

Off topic-slightly, but this a good point, one that Glenn Jakovich touched on in yesterdays calls, when he referred to an umpire being too chummy with a player ... It's been going on for years and I've always disliked it when you'd hear "Hirdy (or Bucks) come back 2 steps mate" but for any fringe type of player it would be "free kick <insert team> number 5".

I know the AFL have been trying to promote good relations between umpires and players for quite some time, and you can't condemn them for that, but I reckon the umps should be a little distanced.

[Pag]

Also, there was an incident last year with Hodge...he HUGGED an umpire and there was no free kick. The umpire laughed along with Hodge. I think all Shaw was doing was tapping the umpire to get him to look at him, but thats a lot different from what Hodge did...it couldve been seen as hostility rather then "affection".

Off topic-slightly, but this a good point, one that Glenn Jakovich touched on in yesterdays calls, when he referred to an umpire being too chummy with a player ... It's been going on for years and I've always disliked it when you'd hear "Hirdy (or Bucks) come back 2 steps mate" but for any fringe type of player it would be "free kick <insert team> number 5".

I know the AFL have been trying to promote good relations between umpires and players for quite some time, and you can't condemn them for that, but I reckon the umps should be a little distanced.

I don't mind the umpires using nicknames to talk to players, that's what they're used to being called anyway. It even happens in the ammos when umps (who usually do the same division week after week) get to know players by nicknames. But the Hodge thing is interesting, got nothing for the 'affectionate' contact, yet Shaw (rightly or wrongly) gave the umpire a little love-tap on the arm and will go. Who determines what's 'affectionate' contact and what's not?

[JK]

Also, there was an incident last year with Hodge...he HUGGED an umpire and there was no free kick. The umpire laughed along with Hodge. I think all Shaw was doing was tapping the umpire to get him to look at him, but thats a lot different from what Hodge did...it couldve been seen as hostility rather then "affection".

Off topic-slightly, but this a good point, one that Glenn Jakovich touched on in yesterdays calls, when he referred to an umpire being too chummy with a player ... It's been going on for years and I've always disliked it when you'd hear "Hirdy (or Bucks) come back 2 steps mate" but for any fringe type of player it would be "free kick <insert team> number 5".

I know the AFL have been trying to promote good relations between umpires and players for quite some time, and you can't condemn them for that, but I reckon the umps should be a little distanced.

I don't mind the umpires using nicknames to talk to players, that's what they're used to being called anyway. It even happens in the ammos when umps (who usually do the same division week after week) get to know players by nicknames. But the Hodge thing is interesting, got nothing for the 'affectionate' contact, yet Shaw (rightly or wrongly) gave the umpire a little love-tap on the arm and will go. Who determines what's 'affectionate' contact and what's not?

I just think that rightly or wrongly, the public might have a perception that those players the umpires seem chummier with, receive additional benefit ... Im not for a minute suggesting that is the case, but perception is a big thing on this scale.

You're right about differentiating between the types of contact and I wonder what the ruling suggests .. If it's STRICTLY no contact whatsoever, then Hodge might have been lucky.

Shaw deserves games just for being so stupid .. BTW, how many do we all think he'll go for? I'm guessing the tribunal might look to make a statement here and it could be around 4 weeks.