Trader wrote:gadj1976 wrote:You keep going back to abuse! This isn't what we're talking about.
40 years ago giving your wife a right cross was considered domestic abuse.
In 2022, everything can be considered abuse, emotional abuse, social abuse, verbal abuse, economic abuse.
I'm not drawing the comparison to suggest players are threatening violence against umpires, but I would say that questioning their decisions is a behaviour that undermines the umpires authority.
The average fan is looking at what's getting pinged today, and comparing it to what was acceptable back in the 80s (refer to BT's antics here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6V9kY-C_2M). Then coming to the conclusion that Harris Andrews is hard done by.
They shouldn't compare it to 1980's BT. The rules have changed. Interactions from players towards umpires now need to be respectful.
The bottom line, the AFL has come out and said players are no longer allowed to undermine umpires.
Is questioning their decision abusive? Or simply disrespectful? Who cares is the answer, neither are allowed.
Rather than argue what constitutes abuse, players that accept the ruling (both the new stance that umpire respect is required, and individual decisions in games) and move on, will be better off than those that want to argue the point.
So hold on, if I say to my wife that I disagree with her going to the shops, I'm abusing her now am I? FMD.
Without logical debate the game will get more and more sterile and more boring to watch. I wouldn't mind if the AFL took feedback on but they are mightier than thou and cannot be questioned.
You have to remember, this is supposed to be bringing us back to respecting umpires. I can't see, even if we don't wave arms, that paying 50's every 5 minutes is 1, making our game better and 2. making us respect umpires any more than we do today/2021. In fact I see the disrespect being heightened.
And yep, coaches will take the AFL's stance, we'll laugh at players for giving multiple 50's away and in a few years time we'll have no remonstrating or 50's because of it, but like the "Stand" rule or "deliberate" rule, have those rules worked to achieve what they set out to do? No. The game will be over-governed and hugely boring.