Prev
Next

The AFL, where image trumps consistency

Finn Bradshaw

by Finn Bradshaw

02 Jul 05:35am

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Afl, Fifa, Sport, Steven Baker, World Cup

28 comments

As Ben Cousins said this week, it’s a strange position to be in when you feel sympathy for Steven Baker.

The low-intensity guerrilla warfare of Steven Baker. Still: 7 Network

When the AFL handed down its War and Peace sized list of charges against Baker this week, you could only feel the little tagger had been made a scapegoat.

There’s no doubt the AFL was correct within the letter of the law when it charged Baker with various counts of striking and “interfering with an injured player”, only it’s a letter that the league had previously ignored. Like the umlaut in Joachim Low’s name.

The four charges laid against the Saints’ niggle-meister were mostly for actions that had gone unnoticed when dealt out by other players earlier this season.

According to the match review panel, Richmond’s Jack Riewoldt had no case to answer for slapping an opponent’s sore hand in Round 9.

And just two weeks ago, the saintly – note small s – Chris Judd had escaped any sanction for an elbow that drew blood. But that had been on a Saturday night game against the Dockers.

Baker had the misfortune to unleash the tagger’s repertoire of black arts against Norm Smith Medallist Steve Johnson. And done so in the round’s showcase game – a Grand Final re-match on Friday night footy.

Since the weekend only contained two other games – it was the second week of the split round – the incidents had plenty of oxygen. By Monday it was a raging fire that the league needed to douse.

The AFL is in a unique position. It is both runs the game’s showcase product and is its governing body. Which makes it possibly the most image-conscious sporting league in the world.

It’s like FIFA and the Premier League rolled into one. This seems to result in rules being changed for aesthetic purposes as much as any other reason.

The most significant rule changes over the past five years have been designed to encourage a faster style of play after the league’s CEO criticised the slow-it-down game plan of clubs like Sydney.

The AFL’s willingness to constantly tinker with sections of the rule book stands in stark relief to FIFA, which this week promised to “look” at goalline technology after Frank Lampard’s “goal that wasn’t”.

FIFA – in particular its president, Sepp Blatter – has been so ardently against using video, it’s like he’s the anti-Paris Hilton.

I’ve always thought the beauty of sport was that at the end of a game, there was a winner and a loser decided within the confines of pre-determined rules, with none of the grey areas that make analysing areas of real life so difficult.

No matter how many times a team was robbed by poor decision, FIFA has refused to change their rules. It was as though they were unleashing some sort of Kafka-esque trial on soccer fans, testing how much indiscriminate punishment they could stand.

In the AFL’s system, it is the players who are the guinea pigs, forced to adjust to new rules interpretations in the middle of a season.

Yesterday morning, Baker’s manager warned of a player revolt if the league’s match review panel didn’t become more consistent.

I would argue it has been very consistent – public image always comes first.

NB: If you needed any proof of the sharp change in rule interpretations that occurs mid-season, check out the extraordinary number of 50-metre penalties handed out in last night’s Brisbane-Carlton match.

- Finn Bradshaw is editor of News Limited’s national AFL site, SuperFooty. Follow him on twitter at http://twitter.com/finn_bradshaw

Most commented

28 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • pete m says:

      08:38am | 02/07/10

      I was disgusted when players from my own team attacked St Kilda player’s injured shoulder.  I’ve always felt if you can’t beat someone fairly, then suck it up.  Using gutter tactics is no way to win.

      To all players - fans want to see everyone having a go in a tough contest.  We don’t want to see dirty play designed to injure.

      It was appalling the umpires let it go and it made the situation worse.

      St Kilda should also have a good look at their comments after the game too.  Wake up guys.  the player himself even put a screenshot of 1 of his pathetic blows on his twitter feed.  Pathetic to celebrate being a moron.

      re AFL - maybe they were prepared to cut players some slack in a big mans’ game, but saw it get out of control, so had to rein it in.  Thought of that?

      Reply

    • AFL Fan says:

      09:33am | 02/07/10

      The AFL is run by a bunch of blokes in suits who have never played football in their life.

      Players need to be given a LITTLE slack. At the moment they have none. There’s soft penalites called for everything these days, without warnings or anything. It’s disgusting. I can understand the AFL taking action on Baker’s dirty play the other night, but 9 weeks is too harsh - that’s more than Barry Hall got for cleaning Staker up.

      I lay the blame for the criminally bad umpiring and adjudicating consistency straight at the feet of Adrian Anderson. His management of our sport is a disgrace, and he should be removed ASAP. Get someone in that actually understands sport, not just business.

    • Tim says:

      09:40am | 02/07/10

      Pfft,
      If a player is so injured that he can be put off his game by hitting the injured area, then he should not be playing. Sure it’s not a good look but what are the AFL going to do, suspend any player that hits a possible injury? FFS it’s a contact sport.
      If I was a coach, I would be handing the umpires a list of all of my players stating they all have shoulder injuries. No hitting or bumping our players please.

    • James says:

      10:57am | 02/07/10

      To AFL Fan @ 09:33am | 02/07/10

      Big Andy D played about 100 games for North and I believe he also pulled on the brown and yellow for the Hawks in the 80’s. If I recall correctly he even got suspended for punching someone.

      Adrian Anderson from, what I understand, plays at a lower level. Yes he’s never played AFL but you don’t neccesarily need to recruit ex players etc for these jobs. It is a highly competitive business model and Adrian’s experience from being a partner at a top firm obviously has come into play. I’m sure he has a handy team of advisers keeping him updated as well.

      Don’t forget to throw some stones at Jeff Gieschen as well. He is in control of the prancing ponces who make a total mess of the game. Before you ask…Jeff also played footy and coached the Tiges.

    • Phillip Malone says:

      09:25am | 02/07/10

      Whatever tribunal system the AFL put in, it will never be consistent for one major reason, there are people involved! One of our great issues as a race is that we are never 100% consistent, so unless we can create AI (Artificial intelligence, and even then, AI Not created by humans as the AI could have human flaws) we will always have that inconsistency!

      At least in the current system the flaws of inconsistency are taken out of the sentences handed out after the flawed decisions are made. Past record, good or bad, are already facted in so cannot be inconsistent from case to case. Yes, the original points given can be flawed due to either the reading of the incident by the Flawed MRP or because the points scales are flawed as they are human generated as well, but maths is never flawed. The execution of maths can be, like in the AFLs points system how carry over points are re-added before discounts (potientally getting a double discount) but not before further loading (like that given for having suspensions in the last 3 years), but these are minor issues.

      Lastly, would be interested in what Fin thinks the MRP should do if they get one wrong like the Judd incident? Should the AFL appeal, as if you believe them, they are independent of the MRP, so then send it too the tribunal where the AFL could plead their case? Or do they come out and admit errors so people know they could have issues in future for similar incidents? The Pears/Riewoldt incident is a good example of this. Or do they just get it right the next time?

      The funny thing about the Judd elbow compared to the Steve J one is that I think you would argue that both were assessed about two shades of impact rating lighter then they should have been, so isn’t that consistent?
      Just my two cents (well, actually, more like an essay!) wink

      Reply

    • martin says:

      10:06am | 02/07/10

      have you ever thought how Demetriou cares nothing fo rthe actual game and his passion is only related to the balance sheet. The inclusion of western Sydney being a prime example, this team will only suceed via television rights, Western Sydneysiders will never get behind them in sufiicient number adn ut will spell the death knell for two Melbourn based clubs,.be prepared Richmond and Melbourne supporters your days are numbered

      Reply

    • S.L says:

      11:04am | 02/07/10

      I agree with your sentiments 100% on the striking of an injured player Finn but you still couldn’t help yourself could you? You had to have a dig a football/soccers reluctance to change where the noble AFL gets a new rule every year. Also where is the usual southern mockery of the League? Oh that’s right your bosses own that game don’t want upset them do you!

      Reply

    • Dan says:

      02:42am | 04/07/10

      1. If you have an injury and you’re on the feild either carry it or get off, in other words if SJ cant handle a little tap to the hand he shouldn’t be out there.

      2. I agree with you about about the constant rule changing, it annoys me every year

      3. I like to present my comments in point form

    • luke09 says:

      12:05pm | 02/07/10

      Watched the Carlton-Brisbane game for a quarter, even that was too long. The umpires went overboard with minor physical contact being ridiculously penalised, the AFL has lost the plot with continuous rule changes year in and year out and from one round to the next.

      The whole AFL competition is seriously flawed with the uneven fixture (and I mean fixed) with some teams given a easier round of games all year. The game of aussie rules football was once a must see event, now its a hybrid of aerial basketball with soft rules to quicken the game.

      The player is penalised for trying to win the ball on the ground, what is so wrong in stopping the play and having a ruck contest? It is time to bring AFL back to the basics, less rules will provide a less frustrating experience.

      Reply

    • hot tub political machine says:

      12:11pm | 02/07/10

      Yes Baker is being made an example of but as the old saying goes “if you can’t do the time don’t do the crime”

      I for one am glad to see the pendulum swing toward skill and away from niggle.

      I’ve never really understood people who love “the biff” - its just a half-arsed form of fighting which runs the clock down while we all wait for the game to begin again.

      What would you prefer to watch? One of the games superstars going in full flight or him rolling on the ground in tight shorts having a wrestle with Baker? I no which one I’d prefer - and not just because I like goals from outside fifty more than homo-erotic imagery.

      One of the best games of football I ever saw involved Brisbane and the Crows. Andrew Mcleod and Michael Voss in their prime lined up on each other. No taggers - just which gun midfielder is better. This decison may bring that back.

      Reply

    • Tim says:

      12:46pm | 02/07/10

      Yeah,
      who needs defense, they should ban tackling as well while they’re at it. It should be all about the “skill”.
      No wonder the AFL is so stuffed.

    • macdaddy says:

      05:07pm | 02/07/10

      I go to the footy fwds kick big bags of goals, not defenders who do nothing but spoil the ball. i think that there should be a limit to how many defenders are allowed in the defensive 50. how many does netball allow? 2?

    • Tbone says:

      12:22pm | 02/07/10

      An interesting point of view, albeit if the spelling mistakes were a little distracting.

      Reply

    • Far Canal says:

      12:34pm | 02/07/10

      Judd is pure teflon, untouchable and the AFL are terrified everytime he is involved in a misdemeanour.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      01:11pm | 02/07/10

      Judd is teflon because he gets away with it, and i’d like to know why.
      And last nights game at Etihad, how come there were 10 50 metre penalties ? When did the rules change so that this game was like watching shunting trains ?
      And if it keeps on like this i’m going back to soccer.

    • RED CARPET says:

      08:12pm | 02/07/10

      Judd has no hair,is past his best,he rode off Cousins back for years, A Myth

    • Ben G says:

      01:12pm | 02/07/10

      You’re right, the AFL is inconsistent, but that doesn’t mean that Steve Baker got the harsh end. Rather than letting Baker off, they should deal with Judd. Seriously, someone’s going to lose an eye unless they do something about him. The AFL’s going to look pretty silly when someone loses an eye, and it turns up in Chris Judd’s hand and they’re stuck in front of the cameras saying “How could we have known or prevented it happening?”

      Reply

    • Jay Santos says:

      02:26pm | 02/07/10

      Modern football’s biggest problem is Andrew Demetriou.

      Unashamedly politically-correct and populist, his ideologically driven reform agenda and fiercely partisan political ambitions have reduced the sport of AFL to being little more than boring and sanitised television fodder.

      An inexcuseable bastardisation of a once great game for both player and spectator.

      Reply

    • Soultrader says:

      03:41pm | 02/07/10

      @Jay
      Spot on - I don’t even bother watching this rubbish anymore. The AFL only wants corporate involvement and guess what - they win me there - I am not interested anymore.

    • Dan says:

      02:48am | 04/07/10

      Could not agree with you more

    • The Redman says:

      02:37pm | 02/07/10

      The only thing I’ve got to say is that you may have a point about consistency, or lack of it, but Baker got what he absolutely deserved, and I support neither team - can’t stand Geelong, actually. Baker’s actions were gutless and against the spirit of the game.

      Reply

    • Mat says:

      03:42pm | 02/07/10

      Excellent article, hit the nail on the head.

      Reply

    • John V says:

      03:54pm | 02/07/10

      Am I right in thinking Johnson broke his hand punching Baker? Surely then it becomes fair game - his fault for not having enough calcium.

      Reply

    • Brad says:

      05:46pm | 02/07/10

      Has anyone asked the question as to why Geelong allowed Johnson to remain on the ground with a broken hand. Surely the club has a duty of care to its employees (the players). Yes what Baker did was wrong but why was Johnson still playing?

      Reply

    • John says:

      06:56pm | 02/07/10

      This is not directly a problem with the AFL but they have created it. The real problem lies with poor and inconsistant umpiring then the AFL attempts to fix the problem and we have even more inconsistancy. If we stopped this crap where knocking the umpire is NOT tolerated we would solve 50% of the problem. If the umpires were apprased and treated like the players are when they dont perform as expected the issues would disappear very quickly. At the moment the pastel pansies go about their job poorly and this influences the outcome of some games and it is just not bloody good enough. If an umpire has an issue with a player he can pull them up but when an umpire wrongly pings a player there is no recourse. Maybe we need a system where a player or coach can report an umpire who is favouring the other team or making bad decisions.

      Reply

    • Dan says:

      02:55am | 04/07/10

      I’ve always wondered about the legallity of AFL’s ability to fine players/coachs who comment about umpiring.
      I know Australia doesn’t have the same “freedom of speach” laws that the USA has, but surely this infringes on the basic rights of the players

    • ac says:

      10:03pm | 03/07/10

      The AFL is just concerned about making money - thats all it is, a business

      Reply

    • hot tub political machine says:

      02:24pm | 05/07/10

      Nail. Head. Hammer. If you like Aussie rules its time to get along to your state league and see the game played rather than a bleached hair marketing parade.

 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter