The Giants have asked AFL umpires’ boss Dan Richardson to clarify the controversial umpire dissent free kick given against them in the last quarter of their narrow loss to Carlton on Saturday night.
A Greater Western Sydney source told The Age that Richardson was sympathetic to the Giants – who do not blame the ruling on the defeat – but he did not accept that the wrong decision was made.
The league introduced the dissent rule ahead of last season to increase on-field respect towards officials and stamp out umpire abuse, in large part to improve treatment of umpires at community level, acknowledging how the example set at the top affects lower levels of the sport.
Players who have demonstrative verbal or non-verbal reactions risk conceding a free kick, as in Stephen Coniglio’s case against the Blues.
A decision was privately made midway through last year to soften the adjudicating of the dissent rule after a series of 50-metre penalties early in the season, but the AFL believes the rule has achieved its goal.
The Age has contacted the league for comment on the decision against Coniglio about halfway through the final term that gifted Blues forward Jesse Motlop a close-range goal to put Carlton one point up.
Stephen Coniglio conceded a controversial umpire dissent free kick on Saturday night.Credit:Getty Images
Coniglio, with his arms outstretched, reacted instantly when his teammate Sam Taylor was denied a free kick for his tackle on Harry McKay, querying why experienced umpire Craig Fleer had not ruled in his team’s favour.
While some would argue Coniglio should not have reacted and given the umpire cause to pay the free kick, others are frustrated by the inconsistency of these types of dissent rulings.
Jesse Motlop gave Carlton the lead after being awarded the free kick because of dissent shown by Giant Stephen Coniglio.Credit:Getty Images
Fellow Giant Lachie Whitfield was similarly inquisitive as to why Taylor was not awarded a free kick for his tackle, but Fleer told Whitfield after Motlop’s goal that the dissent free kick was against Coniglio.
“It’s not what he said. It wasn’t you [Whitfield] – it was Steve Coniglio,” Fleer said, in a conversation audible on the match coverage.
“There was a decision not paid, so the ball had gone through [for a behind] and he [Coniglio] has gone, ‘How is that not a free kick?’ – with his arms out. Whitfield replied: “And that’s worth another goal?” “That’s dissent,” Fleer said.
Giants coach Adam Kingsley spoke to Coniglio after the incident but said he was unsure what happened when he fronted the media straight after the match.
“It’s hard for me to comment, really, because I don’t know what was said,” Kingsley told reporters. “Clearly, we don’t want to be giving away free kicks in front of goal, that’s for sure. We’ll try and get to the bottom of it. Guys know when they make mistakes of that nature, so it is what it is, and we move on. Everyone makes mistakes.”
There was another potential dissent ruling barely a minute later, when Carlton’s Mitch McGovern also threw his arms out after his own tackle went unrewarded as the ball spilled over the boundary line.
The possible difference in the McGovern case is his actions might have been viewed as being more of an appeal for a free kick rather than showing dissent against the denial of a free kick. There was also no free kick paid in a separate example during the St Kilda-Essendon match on Saturday night, when Saint Jack Higgins animatedly appealed for Essendon defender Mason Redman to be penalised for rushing the ball for a behind.
Port Adelaide great and Age columnist Kane Cornes is adamant Fleer made a bad call against Coniglio.
“I wake up this morning embarrassed, and I wake up embarrassed for the game,” Cornes said on Channel Nine’s Sunday Footy Show.
“There is no threatening language, there is no swearing, there is no pointing – it’s just a reaction to a frustration of a player, and that’s a free kick from the top of the goal square that puts Carlton in front.
“This is AFL footy, these are people’s careers, there are coaching jobs on the line, there are playing jobs on the line – and an umpire has reacted like that.”
Umpires continue to be in short supply at the grassroots level nationwide, with the AFL hoping to reduce the shortfall from 6000 at this time last year to 5000 by this season’s end.
The league’s executive general manager of game development, Rob Auld, told The Age at the start of March that he believed the dissent rule had reduced umpire incidents at community level.
“There are always small little spot fires, but there is nowhere near the arms in the air and back-chatting of umpires there used to be – that pretty much stopped with the umpire dissent rule,” Auld said.
“What I remain disappointed about is the behaviour on the other side of the fence, and everybody’s got to own that. That’s a community opportunity, that one, and plays a significant role in keeping umpires in the system.”
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
