Brad Scott | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • If you are having trouble logging in to the forum please contact [email protected] // When reseting your password or awaiting confirmation please check that your email is correct and also your junk/spam emails.
  • IMPORTANT! Our inbox is full of email errors from members who have not updated their emails, please follow the instructions on how to update here
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Brad Scott

momentai

Tiger Champion
Jul 24, 2004
4,142
773
Melb
Putting to one side the issues raised by Hocking's (late) introduction of the stand rule and the predictable impact that had on Richmonds "chaos" game style, the thing that stands out about parachuting Brad Scott into the administration, is that he is moving into a position which will give him control over several of the most important areas of AFL activity, and that some of these have very poor internal process giving him enormous discretionary power.

The three that stand out to me in this regard are the Match Review arrangements, the Umpiring arrangements and the arrangements around free agency compensation. (There are undoubtedly others).

The Umpires.
As I see it, it is a mess with the football director (FD), closely involved in the day to day administration of how rules are to be interpreted. The rules change or stay the same, but it is impossible to predict from match to match, little own season to season, what is appropriate and fair play, and what play is going to result in a penalty. The simple solution is that the administration of umpiring should proceed under the direction of the director of umpiring or the umpires coach, and without any involvement of other AFL personnel.
The rules committee review things from time to time but once the rules are written it should be left to the umpires to interpret them and to stick to a single hopefully consistent view, as to how to do so. The umpires are as a body perfectly competent to carry out this function. They should be allowed to get on with that job, without further input from the FD.
There will be inconsistency arising between umpires but that can be sorted out within the group, this without complicating what the rules actually mean with a further over lay of what the AFL would like the rules to be interpreted as meaning.
The fact that we regularly have an opinion from the FD as to whether a particular rule interpretation over the previous week was correct or not is a really good example of how the AFL has led the umpires into this mess. Simply put the AFL should seek to emphasise the independence of the umpiring function, and let them get on with it.

Match Review.
Under present arrangements the Match Review Officer Christiansen reviews the games and makes recommendations to the FD who then makes a final decision as to whether the charge and penalty, should or should not go ahead. As above the FD is wearing many hats and may allow his/her judgement on match review matters to be effected by those considerations. Some players and some clubs seem to be especially well looked after at match review while others do not. Providing Christiansen with the ability to proceed independently would take away this problem. As far. as I can see he is capable and able to carry out such work in a consistent manner. If he is unable to do so then the AFL may need to find another review officer, but IMO the fact that he may not be up to it doesn't warrant his decisions being subject to the whims of the FD.

Free Agency.
No one knows how it works or who is responsible for its interpretation. There are clear examples of inconsistency in the past, which don't pass muster. (Motlop to PA is one which immediately comes to mind). And yet there is still no transparency. Surely the AFL can do better.
For those interested in the Scott appointment just read a piece by McLure and Wilson published in the Age on Friday afternoon 16/9, which confirms that Scott is taking over responsibility for umpiring, match review etc as above.
Crazy decision.
 

Quickdraw

End of the drought
Jun 8, 2013
2,204
2,786
see Brad has mentioned a possible 'Umpiring Crisis". mostly at lower levels, but seems to vaguely flag the idea of it becoming a proper job.
it may not come to anything, but it tells me he's aware of something wrong.
Because there is.
Yes there is a crisis in umpiring. It's good that Scott has acknowledged that point but what I haven't heard is anything about the cause.

Not discounting things evolving outside of AFL (attitudes to contact sports, popularity of other sports or greater interest in pastimes such as video games), to me the "umpiring crisis" gets down to the constant rule changes/interpretations.

Everyone says how hard it is to umpire the game yet they keep adding layer upon layer of rules/interpretations. People are sick of the changes and week to week interpretations.

I think the AFL have done a good job in highlighting respect to umpires but the irony is that they have created an environment that added to the hosility towards the maggots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

eZyT

Tiger Legend
Jun 28, 2019
17,525
15,608
The part I don't understand is why people think he is a bust before he even starts?

He would seem to be a perfect fit for a role like this and have every chance of success.

I must have missed the

> Bachelor of Law
> Masters In Organisational Governance
> 30 year career as an Umpire

on Chris's CV?

These people exist. They just don't get an interview, because theres never an ad in the paper.

sure, a head coach would have a diverse skillset, but unrelated to adjudication and sanctioning. A head coach is an autocrat; transparency and consultation aren't their strong suit. The good coaches do accountability well, but Brad Scott wasnt a good coach. Great communicators, but I never heard a press conference from anyone in the AFL except Gil. Brutal competitors, but theres no competition.

its a $Billion dollar industry. Imagine if Alan Joyce put a bloke who left school in year 11, but who liked model planes, in charge of QANTAS governance and legals?

the only two Selection Criteria are

1. Must be a good bloke, according to the private school clique who run the show
2. Desirable to have played footy.

and they aren't even written down
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users

22nd Man

Tiger Legend
Aug 29, 2011
7,665
2,424
Essex Heights
Instead of teams moulding their game plan around pressure and fast ball movement, we have an environment where it's benificial to fold back and park the bus!

Just a coincidence that two teams playing next Saturday got there through pressure and fast ball movement? Or maybe it still works?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

tigerman

It's Tiger Time
Mar 17, 2003
16,751
8,123
Scott is going to make a tweak to the standing on the mark rule.

Players will be required to kneel on the mark, so instead of looking like statues, they'll look like garden gnomes.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users

TigerForce

Tiger Legend
Apr 26, 2004
53,183
4,154
Interesting situations next season to see what Pepper does when Salty's players go under MRP scrutiny......if that....
 
  • Angry
Reactions: 1 user

LeeToRainesToRoach

Tiger Legend
Jun 4, 2006
33,135
11,449
Melbourne
For those interested in the Scott appointment just read a piece by McLure and Wilson published in the Age on Friday afternoon 16/9, which confirms that Scott is taking over responsibility for umpiring, match review etc as above.
Crazy decision.

"Scott will become the general manager of football, encompassing list management, umpires, the match review system and the rules."

Josh Mahoney turned it down as the job he was interviewed for wasn't what was advertised. Were there two different jobs going, one for the AFL's preferred candidates and another less attractive role for outsiders?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

momentai

Tiger Champion
Jul 24, 2004
4,142
773
Melb
"Scott will become the general manager of football, encompassing list management, umpires, the match review system and the rules."

Josh Mahoney turned it down as the job he was interviewed for wasn't what was advertised. Were there two different jobs going, one for the AFL's preferred candidates and another less attractive role for outsiders?
It seems highly likely that there were two different jobs floated.
There has been quite a bit of uncertainty as to how the responsibilities would be divided between the incumbent, lawyer Dillon, and the person named to replace him. The matter was cleared up in the McLure Wilson article but some will have sensed how it would turn out once Scott's name was announced.
This again highlights what a shmoozer Gill is.

The most important areas now handed to Scott are in a mess largely because Gil doesn't want the umpires and the match review officer, and the person responsible fpr administering free agency, to carry out their responsibilities independently. These are decisions which should be made independently by people skilled in those areas and without the intrusion of bias, seeming or actual.
Putting Scott in charge will ensure that cannot occur.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

momentai

Tiger Champion
Jul 24, 2004
4,142
773
Melb
Just picturing the response on here if they employed someone with a career in umpiring. :LOL:
Rarely do I disagree.
They have an umpires coach and I believe a Director of umpiring, both of whom are experienced former umpires, who have been elevated following their retirements after successful careers. They can read and they can communicate. They should be permitted to get on with the job without interference.