TOPIC:

Once again in the colts' game yesterday at Basso the umpires showed complete disdain and contempt of a player's welfare. How can a set of umpires and the umpiring fraternity suggest that one of their primary considerations is the welfare of the players when they continue to ignore a seriously injured player and continue to allow play to continue? We had an example in the first quarter of the colts' game yesterday where a Swans' player was lying on the ground not moving and a field umpire about 40 odd metres away did not MOVE ONE METRE to check out the extent of the injury. Play continued with reckless abandon until a stretcher was called for. I add that the player was subsequently taken to hospital by ambulance.

And before the apologists for the umpires say oh well they are only young umpires and lack experience I will make the observation that Swans were warned later in the game for not having the requisite number of players in the 50 m arc. So we not only have three field umpires and 3 boundary umpires on the ground we have an umpires' adviser in the stands in DIRECT COMMUNICATION with the field umpires who could NOT BE BOTHERED TELLING the field umpires to stop the game.

What D Sinclair and others NEED to understand is that if a major injury occurs because of the inaction of the umpires they and the umpires will be PERSONALLY liable.

S42 the one and only D.Sinclair was in attendance at Bassendean yesterday so would have witnessed first hand. Fair to say the WAFL umpiring standards under the same chap for 15 years or more have reached levels equivalent to the depths of Davey Jones Locker and or shark droppings!

Pretty sure if you had read Laws of Footy

3.2 Procedure
Where a stretcher is required, the following procedure shall apply:
(a) upon being advised or noticing that a Player requires a stretcher,
the field Umpire shall stop play at the earliest opportunity and
unless a doctor considers or it is apparent that it is unsafe to do
so, the Player must be removed from the Playing Surface on the
stretcher by the shortest possible route and taken direct to their

Now knot knowing what injury this player had in this case , would think in 90% of cases the game would not stop until trainers advise that a stretcher required.

Kirbs with all due respect when you have a player lying flat on his back not moving I don't give a stuff what the laws of footy are it is incumbent on THE UMPIRES to ensure that the welfare of the players is of primary consideration and for the umpire not to take the time to check whether play needed to be stopped is an indictment on the umpires and the umpiring hierarchy.

I also hasten to add that when an umpire goes down the other umpires have no hesitation in stopping the game.

What a load of crap 42. You have trainers and medicos to look after players. Umps are neither and should only get involved when play needs to be stopped. Its just another example of your negativety on all things WAFL other than your beloved bogans.

BC wrote: What a load of crap 42. You have trainers and medicos to look after players. Umps are neither and should only get involved when play needs to be stopped. Its just another example of your negativety on all things WAFL other than your beloved bogans.

So BC you have no problem with a potential spine or neck problem being run over by a group of footballers because the ball is kicked in his direction? Absolutely mind-boggling. Also, I didn't say that the umpire should go and HELP. I said he should go and check the POTENTIAL SEVERITY of the injury and to then use common sense (albeit it might be in limited supply) to determine whether the game should be stopped immediately.

It has got nothing to do with being negative or positive; it is to ensure that someone does not sustain a permanent injury because of a lack of care.

swan42 wrote: Kirbs with all due respect when you have a player lying flat on his back not moving I don't give a stuff what the laws of footy are it is incumbent on THE UMPIRES to ensure that the welfare of the players is of primary consideration and for the umpire not to take the time to check whether play needed to be stopped is an indictment on the umpires and the umpiring hierarchy.

I also hasten to add that when an umpire goes down the other umpires have no hesitation in stopping the game.

Rubbish - the Umpires do not have the expertise to determine an injury, that is why we have trainers etc and the law is most probably written that way for those reasons. Do you recall back in the 90's when players feigned injuries to hold up game, blokes getting on stretchers not injured ie: Bairstow Geelong. That is why the law changed to a time off if you call for a stretcher

Correct kirbs. I agree that umpires do not have the expertise to assess an injury. They are not medically trained. Thats why we have physios and doctors at games. Someone gets a corky and is laying on the ground and 42 you want the umps to run over and make sure he's OK? Give me break.

I remember a game back in the mid 80s when Michael Mitchell was sitting down on the wing being attended to by a couple trainers and managed to find the ball and get an effective handpass away much to the amusement of the crowd!

kirbs wrote:

swan42 wrote: Kirbs with all due respect when you have a player lying flat on his back not moving I don't give a stuff what the laws of footy are it is incumbent on THE UMPIRES to ensure that the welfare of the players is of primary consideration and for the umpire not to take the time to check whether play needed to be stopped is an indictment on the umpires and the umpiring hierarchy.

I also hasten to add that when an umpire goes down the other umpires have no hesitation in stopping the game.

Rubbish - the Umpires do not have the expertise to determine an injury, that is why we have trainers etc and the law is most probably written that way for those reasons. Do you recall back in the 90's when players feigned injuries to hold up game, blokes getting on stretchers not injured ie: Bairstow Geelong. That is why the law changed to a time off if you call for a stretcher

I NEVER said that the umpire should determine the injury. Let me repeat I said that the umpire should check the extent of the injusr. That is, to go and speak to those attending the players to determine whether it is appropriate to stop the game. That means that the umpire can't stay 50-60 m away from the player and just ignore their DUTY OF CARE.

For the umpire apologists on this site think about the potential long-term ramifications if a player is severely and permanently injured because of the indifference, incompetence and complete disdain to the welfare of the player. Also, to address the possibility of a player feigning injury there are already rules in place that would address that situation and I personally would prefer to err on the side of caution and have the best outcome in the 1 i a 100 or even 1 in a 1,000 case.

Just to repeat for the umpteenth time I am not saying the umpire diagnoses the extent of the injury. The umpire asks the trainers and medicos attending the player what is the potential extent of the injury.