Player reaction that shows why the AFL’s umpire dissent rule is doing NOTHING to promote respect

St Kilda legend Nick Riewoldt says if the AFL doesn’t take a common-sense approach to the ‘arms out’ controversy umpires risk having the crackdown blow up in their faces.

The five-time All Australian used an example of the Western Australian derby between Fremantle and West Coast in round three, where halfback Luke Ryan was pinged for dissent after throwing his arms out to question a call from the umpire.

When the whistle was blown, Ryan reacted by throwing his head back and laughing at the ump.

Riewoldt told the panel on AFL 360 that umpires would be better off adopting a common sense approach and only issuing a free kick for genuine dissent, not every single occasion a player throws their arms out to question a call.

‘First quarter [tonight] a player is going to put their arms out and ask a question of the umpire and I just want to be in the mind of that umpire when they do it,’ he said.

‘I think you can take it one of two ways. We heard from Brad Scott who said it is really up to the umpire to decide if it is dissent or not and if you put your arms out, you run the risk.

‘If I’m the umpire, well I am taking a common sense approach and I think – if we’re talking about respect for umpires – I’m going to get more respect not paying it and having common sense. I wouldn’t consider it as dissent.

‘Of course, you can go the other way and in a situation where we’re trying to garner more respect for the umpires, you pay the free kick and this is what happens. you end up with a player laughing in your face. Which is the furthest thing from respect.’

Fremantle’s Luke Ryan remonstrates with the umpires in their clash with West Coast

When he surrenders a 50-metre kick for his troubles, Ryan openly laughs at the officials – an act Nick Riewoldt says is far more disrespectful than throwing his arms out

Riewoldt’s plea for common sense comes after several incidents of players throwing their arms out were let go by the AFL during round five while Lions star Harris Andrews and two Hawthorn players gave away 50 metre penalties for the same action.

It has left many AFL players and pundits confused over what constitutes dissent and AFL football boss Brad Scott moved to clarify that on Tuesday, saying any questioning of an umpire’s decision could be classed as dissent.

‘There’s no acceptable level of dissent towards umpires. If players show demonstrable dissent, then they’re risking a free kick or a 50 metre penalty,’ he said.

‘In terms of what that level looks like, that’s up for the umpire to decide. But we’ve been really clear on this, really clear to the clubs, we have unanimous support from all the clubs, all the leaders or clubs and in fact, they want us to pay these free kicks.

A number of incidents, like this one with Suns player Jy Farrar, went without a whistle

‘So with the inconsistency on the weekend where we paid some and we didn’t pay others, I get that some players may think ‘what’s the level of dissent that we’re allowed to produce?’ And the answer to that is none.

‘Our umpires missed some, we acknowledge that and we’ll work on that. I think that what we’re trying to do with umpires, we’ve got a really big challenge in front of us and we’ve got to work really close with closely with the umpires on making it easier for them to adjudicate the game but also to make the game as consistently adjudicated as we possibly can.’