Despite annual assurances by the umpiring administrators that their charges do not target certain rules or interpretations at certain times, it seems there's been another blitz by AFL umpires in recent weeks. Fifty-metre penalties seem to be all the rage, with one being handed out this past weekend because the offending player pointed at the umpire! It may be reasonable to expect players to show respect to the officials and to penalise threatening words and gestures or accusations of bias, but pointing?

Some senior umpires also appear to be fundamentalists. That is, they adhere to the strict letter of the law. Thus we have players on their feet penalised when a player dives head first at their legs and others penalised when their arms brush, incidentally, against their opponent's in a marking contest.

Not for the first time this season, I have the AFL's umpiring department (and Rules Committee) in my sights.

Watching an unusual number of TV games this weekend, I was struck by the number of free kicks paid against players who were standing when their opponents cannoned, head first, into their legs. What, in heavens’ name, is the standing player supposed to do? Fine let's keep the head sacrosanct (but only give Kerr three weeks for a deliberate roundarm punch: consistency?), but surely we can apply a little practical understanding of the game? The standing player in this scenario has nowhere to go to avoid making contact. This interpretation of high contact is an unqualified nonsense.

A second instance of incidental contact occurs in marking contests where one player’s arm or hand brushes the other player’s arm INCIDENTALLY. Please Jeff, it doesn’t matter whether the player doesn't hold the mark after such incidental contact. Does the contact drag the player’s arm away? That must be the only criterion.

There is so much incidental contact in the game, so much of which appears to be in plain view of an umpire, yet it seems random events are chosen to be penalised. Umpires must be given the freedom to judge within the context of the game, rather than inconsistently and imperfectly applying a zero tolerance standard.

Lastly, the AFL tell us the Rules Committee are trying to improve the image, speed and continuity of our game (leave it alone!! — but let's leave that aside for a moment). On Saturday we had the 'spectacle' of a full back waiting to be called to play on before walking backward to 'rush' a point in order to waste time. This is the same AFL that awards a free kick against a player kicking or punching a ball after it has crossed the boundary line. This is the same AFL that had its umpires awarding 50m penalties for TOUCHING a player after an uncontested mark (where has that interpretation gone?). Those penalties are for WASTING TIME. What the hell was Bowden doing?

Andrew? Jeff? Oh, what a tangled web we weave...