Essendon coach Brad Scott reveals AFL’s admission over controversial umpiring decisions

Essendon coach Brad Scott has revealed what the AFL communicated to the Bombers after a number of costly umpiring calls on Saturday night. Plus why the league haven’t publicly clarified the decisions.

Essendon coach Brad Scott says the AFL admitted it should not have paid a rushed behind against Jye Menzie but he remains confused after AFL House backed in a holding-the-ball decision against Jordan Ridley.

The league this week said it would only provide forensic clarifications on umpiring decisions if they occurred at the end of games despite Essendon’s outcry over a series of decisions.

The AFL declined to put up one of its football officials on Monday to explain the Menzie rushed behind or the Sam Draper arm chop despite a wave of outcry from Essendon fans.

But Scott told Fox Footy the league had told Essendon the Menzie decision was incorrect and Draper should have been paid a free kick for the Zach Tuohy arm chop.

Brad Scott has revealed what the AFL communicated to the Bombers today. Picture: Getty Images

“It’s not a witch hunt. It’s not about seeking vengeance,” he told AFL 360.

“Mistakes are mistakes. The deliberate rushed behind, the AFL made it clear it was a mistake. Now I can provide absolutely clarity.

Some of the other decisions that helped us around holding the ball, some under my understanding of the interpretation of the rules, the umpires had a different view on.

“The Ridley one, for example. He had no prior opportunity but the umpires’ view was that he had sufficient intent to dispose of the ball.

“The Ridley one is interesting. I find it very hard for Ridley with two arms pinned to make an attempt to dispose of the ball. I wasn’t sure how he was supposed to do that. The fans would be confused by that. (But the AFL says) if you don’t have prior opportunity and you make an attempt it doesn’t have to be correct disposal.

Ridley pinged for HTB - did he have prior opportunity? another geelong GOAL from free kick #AFLCatsDonspic.twitter.com/yIxXHoVO4u

— outbreezy (@outbreezyWC) June 29, 2024

“The one with Stewart he attempted to dispose of the ball so it’s play on. The fans would be confused by those. I don’t think it’s helpful to go on a witch hunt about obvious mistakes. Clarify the grey area around prior opportunity. That is the one we are struggling with. Most of us would say the Ridley one is a mistake but the umpires would say he has to kick that. I don’t know how.”

While Scott provided clarity given his media appearance the AFL has softened its stance of transparency over umpiring decisions every week.

Only two weeks ago AFL executive football boss Laura Kane had made clear the league would not back away from publicly explaining its decisions to the fans.

But the league believes the threshold for those explanations are game-deciding decisions which affect the outcome of games.

The league clarified earlier this year that the Sam Draper decision to jump on the ball against Adelaide, which the league said should have been a free kick.

Scott is still not clear on the grey area surrounding prior opportunity. Picture: Getty Images

The AFL will continue to talk to clubs behind the scenes every week about contentious decisions but will publicly communicate late-game calls but will not comment on decisions every week.

Kane had said at a media event at the AFL’s ARC in recent weeks the league was determined to continue being transparent as a general principle.

“What’s really important to me is that we are transparent and, as required, we’re explaining things,” Kane said.

“We are articulating to fans and we are articulating to people watching our game what’s happening. That’s not something we will stop doing. It’s been a really important focus area for me and it’s something we will continue to do.”

Essendon players said they were confused about the rushed behind call because they were under the impression a player under pressure could rush the ball within nine metres of goal.

AFL umpire Ray Chamberlain last week said umpires were told if an opponent was within 2-3 metres it was categorised as pressure.