Despite what you might have read on social media over the past 48 hours, the sun came out today even though the AFL stood by its hard-line stance on umpire abuse.
Some questionable 50m penalties were paid across Round 5, most notably against Harris Andrews in Brisbane's clash with Collingwood on Thursday night and against Jack Gunston/Tom Mitchell in the Hawthorn vs Geelong Easter Monday blockbuster.
The penalties, for the most innocent of raised arms, were at crucial stages of the game and seemed to attract plenty of criticism from fans and pundits alike.
The frustration was heightened given Carlton's George Hewett went unpunished for a similar action in the dying stages of his side's win over Port Adelaide on Easter Sunday.
The general consensus over the weekend was that neither of the Harris or Gunston/Mitchell incidents was an act of dissent, and common sense needs to be applied by umpires when adjudicating such actions.
Football is, after all, an emotional game played by humans - to suggest players can't show any emotion at all is unnatural.
On Tuesday, AFL General Manager Football Operations Brad Scott reminded AFL Clubs, Coaches, Players and administrators of their obligation to fans and participants of all ages to establish and maintain the standards for the code and to take a leadership role in setting the right example.
"It is incumbent on us at the elite level to set the standards of behaviour for all levels of the game. We have fallen short as a football community and dissent towards umpires during matches has become an issue at all levels of the game, particularly at the community level where we are 6,000 umpires short," Scott said.
"Respect towards umpires and penalising players for showing dissent has strong support from everyone in football – including Presidents, CEOs, coaches and football managers.
"Our message to players is that when an umpire pays a free kick, accept it and move on and our message to umpires is we encourage you to continue to pay free kicks or 50-metre penalties where players have shown dissent. We will stay the course on this and acknowledge there have been instances across this season where we have missed free kicks for dissent."
My first reaction to this was very similar to the majority of fans - that there's a clear difference between dissent and players genuinely communicating with an umpire, where raising your arms to ask a question is a natural reaction.
However, the more I think about it, the more the AFL's hard-line approach makes sense.
I have liked the crackdown on umpire abuse over the first few rounds and, on the whole, think it's worked well.
And I'm the first to admit the aforementioned 50m penalties initially frustrated me, thinking they were 'soft' and undeserved.
But the problem with suggesting umpires should use common sense and apply discretion to each individual case of a player raising their arms means there is going to be a grey area.
And with grey areas come inconsistencies, which in turn increase frustration from players and fans at the umpires themselves - amplifying the very issue we're trying to eradicate.
While there will be a period of adjustment from players, coaches and fans alike, a black and white rule that any raised arms will result in a 50m penalty gives us all clarity.
If it comes down to discretion, each decision will be scrutinised to the nth degree - and there is much more margin for error.
While umpires will inevitably get decisions wrong, whether it be missing the Hewett incident on the weekend or a simple 'push in the back', we don't need to be complicating things further by leaving a grey area in this.
While the hard-line stance on raised arms will take some getting used to, not to mention that it's unnatural, it will continue to stamp out dissent and make the rules easier for players, coaches and fans alike.