AFL - Good Ideas, Terrible Ideas, Too Many Ideas, No Idea


Ha, I wonder if they considered that the new “no need to kick to yourself” rule means the “step on the line” rule is revoked. Didn’t occur to me initially.

Will be interesting to see how much of all this is in the published rules and how much is in the undocumented “interpretations”.


Yes it has to be that the goal square is irrelevant for kick ins now, except as a rough indicator for where the man on the mark can be


Who is going to check where all 36 players are at the bounce? Currently it’s easy as all you have to do is put one ump on each corner of the centre square and each covers one (straight!) line.

Will goal umps have the ability to call a free?


I hope it results in goal square sumo wrestles where the full forward tries to force the full back out of the GS and vice versa.

Traditional sumo attire and ceremony optional


So I take it Adam Saad is now to take the kick out,play on to reach the defensive 50,and kick it to chf?


P.S. Why release this now? Surely there was some day later in the year where it was possible AFL wouldn’t be the lead news item without it?


If I was being kind I’d say because clubs would probably like to know while trying to manage their lists. I’m not though, so I think you know the real answer…


You see what they’ve done here? Everyone was against the 18m goalsquare. Instead of that, they’ve set the man on the mark 10m from the top of the goalsqare and allowed players to not have to kick to themselves in order to play on. This will have a similar, albeit not quite so extreme, effect as per the 18m square. Very canny. I also believe there must be a 10m clear zone all the way around the player bringing the ball in, although fellow teammates can be within that space. That disposal can also be a handball directly from that play…


Sounds similar to what I was suggesting,… that they didn’t need to alter the goalsquare at all, … they just needed a dot on the ground where the man on the mark was to stand, 18 plus meters out form the goal line, dead centre of the ground.



I think I see where your logic failed…




With the restrictions on runners and water carriers I wonder if there will be a lot more trainers/medical staff attending to ‘injured’ players out on the ground instead.


So someone grew a brain and relaxed the hands in the back rule. About time.


Yeah, looking forward to the good old days of the man behind taking a chest mark.


Will they pay lots of fifty metre penalties for defenders not instantly moving twenty metres from the goal after a behind?

Or will lots of guys be run down from behind as they take off?

Will the umpire call play on when he thinks someone is starting to play on, even if they haven’t left the goal square?

Can a player get a ball from the bag before the shot at goal, so they can play on 0.00001 seconds after the point is kicked?

If a player has the ball and throws/hands off/handballs/kicks to their designated player (both of them being in the goal square) is that an instant play-on? And a free in the case they threw it? Will there need to be a designated kick/run/handball-outer, which will stop quick play-ons? Can you nominate yourself before the point is kicked?

Am I a nerd?


I don’t mind them. Just tinkering not revolution.

The play on from behind is good. Should make it easier to get through a forward press.


Yes to all questions, especially the last one


Mostly just taking silly rules away, (hands in back, dinky kicks in the goal square to yourself so you can play on, etc.)

Not sure how you could complain


The player with the ball:

  • Must be allowed to advance the mark by 50m without the infringing player delaying the game.
  • Will be able to play on while the 50m penalty is being measured out.

So if Saad receives a 50m penalty, he should run as fast as he can directly to goal and any interference, or minding the mark running back, by the opponent is another 50m penalty?
Can’t see anything going wrong with this rule.


The #1 skill of an umpire is running backwards quickly — that’s why they can’t see a problem with that scenario.