AFL Rules Committee produces yet another stupid rule change




You must be enjoying seeing Hawthorn near the bottom of the ladder and getting zilch benefit from it though!


Oh very much so
I actually don’t understand your suggestion, to early in the morming maybe
A couple more cups of coffee and I’ll give it another go, maybe



With the AFL almost certainly bringing in perhaps the biggest set of rule changes regarding the way that teams set up, starting positions at stoppages, I am interested in discussing whether this could actually benefit us.

With players like Stringer, Daniher, Fantasia, Walla and even McKernan in our forwardline we have a pretty potent forward half. These new rules should also force us to maintain a proper structure forward of the ball, an area we traditionally struggle in.


If they do bring it in Collingfree would be stuffed.
How many times yesterday did the filth have 16 players in our fwd 50?
Talk about congestion.


It will be an absolute disgrace knee jerk piece of rubbish from a bunch of people who get an idea in their minds, and then listen to it eco around the echo chamber for a couple of months and think that everyone agrees with them.

That’s what you wanted to discuss right?


Heard on the wireless over the week-end.
“The only thing wrong with football is that there are some people who think something’s wrong with football”.
Forget who it was.


Would be a rare voice of sanity in the AFL media echo chamber. Every time I turn on the radio this year they’re talking about zones, and each week haveanaged to convince themselves that is going to Make AFL Great Again ™.


Luke Beveridge.


The best rule changes would be to undo some of the most stupid changes of recent years.

Eg: Deliberate out of bounds. Deliberate rushed behind. Encroaching on “protected zone”. Calling “play on” after a mark before the player with the mark has had time to look around. Kicking out after a point with a different ball before the original ball has been recovered from the crowd.

There was also something done to the interpretation of what should be done when a pack has formed. Before the change there would be a ball up. Now the pack continues until the umpire decides that the ball has stopped moving. The result has been the rolling maul that is such a blight on the spectacle.


I honestly believe holding dropping the ball need s real good look at. Not the chase down tackles, which are one of the very best part of the game.
I reckon when packs form, there are arms. legs half tackles going, ball kncoked out ect ect , too much going on to ever get those more than 50% right. Those are the best time to let the play just go. They fairdinkum randomly pay these frees, , and this is one of the biggest frustrations. Either pay all of them , or none of them and let the play go.
They are just so paranoid about ball ups they over officiate


Holding the ball by it’s very definition is what makes it hard.

Making a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball counts. Doesn’t matter if you don’t dispose of the ball correctly, the umpire has to interpret if a genuine effort was made.

It’s like deliberate out of bounds. It’s an interpretation, a guess, an afl device they can use to screw us over.


Corey MCKernan said on Hirds podcast, that back in the 90’s/00’s you would see every ruckman run back on the goal line to get try and touch the ball or mark and prevent a goal. But now due to the instant kick in, there is no time to get set up in the zone for kick out,so they simply cant do that anymore.
Also gave players a bit of a breather.

Its a good example of how a rule change effectively changed the way the game was played.
In this example to the detriment of the ruckman.


As a backman it was great to have the safety of the boundary line.

Now because players are so highly skilled, they would probably prefer to keep the ball in if they can to keep control of disposal, it is something that would have probably been fixed over time through the natural evolution of the game.

Also kicking to space down the line if opposition has loose defenders back would give a bit of a benefit back to the team who has the ball. rather than a blind kick forward to a outnumber, they could safely dribble it towards the boundary.

With Deliberate rushed behind, rule change should be that they must start play and person brining ball in may not deliberately rush behind. ie whatever brian lake did at dogs, or that tigers bloke.

Protected zone can go.

but Umpire needs to give players opportunity to dispose of ball not call play on and player gets tackled from behind then holding the ball.


The way it’s interpreted has screwed that though. Making an attempt no longer counts (as we see when a guy lays a light hand on someone mid kick who then has an air swing - or even dropkick - and the umpire pays “incorrect disposal”).

In the old days if you made an attempt it was “play on”. If you didn’t make an attempt it was HTB (no matter how much prior or not you had). The key was making an attempt at disposing of the ball. So the ball came free. Play continued.

These days players are instructed to hold the ball in the tackle and force a stoppage at any time they can. They take possession in a pressure situation (as long as not on the ground), where there is no “prior opportunity” to dispose of the ball and there is no requirement to release the ball. They want a ball up, because the coaches want to enforce structures, so they hold it and a massive pack forms and the ball never comes out.

If they got rid of the prior opportunity charade, and instead asked that players made an attempt at disposing of the ball whenever they were tackled there would be many less stoppages. The run down tackle would need to be a tackle (rather than just a vague hand on the back), and the ball player would be encouraged to take the game on. Skilled midfielders would be at a premium because they could make something out of a hot ball, and boring role players through the middle who can fit to a structure, and hold the ball in when tackled, would be less important.

“Made an attempt, play on”. That’s the spirit of the game. Not “no prior, give it to me”.


I’ve previously said, any rule that requires interpretation shouldn’t be in the game.

Makes it easier to manage and easier to officiate.


Yep, it’s best to pretend it was knocked out. When you genuinely attempt to handball but the ball gets dislodged before the fist strikes, you will always get pinged.


Interesting on the players talking footy last night all 3 of Phil Davis, Patrick dangerfield and nathan jones agreed to starting points at stoppages would be a good introduction. That goes along with all the players that have trialed it given it a glowing endorsement.
100% this will come in next year and i think with our talent in the forward half will benefit us and bring teams like collingwood and the tigers back to the pack a bit (exactly the reason buckley and shaw have been the biggest knockers on potential changes coz the pies have finally mastered the modern day tigers type style of compressing the field).


When a pack forms umpires seem to wait for an eternity - waiting for the ball to come out. More and more players pile in, then the umpire decides to ball it up. By this stage there are twenty players around the stoppage.
Surely on the umpires can see an infringement in that pack. The player with the ball invariably has opposition players around his neck, on his back etc.
A quick free kick would break up play and deter everyone rushing to the forming pack.
No rule changes necessary just umpires keeping the game open. When a pack forms near the goal the umpire needs to be more circumspect, by in the middle third just keep it moving.


I would like to see a game trialed with only one umpire. Probably couldn’t keep up but would be interesting to see stats on free kicks given/missed and player confusion/satisfaction.