I have no problem with a player being spun around, as long as they have both arms free. The example of Curnow with only one arm free is where they need to crack down. At the end of the day, the rule is holding the ball, this to me means that the player has had an opportunity to get rid of it and then hasn’t been able to. The dangerous tackle is why we are here now. Players are scared to bring opposition players to the ground resulting in players spinning around in circles.
yeah i think the point is many far should they spin before being pinged. not so long ago if you spun 360 you were pinged even if disposing at 361, players are getting in 2 full rotations after having prior now which is a joke
7 Likes
It’s a good development. Concussion injuries demanded a change. We can now go back to yelling “Ball !!!”
2 Likes
They also haven’t been award long a free kick if the ball carriers first attempt is to fend off, then they don’t get the disposal away cleanly.
It’s weird that the AFL statement says “It has become clearer throughout the season that in discharging their duty of care whilst executing a tackle, tacklers are positively electing not to take tackled players to ground in the tackle or are generally doing so in a reasonable way including by not using excessive force,” and then the two examples of play on are where the player has been tackled to the ground without having their arms pinned.
So pinning the arms but not tackling the player to the ground? Going to be rewarded. Tackling the player to the ground in a reasonable way and not using excessive force, the thing we just explicitly praised? That’s play on.
2 Likes
I think what they’re trying to say is that tacklers aren’t tackling with force resulting in prolonged tackles, but the ball doesn’t get knocked out, leading to no incorrect disposal call, leading to spectator frustration.
Therefore reducing the time between the tackle and the incorrect disposal call will enable players to continue to tackle without as much force and appease spectators.
1 Like
So in other words, it’s someone else’s fault, not the umpires.
6 Likes
In other other words, “we’ve brought in a new rule to fix what happened when we brought in the other new rule.”
9 Likes
Well if the player had prior, they must dispose “immediately”, so being spun is not on.
If they had no prior, they must dispose in a “reasonable time”, which is so broad as to be meaningless without additional guidance.
Either way, a player should be able to be spun indefinitely, just because they might eventually be able to get the ball off. The laws don’t support that view.
I am not talking about prior opportunity.
If a player picks up the ball or has it handballed to them without prior, then are tackles with one arm pinned and spun around, is that a free kick? The answer is no. So when we see the Curnow incident 50 times in the media, we are seeing him being spun around with one arm trapped and one arm free with the ball. Did he at any point have prior opportunity to get rid of the ball legally?
1 Like
So umpires are cheats and being coached during games
Best explains why blokes like Cripps,Curnow etc get looked after
Can he still kick it?
difficult if being spun and opposition is weighing you down.
I’m not defending Curnow BTW, I actually don’t know if he had prior. I’m just saying it’s not that clear cut.
They have changed on this. They used to consider if the one arm holding the ball was free, it wasn’t pinned and it was holding the ball against. This year, not so much. They seem to think that you can’t really get it off, so it’s a ball up. Even if sometimes, players do actually get a kick away. I don’t care which it is, so long as it’s clear. It just seems to have been subject to a slow drift in interpretation.
If there’s prior, it matters not how possible it is to get the ball away legally; you’ve lost your right to that chance.
Why are the umpires cheating to look after Cripps and Curnow?
Using them as examples
I haven’t seen it either, but I’m not sold on a guy having only one arm pinned and being spun not being able to kick it, like the guy smiling in the third tackle of that demo video.
If scores were level with a minute to go and he was in the goalsquare being tackled like that…I reckon he could kick it.
He did kick it though, just took him a while to do so.
Well, again, without seeing it…
I guess it depends on the interpretation.
When you’re tackled, you’re supposed to get rid of the ball legally and quickly.
It does frustrate me when players can’t dispose of the ball, until they magically can at just the instant a teammate comes into their view.
Or both arms are free but they can only repeatedly hit the thing while it stubbornly stays put - held in place by their other arm. Silly arm!
3 Likes