I can almost accept hands in the back almost, but then one that gives me the shites is the chopping of the arms. What is a defender supposed to do against a 200cm forward, grow?Revoke any rule that Kevin Barlett has chairman of the Rules of the Game Committee has been responsible for introducing and the game would 7928% better.
Stop the pre-game briefs that seem to change precedent from week to week. The small amount of precedent that is inevitable, stop being too gutless to overrule it as a bad decision during a game which then stops a **** decision from building up steam and becoming the norm.
Stop the sub rule, stop interchange caps.
Stop the below the knees rule.
Our game would be 20-30% better straight up.
Cannot believe that hypocritical flog, any muppet who was involved in bringing the idiotic hands-in-the-back rule into being should not be criticising anyone else for damaging the game!!
I can almost accept hands in the back almost, but then one that gives me the shites is the chopping of the arms. What is a defender supposed to do against a 200cm forward, grow?
Revoke any rule that Kevin Barlett has chairman of the Rules of the Game Committee has been responsible for introducing and the game would 7928% better.Stop the pre-game briefs that seem to change precedent from week to week. The small amount of precedent that is inevitable, stop being too gutless to overrule it as a bad decision during a game which then stops a **** decision from building up steam and becoming the norm.
Stop the sub rule, stop interchange caps.
Stop the below the knees rule.
Our game would be 20-30% better straight up.
Cannot believe that hypocritical flog, any muppet who was involved in bringing the idiotic hands-in-the-back rule into being should not be criticising anyone else for damaging the game!!
Crazy idea: play the ball?
Game is a lot better for getting rid of the tag/scrag/grapple/limpet defenders. Now defenders have to read the ball as well as (or better than) their opponent.
Not like full-forwards are unstoppable influences on games now, either - just given them a fair shot at winning the ball when in front/best position.
Fair enough if the main focus is the arms but the way the rule gets interpreted is if the defender punches at the ball but there is incidental contact to the arms the player gets pinged. Is it the rule or the interpretation that is the issue? If it's the rule give the defenders skirts and call contact every time it happens.Crazy idea: play the ball?
I can almost accept hands in the back almost, but then one that gives me the shites is the chopping of the arms. What is a defender supposed to do against a 200cm forward, grow?Revoke any rule that Kevin Barlett has chairman of the Rules of the Game Committee has been responsible for introducing and the game would 7928% better.Stop the pre-game briefs that seem to change precedent from week to week. The small amount of precedent that is inevitable, stop being too gutless to overrule it as a bad decision during a game which then stops a **** decision from building up steam and becoming the norm.
Stop the sub rule, stop interchange caps.
Stop the below the knees rule.
Our game would be 20-30% better straight up.
Cannot believe that hypocritical flog, any muppet who was involved in bringing the idiotic hands-in-the-back rule into being should not be criticising anyone else for damaging the game!!
It's *meant* to be paid when there is more than incidental contact.
I don't think it's *that* badly umpired in general (apart from, obviously, it never ever ever gets paid to the defender when the forward chops them) but it's often a tricky/wrong decision.
Better than allowing the Silvagnis, roundarm both of the forward's arms clear out of the way every freaking time.
The Silvagni octopus tactics were a blight on the game.It's *meant* to be paid when there is more than incidental contact.
I don't think it's *that* badly umpired in general (apart from, obviously, it never ever ever gets paid to the defender when the forward chops them) but it's often a tricky/wrong decision.
Better than allowing the Silvagnis, roundarm both of the forward's arms clear out of the way every freaking time.
The Silvagni octopus tactics were a blight on the game.It's *meant* to be paid when there is more than incidental contact.
I don't think it's *that* badly umpired in general (apart from, obviously, it never ever ever gets paid to the defender when the forward chops them) but it's often a tricky/wrong decision.
Better than allowing the Silvagnis, roundarm both of the forward's arms clear out of the way every freaking time.
He made it look like WWE with those tactics.
May God have mercy on our AFL souls!He made it look like WWE with those tactics.The Silvagni octopus tactics were a blight on the game.Better than allowing the Silvagnis, roundarm both of the forward's arms clear out of the way every freaking time.
I agree with these comments.He made it look like WWE with those tactics.The Silvagni octopus tactics were a blight on the game.It's *meant* to be paid when there is more than incidental contact.
I don't think it's *that* badly umpired in general (apart from, obviously, it never ever ever gets paid to the defender when the forward chops them) but it's often a tricky/wrong decision.
Better than allowing the Silvagnis, roundarm both of the forward's arms clear out of the way every freaking time.
His scragging tactics were endorsed by the AFL when they named him full back of the century.
It became an accepted method of play used by back men against forwards trying to go for the ball. His antics lessened the game as a spectacle.
The rules are unclear, most situations are a toss up. The officials can call it either way.
Other sports have bad officiating but the rules are clear, it is obvious when an official has made a mistake. In our game you can show a reply of an incident and still have no idea if the call is right or wrong.
I don't get why interchange is a problem. The rules committee brings in changes to speed the game up, so players and coaches adjust to it by having more rotations. The Rules committee creates a problem and rather than saying, 'We ****** up, let's fix it' they pretend they didn't create the problem and try to bring in more new rules.
I also don't see how the game is a hybrid. Just because there are elements of this sport that are comparable to other sports, it doesn't mean there is a problem.
The only rule changes needed are to scale back the rules and to make them more clear.
I think the rules committee just try to justify there existence by over doing it with rule changes.
most of the rules are clear, it's merely interpretation and implementation from one umpire to the next, from qtr to qtr, let alone game to game, week to week.
Hands on the back as a small example (opinion of the rule change aside) how many times does it get called now, when it happens ? not ahell of alot. However now and again it'll get pulled out of the hat, like every other rule.
Another rule, you're not allowed to throw the ball, you have to make a certain contact with it to be classed as a handball. That last season esp went out the window and was interpreted as he "made an attempt" to get rid of it, despite not correctly disposing of it.
but yet again the AFL cares more about the image of the game and in this case, how the umpires are viewed, rather than how they perform.
I Personally didn't mind the amount of rotations either, not my cup of tea, as to me they seemed counter productive, sprint 100 plus meters for a "rotation", have a minute or less break, then sprint back onto the ground, seems to do the opposite of what was intended, as in giving players a break.
I still also remember the game when Winda did his knee, and both sides rotated about 10 players each, in the 5 or so min break, that it took to get him off the ground. It's pointless rotating players for the sake of it, which is what teams have been doing, but each to their own.
There are less hands in the back free kicks called now because backmen have changed the way they play.
I friggin' LOVE the hands in the back rule. It's a small step to bringing the game back to what it was. Two blokes going for the ball.
'Incorrect disposal' went out the window a lot longer than twelve months ago. My gut tells me that bringing it back now would play into the hands of flooders, but I may be wrong.
Why don't we find out? Here's a rule to try in the next pre-season: Any disposal not by hand or foot is a free kick. See what happens.
That would be just another interpretation (I realise you‘re taking the piss). Very few have read the actual rules; notably, if the ball is knocked out it is play on.Why don't we find out? Here's a rule to try in the next pre-season: Any disposal not by hand or foot is a free kick. See what happens.
In practice the umps dance all around the actual rules; so whatever any individual viewer thinks are the rules is, at last some of the time, "right".
That would be just another interpretation (I realise you‘re taking the piss). Very few have read the actual rules; notably, if the ball is knocked out it is play on.Why don't we find out? Here's a rule to try in the next pre-season: Any disposal not by hand or foot is a free kick. See what happens.
In practice the umps dance all around the actual rules; so whatever any individual viewer thinks are the rules is, at last some of the time, "right".
I'm aware of that rule. I used to apply it constantly when I was 70kg and umpired juniors.
I wonder how old that rule is. I'd wager it doesn't go back to the mid eighties.
Even so, I'd like to see what the game looked like without it in a preseason.
As far as I'm concerned it's win-win.
If it works you get skills back.
If it doesn't you shut KB the hell up.
most of the rules are clear, it's merely interpretation and implementation from one umpire to the next, from qtr to qtr, let alone game to game, week to week.
Clear as mud!
Pro-tip:
A clear, logical rule doesn't have that much room for interpretation or wiggle room.
Vlad deciding he didn’t like Sydney’s style of play led to the interchange explosion. The afl tried to speed the game up and reduce stoppages by changing the kick in rule. It worked, the game got faster and the interchange s increased.
Quit farking with the rules, accept that different coaches will favor different styles, enjoy that the game is evolving quicker than at any time in its history, finish your rep…
Oh and enforce incorrect disposal for the love of all that is good
I would like in-the-back to be paid more often. The amount of times blokes just jump on the guy with the ball and he gets pinged for holding the ball, when in actual fact he has a bloke sitting on his back, well it just aint in the spirit of the game.
Oh and enforce incorrect disposal for the love of all that is good
It is honestly disgraceful these days.
I remember in the Port pre-season game, one of our blokes got pinned for holding the ball in their forward pocket to which Port took the advantage and the player who took the advantage and got tackled in a 360 tackle about 5 metres away from where he had picked up the ball, then proceeded to drop the ball and it dribbled to the goal square where that cherry picking c@#t Westoff kicked it and the stupid pr%$k umpire waved advantage.
Now from memory, they changed the rules not that long ago that if you are tackled and swung in a 360 motion and you do not dispose of the ball before returning to the beginning of the tackle it is holding the ball? Let alone after that dropping the ball which is supposed to be a free kick to the opposite team in any case.
It just ruins the game not seeing players get rewarded for good tackling and defensive pressure.
It is honestly disgraceful these days.Oh and enforce incorrect disposal for the love of all that is good
I remember in the Port pre-season game, one of our blokes got pinned for holding the ball in their forward pocket to which Port took the advantage and the player who took the advantage and got tackled in a 360 tackle about 5 metres away from where he had picked up the ball, then proceeded to drop the ball and it dribbled to the goal square where that cherry picking c@#t Westoff kicked it and the stupid pr%$k umpire waved advantage.
Now from memory, they changed the rules not that long ago that if you are tackled and swung in a 360 motion and you do not dispose of the ball before returning to the beginning of the tackle it is holding the ball? Let alone after that dropping the ball which is supposed to be a free kick to the opposite team in any case.
It just ruins the game not seeing players get rewarded for good tackling and defensive pressure.
The clear defective to the umps is to let the game flow. They want the ball out and they don't care how. The result is in the 3rd qtr of the grand final on the members wing Burgoyne throws it in the air while being tackled and gives it the old one hand punch with the ump standing 5 meters away. The little leaguers at half time would be pinged for it but burgoyne gets away with it. They then turn around and ping the bloke who has had no prior who is being chicken winged by rioli with others holding in it because he didn't make an attempt.
Not throwing the balL is a key element of our game and the umpires ■■■■ on it week.
It's only in the last 20 years that players have dived on the ball to get a ball up. before that the ball was knocked on ASAP.
they should put a stop to the player with the ball being allowed to play on whilst the ump is still barking instructions at the guy who has to stand the mark. Absolutely unfair advantage to the guy with ball.