Jump to content

  • Latest Podcast: JLT 02 Brisbane

titan_uranus

Shepherding the man on the mark

Recommended Posts

Hawthorn did this repeatedly today to good effect. It bought some of their kicks an extra 10 metres by allowing the kicker to get out on an angle without the man on the mark cutting him off. It also got Gunston a goal early in the fourth quarter.

IMO this should be outlawed by changing the rules: the protected zone should apply to the man on the mark who is otherwise defenceless. But until that happens, why don't we do it? Didn't any of our players see how frequently Hawthorn did it and how it helped them get out the back of our press?

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Hawthorn did this repeatedly today to good effect. It bought some of their kicks an extra 10 metres by allowing the kicker to get out on an angle without the man on the mark cutting him off. It also got Gunston a goal early in the fourth quarter.

IMO this should be outlawed by changing the rules: the protected zone should apply to the man on the mark who is otherwise defenceless. But until that happens, why don't we do it? Didn't any of our players see how frequently Hawthorn did it and how it helped them get out the back of our press?

Yep, was mentioned a heap on MMM, too. They used that tactic all day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to recall that the legality of the tactic was raised at senior AFL level a few years ago & the footy ops mob gave it the ok. To me it's shepherding off the ball and should never have been approved. The Hawks are masters at it and Geelong have also used it effectively over the years.

Just glad it wasn't around when I was plodding around suburban mudheaps decades ago. I suspect I'd have got a few unscheduled holidays

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is totally legal to stand next to the man on the mark according to the rules. However umpires have the teammate stand back generally until play on is called.

Its an abomination and should be banned. Either that or a team should be able to bump the guy to the ground despite him being more than 5m from the ball.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Hawthorn did this repeatedly today to good effect. It bought some of their kicks an extra 10 metres by allowing the kicker to get out on an angle without the man on the mark cutting him off. It also got Gunston a goal early in the fourth quarter.

IMO this should be outlawed by changing the rules: the protected zone should apply to the man on the mark who is otherwise defenceless. But until that happens, why don't we do it? Didn't any of our players see how frequently Hawthorn did it and how it helped them get out the back of our press?

Why are Hawthorn always ahead of the pack and we never are? Clarkson is the greatest coach of all time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Hawthorn did this repeatedly today to good effect. It bought some of their kicks an extra 10 metres by allowing the kicker to get out on an angle without the man on the mark cutting him off. It also got Gunston a goal early in the fourth quarter.

IMO this should be outlawed by changing the rules: the protected zone should apply to the man on the mark who is otherwise defenceless. But until that happens, why don't we do it? Didn't any of our players see how frequently Hawthorn did it and how it helped them get out the back of our press?

They did it all day. I was watching them do it and swearing my head off. Its not in the rules. The man on the man was blocked out from running east or west. How isn't that not a free kick against Hawthorn? This didn't just happen a few times either - it happened regularly. I don't want us to do it because it should have been a free kick to us. I reckon if we did it then they'd of paid it against us.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Hawthorn did this repeatedly today to good effect. It bought some of their kicks an extra 10 metres by allowing the kicker to get out on an angle without the man on the mark cutting him off. It also got Gunston a goal early in the fourth quarter.

IMO this should be outlawed by changing the rules: the protected zone should apply to the man on the mark who is otherwise defenceless. But until that happens, why don't we do it? Didn't any of our players see how frequently Hawthorn did it and how it helped them get out the back of our press?

We were talking about it today too, its blatant holding the man, they don't shepherd they hold the man, the umps today were absolutely pathetic, Chamberlain needs to be kicked of the umps panel, the guy is a F*%#ingarsehole

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been going on for years now...it's nothing new.

Pretty sure it was Malthouse that first used it with C/Wood.

We should be well aware & able to counter it by now.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well since you are allowed within 5 meters of your opponent, if they are standing next to the man on the mark, another player should then creep 5 meters over the original mark. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While it's not uncommon, Adelaide applied the tactic heavily against us in Darwin last year as well. Does it have something to do with the way we set up defensively down the line ? Like leaving the boundary side open?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hawks have been doing it for years.

I recall us trying it a few years back, from memory Dunn was involved. The result was the kick being recalled and we were warned not to do it again. Chalk it up to equalisation I guess.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Hawks have been doing it for years.

I recall us trying it a few years back, from memory Dunn was involved. The result was the kick being recalled and we were warned not to do it again. Chalk it up to equalisation I guess.

Yep.... noticed it in Hawks games a few years back.

Thought that any opposition team would know in seconds how to counter it.

Remember it does put them one man down further up the field

Dare I say it's a match day coaching issue

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rjay said:

This has been going on for years now...it's nothing new.

Pretty sure it was Malthouse that first used it with C/Wood.

We should be well aware & able to counter it by now.

it is an ugly look though wouldn't you say ? I don't like it. 

The zone around the mark should be protected from all.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, nutbean said:

it is an ugly look though wouldn't you say ? I don't like it. 

The zone around the mark should be protected from all.

When I first noticed it during Hawks premiership years I thought it was illegal and agree it looks bad.

Hawks have always pushed the lines...

1. It was them intentionally pulling down players after a mark to slow the game down that caused the 15m penalty to be extended to 50M.

2. They would rush the ball through for a point thus necessitating the intentional rushed behind rule.

On this aspect on reflection I think that if we are going to have the no 5/10m exclusion zone it makes a little bit of a mockery if you can position a player next to the man on the mark. Then again I am getting a little tired of the constant rule tweaking and the over umpiring of games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

Why are Hawthorn always ahead of the pack and we never are? Clarkson is the greatest coach of all time.

He's been doing it for at least 4 years. Its not new....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

When I first noticed it during Hawks premiership years I thought it was illegal and agree it looks bad.

Hawks have always pushed the lines...

1. It was them intentionally pulling down players after a mark to slow the game down that caused the 15m penalty to be extended to 50M.

2. They would rush the ball through for a point thus necessitating the intentional rushed behind rule.

On this aspect on reflection I think that if we are going to have the no 5/10m exclusion zone it makes a little bit of a mockery if you can position a player next to the man on the mark. Then again I am getting a little tired of the constant rule tweaking and the over umpiring of games.

No it wasn't. It was Sheedy.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

Why are Hawthorn always ahead of the pack and we never are? Clarkson is the greatest coach of all time.

 

23 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

He's been doing it for at least 4 years. Its not new....

 

7 hours ago, rjay said:

This has been going on for years now...it's nothing new.

Pretty sure it was Malthouse that first used it with C/Wood.

We should be well aware & able to counter it by now.

It's a tactic that's been used for near on 10 years now.

We should be on top off it...

1 hour ago, nutbean said:

it is an ugly look though wouldn't you say ? I don't like it. 

The zone around the mark should be protected from all.

Agree...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It drove me mental all game. As said above, it was holding not shepherding and should have been a free kick every time. That wouldn't fit in with #freekickhawthorn though. Free kick count was 27-24 their way but it felt more like 30-15. Razor and co certainly gave them a ride back into the game and it gave them all the momentum they needed to do what happened.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It takes smart players to do this, which we don't have.  They need to stand behind the player on the mark and can only Shepherd when play on is called.  It enables the kicker to turn a 50m kick into a 60m play that puts pressure on defensive zones.  Easy to defend against man up the man that is going to shepherd, try to stop is where the ball is rather that 60m down field

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Hawthorn did this repeatedly today to good effect. It bought some of their kicks an extra 10 metres by allowing the kicker to get out on an angle without the man on the mark cutting him off. It also got Gunston a goal early in the fourth quarter.

IMO this should be outlawed by changing the rules: the protected zone should apply to the man on the mark who is otherwise defenceless. But until that happens, why don't we do it? Didn't any of our players see how frequently Hawthorn did it and how it helped them get out the back of our press?

They have been doing it for 5 years. We obviously are not aware of that, as we developed no counter plan.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was under the (mis)impression that there was a 5 meter no go zone around the man on the mark. 

As I recall we tried it a few times and the ball was called back.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coaches were warned off it a few years back when Malthouse was all over it. Dear old Heretia Lamumba, in his Harry O'Brien incarnation, was a gun at it.

Now it's come back big time and the AFL are sitting on their hands. It's completely against the spirit of the game. It's just wrong.

God they're inept.

However! In the rules, NO PLAYER is allowed in the protected zone (unless they're chasing their oppo, etc). 50m penalty. But in true AFL "the real rules exist only in the head of the current umpires director" fashion, they say nothing about what happens when the player is on the ball carrier's team.

So strictly speaking, they can do it.

The only rule in play would be 15.4.2 (shepherding), where you can't block a player more than 5m from the ball. When was the last time you saw that being paid? Even though it happens week in week out in a huge number of "long ball" situations?

But when the umps allow blatant and severe pushes in the back ... when they allow tackled players to slump to the deck and roll the ball away ... when they constantly allow short kicks ... throws ... why would they worry about a "technical" rule like this?

The only rule in play seems to be that Clarkson is a genius, so why shouldn't he be allowed to do it?

I note that after a few weeks of leniency, deliberate OOB made a triumphant comeback.

I am convinced that after a "dark age" where the umpiring has been consistently terrible, it is now worse than ever before.

  • Like 2
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, nutbean said:

it is an ugly look though wouldn't you say ? I don't like it. 

The zone around the mark should be protected from all.

Absolutely. It's a bad look for the game and only makes the rules very grey. If only one person can man the mark because of the 5m rule, how is it fair that his opponent can stand right there and shepherd? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Social Media

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles

    OVERPOWERED by George on the Outer

    If there was ever a prime example of a team of players not ready for the new football season it was Melbourne in the opening round of 2019.   Throughout the field there was just too much evidence of players who haven’t had sufficient pre-season or players who ordinarily wouldn’t have even graced the field at this early stage.   The Demons also got a lesson on selection with Port Adelaide showing that two ruckmen on the field is an essential for this season.  It was a lesson that should

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    THE WELCOME GAME by Whispering Jack

    The Melbourne Football Club has moved forward in leaps and bounds since it last met Port Adelaide in a totally forgettable (for Demon fans) season opener on the MCG.  That game, played on Sunday, 31 March, 2013 before a crowd of 22,924, was supposed to be a close encounter between two of the competition’s lesser lights from the previous season when the Power had finished 14th and the Demons 16th (ahead only of AFL newbies Gold Coast and GWS). It turned into a slaughter with Port taking the

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    THE WALKING WOUNDED by Paddy Gosch

    Forget the fact that Melbourne narrowly missed out on getting the four JLT points on offer for a second consecutive week and the blow to the ego of a supposed top four contender losing ... well almost at home ... to a team that has recently dwelt in the AFL cellar and won a mere five games in 2018. The things that emerged from the horror final JLT outing was that the Demons are a long way from being prepared to take on the rigours of a long tough season in which they have one of the hardest fixt

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT by Paddy Gosch

    The Demons have named a star studded line up in it’s final practice match before the season proper. They take on the emerging Brisbane Lions out at Casey which is the second of three matches at the ground on Saturday. Many of the Dees best 22 have been recalled including Vice Captains Max Gawn and Neville Jetta whilst Captains Nathan Jones and Jack Viney will play restricted minutes in the VFL curtain raiser. Former Gold Coast co-captain Steven May will play his first official game for Melb

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    HIT OUT by Paddy Gosch

    As far as preseason hit outs go, the Demons’ first JLT Community Series fixture against the Tigers in the blistering heat at Shepparton, was instructive of a number of things but not really conclusive as to how each team will fare in the regular season against the competition's big guns (which includes against each other). That’s the way these practice match hit outs go. Neither of the teams was at full strength, particularly Melbourne but if you were looking for the reason for the 12 point

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    HOT OUT OF THE CITY by Paddy Gosch

    The Dees travel out of the city for game one of two JLT Community Series practice matches before the season proper. Our first match takes us to the floodplains of the Goldburn River in Northern Victoria to the city of Shepparton. We take on the Tigers for the first of at least 3 encounters with the 2017 Premiers this year. The game will be played in scorching temperatures so expect plenty of rotations, ice vests, fans running overtime and extra water carriers. The Demons are coming off a wi

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    GAME, SET & SCRATCH by Paddy Gosch

    I always believe in starting off any report by accentuating the positive and in that regard, as at the time of writing, the Demons have not reported any injuries so that’s my major positive from today’s practice game v the Magpies (albeit that we know the club is somewhat lax in reporting these things so my best wishes go out if any of today’s participants are in intensive care at the Alfred).  Another positive was that Razor Ray performed his umpiring duties admirably which is more than I

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    SCRATCH by Paddy Gosch

    The Demons are set to take on the old enemy Collingwood in a good old fashioned Scratch Match on Friday Morning. It is unknown what form the match will take, how many quarters there will be, their length, the amount of rotations or even whether they'll keep score. One thing we do know for sure is that both coaching staffs will be keeping their cards close to their chests to ensure neither will glean too much from their competition. The Dees will likely be without some of their stars as Tom

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    IMAGINE by Whispering Jack

    The Demons made their official return to the training track for 2019 on a sunny Saturday morning at Goschs Paddock with most of the interest initially centred on a small patch of ground in one of the pockets where the rehab group was going through the paces. Some good pieces of news on that score. The  rehab group is considerably smaller than it was prior to the Christmas break with Christian Petracca (knee), James Harmes (shoulder), Jayden Hunt (shoulder), Neville Jetta (shoulder), Oscar M

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features

×
×
  • Create New...