The Advantage Rule

[sue 9,018]

The advantage rule needs re-consideration. There were several instances in the Brisbane match where what happened after the whistle went was treated almost randomly causing unfair advantages or disadvantages. And the same sorts of things happen in almost every match I have seen this year.

There is no easy solution but there surely must be something better. What about the umps not blowing the whistle till it is clear that the team awarded the free kick had no advantage?

BTW, I just watched the reply of the Brisbane match Q1 which has caused so much wrist-slitting here. There wasn't that much between the teams. The scoreboard difference was largely due to some terrible umpiring.

[Chook 14,998]

What about each umpire having two whistles, each with distinctly different sounds? The umpire blows the whistle designated to the team who gets the free, at which point the player from that team can either take advantage, or opt for the free kick. It's when players don't know which team's free kick it is, that trouble starts.

[sue 9,018]

. It's when players don't know which team's free kick it is, that trouble starts.

It doesn't always happen that way. For example, when Green 'played on' (was it Q2?) the ball had spilled well away from where the free was awarded. He went after it at less than full speed, picked it up and looked over his shoulder to see what the ump was going to do. The ump deemed he had taken advantage by which time he was swamped by Lions. Was Green just fetching the ball to quickly return it to the player with the free kick, or was he playing on? Dunno.

[Chook 14,998]

It doesn't always happen that way. For example, when Green 'played on' (was it Q2?) the ball had spilled well away from where the free was awarded. He went after it at less than full speed, picked it up and looked over his shoulder to see what the ump was going to do. The ump deemed he had taken advantage by which time he was swamped by Lions. Was Green just fetching the ball to quickly return it to the player with the free kick, or was he playing on? Dunno.

That was his fault for not making it clear that he was not taking advantage. If we could make it so that players were always clear which team's free kick it was (by having different sounding whistles, for example), then it would be easy for the players to ALWAYS be the sole arbiters of whether advantage is or is not taken.

If we brought in a rule like, "It's always play-on unless the next player from that team to intentionally touch the ball clearly raises their hand and signals that they want the ball to be returned to the person who was awarded the free kick," then the problem would be solved, IMO.

[Demon Rob 2]

in every other sport once the whistle goes the game stops,

and if there is advantage they usually yell advantage or signal a free is noted and advantage is being played,

and if there is no advantage then the whistle goes.

what is so hard with that?

having a whistle mean a free is paid but you can play on maybe for advantage or maybe for a 50metre penalty is just stupid.

oh, wait - its the AFL isn't it.

[pitchfork 181]

Things have definitely changed this year in this regard. Umpires aren't bringing it back when there's no advantage. Similarly, the guy who plays on in hope they'll be paid advantage suffers a 50 metro penalty if the umpires' raffle decided the free was against their team, VERY quickly.

Two whistles is more confusion IMHO. The umpires will stuff it up too often.

How about, as in soccer or rugby, the umpire makes their decision, with the relevant gesture, ie: right or left arm held out, and does not whistle ever in the game unless he wants things stopped. Would mess with frees for SMS against stats but I don't think I care. Dreamteam and Supercoach would learn to live with it.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,012]

I think the umps had it backwards on Sunday. Every time we tried to play on they called it back and when we didn't want to they made us anyway.

[Grapeviney 9,538]

the new rule, or application of it, is absurd..

was much more reasonable in previous years. sure, there were occasions where the ball was brought back when advantage should have been awarded, but the number of times teams have been penalised by allowing play to continue this year is ridiculous

just a case of AFL meddling for the sake of it

should revert to how it was in previous years

[jnrmac 19,905]

Numerous times players can't hear the whistle. Happened to Green, happened to Maric last week.

It's a disgrace.

What about the touched ball where Dunn gave away a 50m penalty????? The Brissy guy was cacking himself.

Filthy maggots.

[H_T 3,032]

What about the touched ball where Dunn gave away a 50m penalty????? The Brissy guy was cacking himself.

Filthy maggots.

I know it means nothing in the grand scheme of things, but fair dinkum I could see it was touched 150 metres away holding a hotdog whilst adding the sauce. One would think at least one of the three central umpires would have observed it being their job. Razor Ray wasn't even sharp enough.

[biggestred 4,823]

id rather they just didnt blow their bloody whistles unless the advantage was the the wrong team or there was no advantage, and then bring it back. if there is advantage, just signal it and get the hell onn with the game - it's how every other sport does it!

[RalphiusMaximus 6,012]

I know it means nothing in the grand scheme of things, but fair dinkum I could see it was touched 150 metres away holding a hotdog whilst adding the sauce. One would think at least one of the three central umpires would have observed it being their job. Razor Ray wasn't even sharp enough.

I was positive I heard one of the umps yell touched for that one. If he did, why the hell didn't he speak up?

[nutbean 8,838]

The issue is the split second advantage decision - did he play on and take advantage or not - some of the calls have been horrific

I think that the AFL could learn a thing or two from rubgy union - when a free kick is paid - the hand is raised for a maximum of 3-4 seconds ( not the 15-20 seconds that union uses) when advantage is being taken - if there is no advantage then the free kick is brought back.

I have no problem with advantage being taken and the advatage kick being wayward and then a turnover - i have a huge problem with advantage being paid when a tram mate picks up the ball and takes one half hearted step and the umpire calls play on when there was no real advantage. The new interpretation has highlighted this.

[demoniac 1,296]

Works well in Union where the referee can call the ball back if the flow of play does not advantage the team. Works shockingly in the AFL without.

[Pates 9,625]

Absolutely, this interpretation change is no doubt a failure. I too can't understand why they don't do the exact same thing as is rugby and soccer, by putting it all on the players you are potentially disadvantaging the team for got fouled against! What was wrong with the old method?! I get that we had occasions where the play had be brought back despite an opportunity being presented, but at least they were able to get their proper shot in the first place, plus the adjudication of a teammate taking advantage seems extremely harsh!

[nutbean 8,838]

Works well in Union where the referee can call the ball back if the flow of play does not advantage the team. Works shockingly in the AFL without.

I am not advocating the call back after 30 seconds - but it is obvious in so many cases after so little time - a second after calling advantage play on, that there was no advantage at all. It should almost be like the bad centre bounce rule - a second after deciding the bounce is dodgy - a recall.