AFL 'What's your decision video

About half way through this clip, Jeff Gieschen tries to explain why Tapscott was correctly penalised for Holding the Ball, despite not having prior opportunity. It's quite laughable.

(almost as laughable as the Brad Green example directly after, where he highlights an incorrect disposal by our player. Yes it was obviously incorrect disposal, but I reckon we tackled North guys about 6-10 times during the 1st half on Saturday, all of which resulted in the player dropping the ball - and often with prior opportunity - yet no decision was taken).

Gieschen's explanation that they are encouraging players to dispose of the ball 'any way they can' in an effort to keep the play moving, proves to me that the AFL have lost the plot once again when it comes to this rule.

Edited May 18, 201114 yr by fitness

To an extent I don't blame him, because he is not setting the rules and there doesn't seem to be a clear concise strategy with the rule changes.

For instance the contradiction between the onus being upon players to take an advantage, but the fact, if you get it wrong and the free was paid to the opposition, then you are giving away a 50 (by the current 50m penalty interpretation).

It essentially means you have to stop, assess the umpire's decision, THEN attempt to play on, inevitably after all your opponents have come to a flat-footed stand still because they are trying to figure out whose kick it is too.

With a clear strategy and thought process in place, this issue would have been avoided.

Gieschen is put in a position where he is just trying to enforce and justify the enforcement of terrible rules put together by an inept rules committee.

AFL 'What's your decision video

About half way through this clip, Jeff Gieschen tries to explain why Tapscott was correctly penalised for Holding the Ball, despite not having prior opportunity. It's quite laughable.

(almost as laughable as the Brad Green example directly after, where he highlights an incorrect disposal by our player. Yes it was obviously incorrect disposal, but I reckon we tackled North guys about 6-10 times during the 1st half on Saturday, all of which resulted in the player dropping the ball - and often with prior opportunity - yet no decision was taken).

Gieschen's explanation that they are encouraging players to dispose of the ball 'any way they can' in an effort to keep the play moving, proves to me that the AFL have lost the plot once again when it comes to this rule.

Yes laughable. No prior opportunity, not holding the ball - anything else is open to interpretation and will result in inconsistency.

If players are encouraged to stand up in the tackle (a la the Didak example) then I believe that the tackling player is left with little choice but to try and bring the player to the ground (a la Dangermouse - Trengove).

Please stop f*&%!ing around with the game!

Edited May 18, 201114 yr by Tricky

Yes umpries have a tough job and it is a fast paced game, however they make far too many glaring errors, despite the fact they try to give stats to the contrary.

They pay too many ticky touchwood crappy decisions and then miss blatant ones (such as petterd being tackled in a marking contest).

The interpretations keep on changing, and this I can blame on Geisch and his people.

I dont recall the AFL or the rules committee saying that now you can get rid of the ball in any manner, as long as you try, and then it is play on.

By far the worst though, and the reason I think the rules and umpires are under so mcuh pressure, is the AFLs absolute love of speeding the game up and wanting to keep the ball moving. Because of that we now have so many incorrect disposals, stupid free kicks paid everywhere, rugby scrums going on and the clubs resorting to "pressing" in order to slow the game down.

What is wrong with the game stopping? Why not ball it up straight away instead of allowing players to hold the ball for 5 seconds and then simply "drop" or throw the ball to a teammate? What is wrong with a 30 second break to see goal line technology come in? Why do we need to move so quickly?

We have loved the game for what it was for so long and they keep changning it and unfortunately their justification is "more people are watching it than ever". I am guessing no matter what they do more people will watch it, because that is who we are, we will watch the game, but just leave it alone and stick to the REAL rules and common sense of hte game.

End rant.

If I saw Tapscott tackling someone like he was tackled I would be expecting it to be holding the ball. If you have one hand free with the ball then its expected he should at least try to kick it. There are worse decisions being made.

What about the non holding the ball decision on Swallow late in the 2nd Quarter?? Had clear prior opportunity resulted in a turnover and easy goal to North. A clear turning point in the game. Absolutely putrid decision!!

What about the non holding the ball decision on Swallow late in the 2nd Quarter?? Had clear prior opportunity resulted in a turnover and easy goal to North. A clear turning point in the game. Absolutely putrid decision!!

That's when i went outside, my TV was in danger.

If I saw Tapscott tackling someone like he was tackled I would be expecting it to be holding the ball. If you have one hand free with the ball then its expected he should at least try to kick it. There are worse decisions being made.

I agree, when I saw it live I thought he took a small step with the footy and could have got rid of it albeit very quickly. It was more the inconsistency on Saturday which was completely baffling.

While we are whinging, does anyone want to complain about Green and Watts not being pinged for blatant throws of the ball in our forward line?

The problem with the umpiring is the consistency not the bias.

If I saw Tapscott tackling someone like he was tackled I would be expecting it to be holding the ball. If you have one hand free with the ball then its expected he should at least try to kick it. There are worse decisions being made.

Interesting point, personally I don't think he had time - hence no PO.

My understanding is that PO occurs before the tackle, not during.

Quote from Gieschen "Certainly didn't have prior opportunity"

Agree you don't have to look far to see worse decisions.

Edited May 18, 201114 yr by Tricky

I am not sure if anyone is, especially myself, is whinging only about our decisions.

I can remember when the Green decision was not paid that I said to my brother that was the best throw seen at ES since Billy Slater was there.

We all hate the inconsistency and we are not the only ones to be hurt with poor decisions. Geisch actually said about the Tapscott tackle that as long as you make an attempt it doen not matter how the ball is moved on, that is fine. That is just wrong.

My understanding is that PO occurs before the tackle, not during.

I think it applies to what happens once the tackled player has possession of the ball which includes when he tackled and not tackled.

Geisch actually said about the Tapscott tackle that as long as you make an attempt it doen not matter how the ball is moved on, that is fine. That is just wrong.

I think the fact that Tapscott made no effort to release the ball when first tackled made his disposition worse. If he had tried to get rid of the ball at that time and the due to circumstances he was not able to then there is a reasonable presumption of no prior opportunity. I know there is umpire consistency here but the number of times where a player tackled makes a dramatic show to indicate that he is trying to release the ball but cant suggests to me that most players are aware of the obligations.

There is a disgraceful decision made about every 2 minutes

Half the good players in the comp are in the stands injured

It's more like athletics than footy

Becoming thoroughly unwatchable

There is a disgraceful decision made about every 2 minutes

Half the good players in the comp are in the stands injured

A-ha so it the umpires fault and not the medical department so many players are getting injured? Good work. You are onto something here.

Rhino I know the players are aware that they need to make a show of their attempts to release the ball, what I am disagreeing with is the way in which players these days just drop the ball, throw it or hold onto it and place it on the ground and release it only when they see a teammate.

There are so many incorrect disposals these days, they are not even close to disposals, and that really annoys me.

Yoko,

While it does not look these days, I used to cringe watching KB throw the ball out in front of himself when about to be tackled and claim "holding the man"....and getting the free.

Alot has to do with the interpretation of the rules and the desire of all team to control possession of the ball (or in simple terms...if you dont have it then make sure the other side doesn't).

The prior opportunity/incorrect disposal rule is a bit of a shambles these days IMO.

I would love to have the Giesch's job, continued drop off in umpiring standards, yet still has a job

The prior opportunity/incorrect disposal rule is a bit of a shambles these days IMO.

It has been a shambles for about 10 years.

This is the official rule relating to Holding the Ball:

15.2.3 Holding the Football — Prior Opportunity/No Prior Opportunity

Where the field Umpire is satisfied that a Player in possession of the football:

(a) has had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if the Player does not Kick or Handball the football immediately when they are Correctly Tackled; or

(b ) has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if, upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not Correctly Dispose or attempt to Correctly Dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.

(c ) Except in the instance of a poor bounce or throw, a Player who takes possession of the football while contesting a bounce or throw by a field Umpire or a boundary throw in, shall be regarded as having had prior opportunity.

Clearly from 15.2.3(b ), if you don't have prior opportunity, you can still be caught holding the ball if you don't either dispose of the ball or reasonably attempt to dispose of it. So you do not need to have a prior opportunity.

Edited May 21, 201114 yr by titan_uranus

This is the official rule relating to Holding the Ball:

15.2.3 Holding the Football — Prior Opportunity/No Prior Opportunity

Where the field Umpire is satisfied that a Player in possession of the football:

(a) has had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if the Player does not Kick or Handball the football immediately when they are Correctly Tackled; or

(b ) has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if, upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not Correctly Dispose or attempt to Correctly Dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.

(c ) Except in the instance of a poor bounce or throw, a Player who takes possession of the football while contesting a bounce or throw by a field Umpire or a boundary throw in, shall be regarded as having had prior opportunity.

Clearly from 15.2.3(b ), if you don't have prior opportunity, you can still be caught holding the ball if you don't either dispose of the ball or reasonably attempt to dispose of it. So you do not need to have a prior opportunity.

(a) and (B) seem to be what they always were (at least as far back as I remember and thats considerable).

that leaves interpretation, and this is constantly changing

two things that still seem to be a factor is the home-crowd-effect, and the umpires favourites, but you can't legislate against that can you?

meh. it was a 50/50 that didn't go our way.

I watched Judd last night crash the pack about 5 times and drop the ball...No penalty, I think players should be encouraged to take on the tackler, the rules need to be "modified" to allow them to do this, it should be play on not a free kick, just the same as Tappy's HTB last week.