AFL introduces 3 new rules for 2013

[Nasher 33,617]

Cool, more rule changes! It's like I get to watch a new sport each and every year.

[P-man 13,366]

I would drink (more) heavily if I was an umpire. They must cringe every time Adrian Anderson has another bright idea.

[monoccular 17,607]

1. Any forceful contact below the knees of an opponent will result in a free kick.

2. The ball will be thrown up at stoppages around the ground. It shall only be bounced to start quarters and after goals.

3. Ruckmen may not make any contact until after the ball has left the umpire's hands (the theory being that this will reduce congestion and help with hit outs to advantage, increasing clearance rates).

They can't help themselves. I suppose the Rules Commission needs a reason to exist so they are going about changing the game each year until it becomes damn near unrecognisable.

Link: http://www.afl.com.a...57/default.aspx

When two ruckmen make contact with each other, who gets penalised?? Both of them?? Another "really well thought out" rules committee decision. Nice theory, but unworkable. They need to draw an imaginary line at right angles to the boundary, or across the ground rather like the centre circle line, and make the ruck men start from either side of this line.

[daisycutter 29,797]

Here is a rule change I'd like to see:

When a free kick is "reversed" the result should be a bounce throw up

As it stands now the reversal is effectively a double penalty....pizzes me off no end

I think when I was a kid this is the way it used to be

comments?

[H_T 3,049]

Here is a rule change I'd like to see:

When a free kick is "reversed" the result should be a bounce throw up

As it stands now the reversal is effectively a double penalty....pizzes me off no end

I think when I was a kid this is the way it used to be

comments?

If the free kick is "reversed" - shouldn't it be just that? Reversed? How can you have a throw up, when it's reversed?

[daisycutter 29,797]

If the free kick is "reversed" - shouldn't it be just that? Reversed? How can you have a throw up, when it's reversed?

OK spell it out for you

Mitch Clark gets free kick 30 m out after being pushed in the back by Norf player

Before he takes his kick the Mo has a push and shove with Harvey who does an Oscar and hits the deck.

Free kick is taken off Clark and free given to Harvey (maybe even closer to Norf's goals

Double penalty. My solution - cancels out original penalty (or mark) - ball-up

[Trisul 666]

Dunn, or any other player that gifts the ball to the opposition after a decision in our favour, deserves to be penalised. Doubly. Triply if it helps.

After all, Dunn could make far better use of his time forcing a ball down the umpires throat for the next throw up.