Goal Posts - rule change

[Toorak 108]

Has the AFL ever considered treating the goal posts the same way as soccer (football) deals with them. If the ball hits the post and still goes through - its a goal. If the ball hits the post and bounces back into play, its play on. This would be a solution to Video Review System and speed up the game. Thoughts?

[Robbie57 2,001]

No but they are considering introducing the rugby rule that you cant play the ball off your feet.....

[autocol 448]

They did that in the NAB cup one year. Would make things a lot easier.

[JV7 2,348]

I guess when they trialled the ball hitting the post and coming back in it was play on in the NAB cup a few years ago but even that's been scrapped from the NAB cup. There's some merit in the ball hitting the inside of the post and still been a goal but as fustrating and annoying the goal system review is, I think once they get the proper technology it will be better. It's been a bit like the cricket review system, bought in to remove the howlers but is used in 50/50 situations which could go either way and players/supporters can deal with those ones if they go against you

Edited July 7, 2014 by JV7

[Sir Why You Little 36,621]

Its a fundamental part of what makes the game different.

Leave it alone.

[SaberFang 7,151]

Could they not just follow the tennis system and force players to be the ones that call for the review? They can only get one per game though, and it remains umpires call if no review is requested by players/coaches?

The current system of field umpires overruling the goal umpire despite being 60 meters away is utterly farcical. Give the power to the players.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Lamashtu

[Nasher 33,607]

Its a fundamental part of what makes the game different.

Leave it alone.

Exactly what I was going to say.

I'm all for a progressive, evolving game (to a degree) but I'd be sorry to see any changes the way scoring works.

[Sir Why You Little 36,621]

Exactly what I was going to say.

I'm all for a progressive, evolving game (to a degree) but I'd be sorry to see any changes the way scoring works.

i even dislike the way the TV doesn't show Goals and Behinds in scoring.

It gives me the [censored]!

[Bitter but optimistic 22,064]

Exactly what I was going to say.

I'm all for a progressive, evolving game (to a degree) but I'd be sorry to see any changes the way scoring works.

I agree Gnash but they have already buggered up a fundamental of the game by bringing in the vrs. Now, just as in cricket, umpires are becoming less inclined to make a decision and the game is being held up by incessant replays.

[monoccular 17,315]

No but they are considering introducing the rugby rule that you cant play the ball off your feet.....

having already brought in, it seems, the rugby rule that a tackled player can throw the ball at will, and the other rugby rule that allows players with the ball to be ridden into the ground and laid upon by a huge stack.

I wouldn't however be averse to having a ball that passes through the goals, or behind area for that matter, being given the full score dependent upon which side of the post it passes. The NAB (or Ansett or Wizard or whatever Cup it was) rule of play on if it came back into play though doesn't excite me much. Anything to put a swift end to the current pathetic, time wasting, confusing, insulting, annoying and inconclusive goal review system would be an improvement.

Edited July 7, 2014 by monoccular

[daisycutter 29,317]

having already brought in, it seems, the rugby rule that a tackled player can throw the ball at will, and the other rugby rule that allows players with the ball to be ridden into the ground and laid upon by a huge stack.

I wouldn't however be averse to having a ball that passes through the goals, or behind area for that matter, being given the full score dependent upon which side of the post it passes. The NAB (or Ansett or Wizard or whatever Cup it was) rule of play on if it came back into play though doesn't excite me much. Anything to put a swift end to the current pathetic, time wasting, confusing, insulting, annoying and inconclusive goal review system would be an improvement.

maybe we could add a horizontal bar like in ruby?

then we could have 6 points for unders and 3 points for overs plus retain behinds

may as well add an offside rule too

[Toorak 108]

having already brought in, it seems, the rugby rule that a tackled player can throw the ball at will, and the other rugby rule that allows players with the ball to be ridden into the ground and laid upon by a huge stack.

I wouldn't however be averse to having a ball that passes through the goals, or behind area for that matter, being given the full score dependent upon which side of the post it passes. The NAB (or Ansett or Wizard or whatever Cup it was) rule of play on if it came back into play though doesn't excite me much. Anything to put a swift end to the current pathetic, time wasting, confusing, insulting, annoying and inconclusive goal review system would be an improvement.

The only rule modification required is if the ball hits the post and passes through, the appropriate score is awarded. If the ball hits the post and returns to the playing area the current rule applies. This is just simplifying the scoring procedure without a radical change.

[John Crow Batty 8,766]

Though looks like a practical idea it will disort the continuity of historical scoring records of our game. Like what happened with cricket with the shorter boundaries making it easier to score sixes but cheapening the value of them. In MLB baseball they decided to keep wooden bats rather than go for aluminium because the aluminium bats could hit the ball about 20 metres further thus making a mockery of their historical records. All our team and individual scoring records will be up [censored] creek.

Edited July 7, 2014 by america de cali

[Earl Hood 6,057]

Its a fundamental part of what makes the game different.

Leave it alone.

Exactly! Why the current obsession with goal decisions? Close games won by a goal or less have been decided by 40 or so field umpiring decisions and probably 50 or so non decisions,not given in the previous 120'minutes, why the obsession when a goal umpire may give a questionable call on a ball that may have hit the post or not. There are so many variables in the field umpiring over 120 minutes of footy that can determine an outcome that I believe it is ridiculous to look at spending a couple of million to do the goal technology properly.

[hardtack 10,400]

Has the AFL ever considered treating the goal posts the same way as soccer (football) deals with them. If the ball hits the post and still goes through - its a goal. If the ball hits the post and bounces back into play, its play on. This would be a solution to Video Review System and speed up the game. Thoughts?

Well, that would open a whole can of worms... if you are to pay that like soccer, then every ball that is touched or run through the goals should also be a goal.

The only issue I have with the whole goal/point system is that if a ball hits the goal post it's a point and if it hits the point post it's out of bounds... why is it that if it is touched through the goals it's a point, yet if it's touched through the points, it's a point and not out of bounds?

[stuie 7,374]

How about we let the umpires try and learn the current rules properly without giving them more every year?

[monoccular 17,315]

The only rule modification required is if the ball hits the post and passes through, the appropriate score is awarded. If the ball hits the post and returns to the playing area the current rule applies. This is just simplifying the scoring procedure without a radical change.

Agree totally - a more succinct way of putting it than mine was.

[Moonshadow 17,490]

Goal umpiring went downhill when they took away the white lab coats and brimmed hats and made them look like baseball refs. The game is becoming more and more dull and homogenised with sports from o/seas. The 'hit the post' rule is unique, leave it alone please.

[dee-luded 2,959]

maybe we could add a horizontal bar like in ruby?

then we could have 6 points for unders and 3 points for overs plus retain behinds

may as well add an offside rule too

then all we'll need, is a round ball, & N0 tackling... Tìoraidh

.

[angrydee 842]

maybe we could add a horizontal bar like in ruby?

then we could have 6 points for unders and 3 points for overs plus retain behinds

may as well add an offside rule too

We can take it a step firther and stop the players being allowed touch the ball with their hand - except for the fullback.

[Theo 272]

All we have to do is change the posts from round to square above the padding. Deflections would we be easily seen. The square posts could be rotated 45 degrees so the corner points are in line each other along the goal line.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Theo

[Ethan Tremblay 29,974]

Just leave it as is and get rid of the stupid goal review system as it is.

Make the goal umpire grow a set and make a call.

[monoccular 17,315]

Just leave it as is and get rid of the stupid goal review system as it is.

Make the goal umpire grow a set and make a call.

The best answer yet. And stop the central maggots from interfering, unless asked by the goal umpire. Edited July 8, 2014 by monoccular

[daisycutter 29,317]

All we have to do is change the posts from round to square above the padding. Deflections would we be easily seen. The square posts could be rotated 45 degrees so the corner points are in line each other along the goal line.

if we had thinner posts then there would be less posters

surely there is some space age material that would allow strong 10mm posts?

better still have virtual posts of bright laser beams as in star wars

[John Crow Batty 8,766]

if we had thinner posts then there would be less posters

surely there is some space age material that would allow strong 10mm posts?

better still have virtual posts of bright laser beams as in star wars

Thinner posts would be hard to see from a distance and likely cause more confusion with narrow misses.