30 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I think the answer to your question is obvious. One is a fourth man up.

So is 4th man up legal?

9 hours ago, billy2803 said:

Thought you'd be a big fan of having a 3rd man "up", Bitty...

Must be mellowing in your old days.

How very vulgar of you hillbilly!

Give yourself a good flogging immediately !!

8 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I think the answer to your question is obvious. One is a fourth man up.

 

7 hours ago, ManDee said:

So is 4th man up legal?

Of course unless it is clearly stated as illegal by the AFL then it must be OK.  They would never leave anything unclear: hell, how could one justify Gil's salary if one left any stone unturned?  He is paid handsomely to run an honest, clearly and cleanly run ship.

Edited December 23, 20169 yr by monoccular

17 hours ago, sue said:

An earlier post suggested that the solution to the problem of short boundary throw-ins etc is that the umpire calls play on at which point it is no longer a ruck contest and anyone can be third, fourth of tenth man up without penalty.  Sounds reasonable to me and who knows, it may be the AFL's position.  But it would be nice if the AFL detailed these sorts of things when making announcements since most supporters are smart enough to immediately ask the 'what if' questions.

Sue it wasn't a suggestion, it is actually how ruck contests are umpired now (ie currently)!

Edited December 23, 20169 yr by deanox