On 02/05/2017 at 5:03 PM, beelzebub said:

SA Rules:  Kick or handpass and it goes over the line without a player touching it and it goes to the opposition, fumbled or tapped over the line it is a throw in

 

20 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

Makes perfect sense, too much sense for Team Gill

Whilst I appreciate and agree with your assessment of Gil's lack of connectivity with the spirit of the game and of reality in general - maybe other than on the polo field, about which I have no expertise - the "last touch rule" will only encourage inferior players just watching the ball go out after an opponent has kicked it, without making any endeavour to collect it themselves, which is just plain ugly, as shown by Goddard on Sunday.

Edited May 3, 20178 yr by monoccular
sp

35 minutes ago, monoccular said:

 

Whilst I appreciate and agree with your assessment of Gil's lack of connectivity with the spirit of the game and of reality in general - maybe other than on the polo field, about which I have no expertise - the "last touch rule" will only encourage inferior players just watching the ball go out after an opens has kicked it, without making any endeavour to collect it themselves, which is just plain ugly, as shown by Goddard on Sunday.

That SA rule isn't 'last touch' it's last clear kick or handball (not fumble or off hands), and can, of course, be tweaked to include ruling out lack of attempt by opposition players. Would still be clearer than what we have now

Edited May 3, 20178 yr by Moonshadow

51 minutes ago, monoccular said:

 the "last touch rule" will only encourage inferior players just watching the ball go out after an opponent has kicked it, without making any endeavour to collect it themselves, which is just plain ugly, as shown by Goddard on Sunday.

The only thing uglier would be if Goddard and Mav Weller both watched it go out together. That would be a Bermuda Triangle of ugly. Don't go near!!

19 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

That SA rule isn't 'last touch' it's last clear kick or handball (not fumble or off hands), and can, of course, be tweaked to include ruling out lack of attempt by opposition players. Would still be clearer than what we have now

It's a good rule, which is clearly why it hasn't been adopted by Gil and his gang.

8 hours ago, steve_f said:

Apparently in the late 60's LA, a "doobie" was marijuana cigarette. Thank the Lord, there is a rational but yet irrational explanation.

The simplest solution is for the Umpires not to read minds but instead to apply a simple criterion such as whether the ball crossed the line less than 15 metres from the the last contact by the player.  If a player can kick for touch, they deserve our admiration and an offer by the Rabbitohs.

PS my late father blamed Brian Dixon who would kick the ball into the crowd so that the Melbourne rucks could palm it out.

PPS the anagram of "anagram" is "a ragman".  

 

Always called a "scoobie" or "Scoob".

The only doobies were on the "tape cassette"

I'm beginning to suspect that the current doob disarray and public disgruntlement is being 'deliberately' left to run as a softening process for the introduction of a last touch amendment. Classic governmental maneuvering - demonstrate (or leak) how bad it can be with a heavy left or right shift and the polity will just about accept any degree of compromise in accordance with your actual original objectives. 

13 hours ago, dpositive said:

Always called a "scoobie" or "Scoob".

The only doobies were on the "tape cassette"

Au contraire

Refer to Mr Google -> https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Doobie&rlz=1C1NHXL_enAU729AU729&oq=Doobie&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i59j69i61&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I tried smoking a doobie once but I didn't exhale.

17 minutes ago, demonstone said:

I tried smoking a doobie once but I didn't exhale.

Tell us something we don't know Keith...

9 hours ago, steve_f said:

Au contraire

Refer to Mr Google -> https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Doobie&rlz=1C1NHXL_enAU729AU729&oq=Doobie&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i59j69i61&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I stand corrected,and can only say that we grew up in the isolated wilderness and grew our own.

i think the Doobies did record the "Don't bogart that joint my friend" line but I will refer to google.

Bound to be faster than looking through my record collection.

I thought it was Little Feat

A lot of these DOOB decisions appear to be influenced by crowd reactions. One can hear the crescendo rising as the ball bounces slowly towards the line. Time for umpires to wear a cone of silence. 

Edited May 4, 20178 yr by america de cali

2 hours ago, america de cali said:

A lot of these DOOB decisions appear to be influenced by crowd reactions. One can hear the crescendo rising as the ball bounces slowly towards the line. Time for umpires to wear a cone of silence. 

Perhaps they should narrow their selection criteria for umpires - requirements already are (1) blind (2) stupid 

add (3) deaf

You can kick the ball up ground, it can be 10 m from the line and traveling fine. An OVAL ball being what it is on a natural surface decides to dogleg and cross the line...

Thats a "BAD" thing ...free given

Ball kicked somewhat randomly but heading for boundary in close proximity to team players ( not of kicker )  Players " effectively shepherd" ball over ,no effort to keep it in. No free, ball thrown in.

That's a "GOOD" Thing

What's not to understand ?

Total @#$!!!! bullshlt rule overseen by zealous ferals* with agenda written by Gil's Dills and subject to whim.

Plain as mud.

*Umpires Advisory

Edited May 5, 20178 yr by beelzebub

I learned the other day that in TAC cup (under 18 comp), tagging is not permitted.

To allow a free flowing fast moving game. I assume that is intended to progress naturally to the top level.

Another artificial manipulation to the way the game is played. By the suits who are its custodians, not its owners.

Was this game not inherently entertaining for the last 150 years? Isn't that why the crowds are big and have been for years and years?

Why this constant need to fiddle with the game to make it "more entertaining"? They've lost the plot.

2 hours ago, Ted Fidge said:

I learned the other day that in TAC cup (under 18 comp), tagging is not permitted.

 

been that way for a number of years, along with no flooding

don't want the nippers emulating all the bad stuff of the big boys

surprised they even bother keeping scores, so discriminatory

4 hours ago, Ted Fidge said:

I learned the other day that in TAC cup (under 18 comp), tagging is not permitted.

To allow a free flowing fast moving game. I assume that is intended to progress naturally to the top level.

Another artificial manipulation to the way the game is played. By the suits who are its custodians, not its owners.

Was this game not inherently entertaining for the last 150 years? Isn't that why the crowds are big and have been for years and years?

Why this constant need to fiddle with the game to make it "more entertaining"? They've lost the plot.

One can imagine the AFL bringing a "no tagging rule" in but  without defining "tagging" -- then expressing surprise that nobody had any idea what was going on.

How do they define "tagging"in TAC?  

16 minutes ago, monoccular said:

One can imagine the AFL bringing a "no tagging rule" in but  without defining "tagging" -- then expressing surprise that nobody had any idea what was going on.

How do they define "tagging"in TAC?  

they look for paint marks........

Adem Yze's brother made the best point about tagging a few years ago.

"I like to remind him (Adem) that as a typical whingeing midfielder, who thinks that because he's got an opponent he's being tagged, he doesn't know much. He should go forward and get belted every week and earn a kick."