Jump to content

An anomaly of the Rules

Jumping Jack Clennett
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Posted

I reckon the penalty of reversing a free kick for an indiscretion  is too severe. It's really like 2 free kicks in one. The side loses the distance they were going to achieve PLUS the other side gets the benefit of a kick.

It's often given for very minor offences, and can change a game ,...e.g.  Carlton's lucky win against Freo.

A more logical penalty would be to just ball it up.  That would be equivalent to the normal penalty for a rule infraction...i.e. one free kick( in this case , loss of a free kick).

What do other Demonlanders think?

  • Quote
    • Like 9
     
    2 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

    I reckon the penalty of reversing a free kick for an indiscretion  is too severe. It's really like 2 free kicks in one. The side loses the distance they were going to achieve PLUS the other side gets the benefit of a kick.

    It's often given for very minor offences, and can change a game ,...e.g.  Carlton's lucky win against Freo.

    A more logical penalty would be to just ball it up.  That would be equivalent to the normal penalty for a rule infraction...i.e. one free kick( in this case , loss of a free kick).

    What do other Demonlanders think?

    I can see situations where this would be fair but sometimes that silly indiscretion deserves the harsh penalty.

  • Quote
    •  

    Having a free kick reversed is penalty enough.  An 80-100m territory (now that territory is spoken about as a real thing) loss is far too much.

  • Quote

    A reversal is more than a double penalty these days because all the defenders have  probably rushed forward and will be out of defensive position 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Love 1

    2 hours ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

    I reckon the penalty of reversing a free kick for an indiscretion  is too severe. It's really like 2 free kicks in one. The side loses the distance they were going to achieve PLUS the other side gets the benefit of a kick.

    It's often given for very minor offences, and can change a game ,...e.g.  Carlton's lucky win against Freo.

    A more logical penalty would be to just ball it up.  That would be equivalent to the normal penalty for a rule infraction...i.e. one free kick( in this case , loss of a free kick).

    What do other Demonlanders think?

    i've maintained this for 50 years

    in fact i seem to remember it may have been his way when i was a kid (or maybe i imagined it)

    it's definitely a double penalty (in fact a 100m penalty)

  • Quote

    I'd like to discipline the umpires.

    There is a way to do it perfected by Franco during the Spanish Civil War.

    It involves a fair hearing followed by a swift decision and justice.

  • Quote
    • Love 1
    • Haha 2

    In the NFL if there are two penalties on the play they often cancel themselves out, so if we went down the same sort of road here then the result should be a ball up.

    However, in situations like vandenBerg's against Adelaide, you have a football-related free kick (the holding the ball call in our favour) followed by a non-football-related free kick (vandenBerg's push). I have no real issue with reversing the free because one team did something non-football-related, and it just so happened to be second in time.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     
    5 hours ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

    I reckon the penalty of reversing a free kick for an indiscretion  is too severe. It's really like 2 free kicks in one. The side loses the distance they were going to achieve PLUS the other side gets the benefit of a kick.

    It's often given for very minor offences, and can change a game ,...e.g.  Carlton's lucky win against Freo.

    A more logical penalty would be to just ball it up.  That would be equivalent to the normal penalty for a rule infraction...i.e. one free kick( in this case , loss of a free kick).

    What do other Demonlanders think?

    The Carlton free kick against Freo was 100% there. You can't dump a player after a kick no matter what.

    They want to stomp out players hitting each other (unless they are named tom lynch) so kids don't do it at junior level.

    Just wish they would do this stuff from the start of the season rather than changing "interpretations" mid way through the season

  • Quote

    I agree with the original post by JJC.

    Here's a rule the umpires need to police better...

    punching the ball put of bounds is allowed in a marking contest. Otherwise not. The key word is CONTEST. 

    However I have seen players who aren't in a contest, could have attempted the mark themselves, but instead just punched the ball out of bounds. The umpires call for a ball-in. If there is no contest, it should be a penalty for deliberate out of bounds.  

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    2 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

    In the NFL if there are two penalties on the play they often cancel themselves out, so if we went down the same sort of road here then the result should be a ball up.

    However, in situations like vandenBerg's against Adelaide, you have a football-related free kick (the holding the ball call in our favour) followed by a non-football-related free kick (vandenBerg's push). I have no real issue with reversing the free because one team did something non-football-related, and it just so happened to be second in time.

    what sort of cockamaney logic is that?.......sheesh, do you work for the afl?

  • Quote
    • Author
    1 hour ago, FritschyBusiness said:

    The Carlton free kick against Freo was 100% there. You can't dump a player after a kick no matter what.

    They want to stomp out players hitting each other (unless they are named tom lynch) so kids don't do it at junior level.

    Just wish they would do this stuff from the start of the season rather than changing "interpretations" mid way through the season

    That wasn’t the point of my O.P.

  • Quote

    I like the ball up idea....except, will it be enough of a deterrent to stop players doing it ? (i.e. pushing a player after they have won the free), I not sure it would be. Even though it is a huge penalty, as some suggested a double penalty or 100m penalty, maybe if paid more often it would fade out of the game. 

    I hate seeing players lean over and arrogantly berate a player they just beaten in a contest, it stinks of bad sportsmanship. Maybe the harsh penalty might eradicate it from our game.

  • Quote

    I think the game is gladiatorial and the reversal of the Vandenberg kick was just ridiculous. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Gets me that they would reverse a free kick for what Vanders did yet, blokes frequently get pushed in the back by other players towards the fence when it goes over the boundary ...and nothing.  Haven't noticed it so much lately, but a while back it use to happen all the time.

    That to me was a real anomaly.

  • Quote

    12 hours ago, sue said:

    A reversal is more than a double penalty these days because all the defenders have  probably rushed forward and will be out of defensive position 

    The one against Harmesy early in the North game was an example of that.

    Also due to the hashness of the penalty, I think it should only be paid for the more extreme  indiscretions.

    That one against Harmesy was soft as butter.

  • Quote
    10 hours ago, Demon_spurs said:

    ....

    I hate seeing players lean over and arrogantly berate a player they just beaten in a contest, it stinks of bad sportsmanship. Maybe the harsh penalty might eradicate it from our game.

    I agree.  The AFL carries on  about setting an example to young people. Mocking and gloating over a defeated opponent is about as low as you can go.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    On 8/19/2020 at 2:18 PM, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

    I reckon the penalty of reversing a free kick for an indiscretion  is too severe. It's really like 2 free kicks in one. The side loses the distance they were going to achieve PLUS the other side gets the benefit of a kick.

    It's often given for very minor offences, and can change a game ,...e.g.  Carlton's lucky win against Freo.

    A more logical penalty would be to just ball it up.  That would be equivalent to the normal penalty for a rule infraction...i.e. one free kick( in this case , loss of a free kick).

    What do other Demonlanders think?

    AGL don't want ball ups!!!!

  • Quote
    On 8/19/2020 at 2:18 PM, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

    I reckon the penalty of reversing a free kick for an indiscretion  is too severe. It's really like 2 free kicks in one. The side loses the distance they were going to achieve PLUS the other side gets the benefit of a kick.

    It's often given for very minor offences, and can change a game ,...e.g.  Carlton's lucky win against Freo.

    A more logical penalty would be to just ball it up.  That would be equivalent to the normal penalty for a rule infraction...i.e. one free kick( in this case , loss of a free kick).

    What do other Demonlanders think?

    Makes complete sense.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    17 minutes ago, Cheesy D. Pun said:

    Makes complete sense.

    Which ,obviously, ensures that it will not receive even the most cursory consideration by those who decide such matters.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

    4 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

    Which ,obviously, ensures that it will not receive even the most cursory consideration by those who decide such matters.

    Was going to add this to my original post but decided I'd play Jerry Lewis, knowing full well that Dean Martin would arrive soon enough.

  • Quote
    • Haha 1

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • PREGAME: Rd 17 vs Adelaide

      With their season all over bar the shouting the Demons head back on the road for the third week in a row as they return to Adelaide to take on the Crows. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • 50 replies
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

      The Demons did not come to play from the opening bounce and let the Gold Coast kick the first 5 goals of the match. They then outscored the Suns for the next 3 quarters but it was too little too late and their season is now effectively over.

      • 175 replies
      Demonland

    • VOTES: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

      Max Gawn has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award ahead of Jake Bowey, Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Kysaiah Pickett. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

        • Like
      • 32 replies
      Demonland

    • GAMEDAY: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

      It's Game Day and the Demons are back on the road again and this may be the last roll of the dice to get their 2025 season back on track as they take on the Gold Coast Suns at People First Stadium.

        • Love
      • 546 replies
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Gold Coast

      The Gold Coast Suns find themselves outside of the top eight for the first time since Round 1 with pressure is mounting on the entire organisation. Their coach Damien Hardwick expressed his frustration at his team’s condition last week by making a middle-finger gesture on television that earned him a fine for his troubles. He showed his desperation by claiming that Fox should pick up the tab.  There’s little doubt the Suns have shown improvement in 2025, and their position on the ladder is influenced to some extent by having played fewer games than their rivals for a playoff role at the end of the season, courtesy of the disruption caused by Cyclone Alfred in March.  However, they are following the same trajectory that hindered the club in past years whenever they appeared to be nearing their potential. As a consequence, that Hardwick gesture should be considered as more than a mere behavioral lapse. It’s a distress signal that does not bode well for the Queenslanders. While the Suns are eager to remain in contention with the top eight, Melbourne faces its own crisis, which is similarly deep-seated but in a much different way. After recovering from a disappointing start to the season and nearing a return to respectability among its peer clubs, the Demons have experienced a decline in status, driven by the fact that while their form has been reasonable (see their performance against the ladder leader in the Kings Birthday match), their conversion in front of goal is poor enough to rank last in the competition. Furthermore, their opponents find them exceptionally easy to score against. As a result, they have effectively eliminated themselves from the finals race and are again positioned to finish in the bottom half of the ladder.

      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 15

      As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

        • Haha
      • 287 replies
      Demonland
    View All