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

    • GAMEDAY: Rd 17 vs Adelaide

      It's Game Day and the Demons are back on the road for their 3rd interstate game in 4 weeks as they face a fit and firing Crows at Adelaide Oval. With finals now out of our grasps what are you hoping from the Dees today?

        • Haha
        • Like
      • 60 replies
      Demonland

    • WHAT’S NEXT? by The Oracle

      What’s next for a beleagured Melbourne Football Club down in form and confidence, facing  intense criticism and disapproval over some underwhelming recent performances and in the midst of a four game losing streak? Why, it’s Adelaide which boasts the best percentage in the AFL and has won six of its last seven games. The Crows are hot and not only that, the game is at the Adelaide Oval; yet another away fixture and the third in a row at a venue outside of Victoria. One of the problems the Demons have these days is that they rarely have the luxury of true home ground advantage, something they have enjoyed just once since mid April. 

        • Like
      • 2 replies
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Gold Coast

      From the start, Melbourne’s performance against the Gold Coast Suns at Peoples First Stadium was nothing short of a massive botch up and it came down in the first instance to poor preparation. Rather than adequately preparing the team for battle against an opponent potentially on the skids after suffering three consecutive losses, the Demons looking anything but sharp and ready to play in the opening minutes of the game. By way of contrast, the Suns demonstrated a clear sense of purpose and will to win. From the very first bounce of the ball they were back to where they left off earlier in the season in Round Three when the teams met at the MCG. They ran rings around the Demons and finished the game off with a dominant six goal final term. This time, they produced another dominant quarter to start the game, restricting Melbourne to a solitary point to lead by six goals at the first break, by which time, the game was all but over.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Gold Coast

      Coming off four consecutive victories and with a team filled with 17 AFL listed players, the Casey Demons took to their early morning encounter with the lowly Gold Coast Suns at People First Stadium with the swagger of a team that thought a win was inevitable. They were smashing it for the first twenty minutes of the game after Tom Fullarton booted the first two goals but they then descended into an abyss of frustrating poor form and lackadaisical effort that saw the swagger and the early arrogance disappear by quarter time when their lead was overtaken by a more intense and committed opponent. The Suns continued to apply the pressure in the second quarter and got out to a three goal lead in mid term before the Demons fought back. A late goal to the home side before the half time bell saw them ten points up at the break and another surge in the third quarter saw them comfortably up with a 23 point lead at the final break.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • 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?

        • Clap
        • Haha
      • 213 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.

        • Haha
      • 231 replies
      Demonland
    View All