Manning the Mark Rule Change

[jnrmac 20,276]

3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

or just have no-one on the mark, and put another player behind the man on the mark so he can move laterally.

they will need to define a no-man area behind the mark.......more opportunity for 50m penalties....lovely

I think the 'protected zone' extends for 5m behind the player on the mark. So a player in theory could move back 5m and then move laterally...

[Diamond_Jim 12,693]

3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

or just have no-one on the mark, and put another player behind the man on the mark so he can move laterally.

they will need to define a no-man area behind the mark.......more opportunity for 50m penalties....lovely

mentioned this a few weeks ago.

Leave the mark unattended and the defensive player stands five metres back allowing full movement of that player

[sue 9,197]

14 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

mentioned this a few weeks ago.

Leave the mark unattended and the defensive player stands five metres back allowing full movement of that player

Quite often you see players doing that even before 2021. When players are not sure where the mark is they  often concede several yards for fear of giving away a 50m.

Under these new rules, will a player be penalized if they stand on the mark and walk backwards to be 5m beyond the mark?  (Or if they aren't already on the mark, note where the ump says the mark is, and then retreat the required distance)

Edited February 18, 2021 by sue

[daisycutter 29,894]

22 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I think the 'protected zone' extends for 5m behind the player on the mark. So a player in theory could move back 5m and then move laterally...

any source on this jnr?

and is it a 5m arc or just 5m behind mark?

also how much can the man on the mark roam in this arc......1,2,3,4.5m?  

[daisycutter 29,894]

11 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

mentioned this a few weeks ago.

Leave the mark unattended and the defensive player stands five metres back allowing full movement of that player

does this include 5m laterally from mark?

[drdrake 3,203]

2 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

does this include 5m laterally from mark?

So you can stand someone 5m to the right or left of the mark.

If umpires paid holding the ball and incorrect disposal correctly you would have a much better game.  Adding rule changes is a band aid solution as coaches will work a way around the changes.  

Pay the old fashion laws of the game correctly and you will have a faster free flowing game.  When the umpires went whistle happen on holding the ball last year the games got better.  Shame they only did it for a couple of weeks

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

9 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

any source on this jnr?

and is it a 5m arc or just 5m behind mark?

also how much can the man on the mark roam in this arc......1,2,3,4.5m?  

2020 Laws of Australian Football. 10m either side of the player with the ball, and 5 m behind.

20.2 DISPOSAL FROM BEHIND THE MARK 
(b) If a Player does not dispose of the football within a reasonable time, or attempts to dispose of the football other than in a direct line over The Mark, the field Umpire shall call ‘Play On’ and the football shall immediately be in play. 

[daisycutter 29,894]

2 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

2020 Laws of Australian Football. 10m either side of the player with the ball, and 5 m behind.

20.2 DISPOSAL FROM BEHIND THE MARK 
(b) If a Player does not dispose of the football within a reasonable time, or attempts to dispose of the football other than in a direct line over The Mark, the field Umpire shall call ‘Play On’ and the football shall immediately be in play. 

that's in the other direction, mr.  i.e. from the mark to the player who is kicking

we are talking about the other side of the mark

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

4 hours ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

Add this to the long list of poorly thought out, untested rule changes the AFL have introduced on the back of the myth that high scoring = good football.

 

4 hours ago, Neil Crompton said:

I think one consequence of this rule change will be that, with the man on the mark anchored, it may well be so much easier to determine when the player with the ball moves off his mark, and hence many more play ons will be called, as opposed to 50m penalties imposed. 

The umpires for the past few years have not bothered too much with the player with the ball moving off the mark. Prediction: the player with the ball will be permitted even more freedom to move off the mark.

 

4 hours ago, ManDee said:

I would add that if the player with the ball goes off-line 1 step it is play on. No natural arcs, off-line is off-line. If Buddy wants to go off-line he should start a bit further back.

That's the rule as it stands, not that you would know it from watching how the umps adjudicate it.

 

4 hours ago, drdrake said:

This is the issue, they changed the rule to allow for natural arc, essentially if a player standing the mark can't move left or right using your arc you don't have to kick over the man on the mark.

They never changed the rule. The then-umps director, Gieschen, couldn't handle the idea that Buddy Franklin was subject to the laws of the game, so he made up an imaginary one on the spot. "Natural arcs" have never been allowed, except in AFL games umpired by AFL umpires.

 

4 hours ago, Roger Mellie said:

Makes sense to me and I could stomach that. The only thing is, when they showed footage of Gawn slotting the mark in the practice match / simulation a couple of weeks ago, didn't he go off his line for a better angle? I could be wrong but IIRC May couldn't do anything but flap and jump. It would infuriate me if players were given license by the umpire to do so.

It happens all the time and that is the thing that should be clamped down on. In typical AFL fashion, they are clamping down on the wrong thing thing and worsen the situation.

Prediction: players will be given licence to do so.

 

2 hours ago, 640MD said:

Can not understand the interpretation sometimes 

How can you run off line if you are out of bounds, if you do that it should be  

play on, then the ball is over the boundary line

throw it in !!

Classic AFL shoddily -worded rules. If you're out of bounds with the ball, you can run off your line in any direction, provided it's a straight line.

 

Meanwhile, look forward to another season of rampant throwing the ball, and going to ground to force a ball up (aka holding the ball).

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

that's in the other direction, mr.  i.e. from the mark to the player who is kicking

we are talking about the other side of the mark

No protected zone for player on the mark. Just a line.

20.1.1 Standing The Mark
When a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick, one Player from the opposing Team may:
(a) stand on The Mark;
(b) move along a lateral line to the Protected Area defined in Law 20.1.2 without advancing beyond The Mark; or 
(c) otherwise be directed by a field Umpire.

[sue 9,197]

Has this new rule been tried in any league?  And for long enough  to see if coaches think up ways to derail whatever it is the rule is intended to achieve.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

10m !!

Now consider how many times you've seen oppo players within 10m of the player with the ball, and not get pinged ...... except randomly once or twice a match and especially when they're not even impacting the player with the ball. Stupid rule.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Mazer Rackham

[daisycutter 29,894]

4 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

No protected zone for player on the mark. Just a line.

20.1.1 Standing The Mark
When a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick, one Player from the opposing Team may:
(a) stand on The Mark;
(b) move along a lateral line to the Protected Area defined in Law 20.1.2 without advancing beyond The Mark; or 
(c) otherwise be directed by a field Umpire.

that's the old law mr !

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

19 minutes ago, drdrake said:

If umpires paid holding the ball and incorrect disposal correctly you would have a much better game.  Adding rule changes is a band aid solution as coaches will work a way around the changes.  

The AFL have lost control of the officiating of the game. Bandaid after bandaid, when fans on all footy forums can easily see better ways to do it (eg third man up). Meanwhile the standout neon blinking light travesties such as throwing it and dropping it are waved through ... nothing to see here.

 

20 minutes ago, drdrake said:

When the umpires went whistle happen on holding the ball last year the games got better.  Shame they only did it for a couple of weeks

So one week over their allowed quota? Surprised they weren't all sent up the bush.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

2 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

that's the old law mr !

Is the new law published?

[daisycutter 29,894]

4 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

10m !!

Now consider how many times you've seen oppo players within 10m of the player with the ball, and not get pinged ...... except randomly once or twice a match and especially when they're not even impacting the player with the ball. Stupid rule.

while we have switched to the behind the mark rules, i have to say 10m either side is a lot of real estate.

players frequently retreat 20m, so that means 20 x (10 + 10) = 400m2 which is about the current size of a block of land! Go back 30m and we are talking of 600m2. And that is ignoring the 5m arc behind the player.

imo the corridor should be 5m either side.

Now if the opposition encroaches the corridor the umpires are savage....50m penalty. No common sense used even when breach is minor and of zero impact.

Now contrast this to player who strays off his direct line. He is either made to go back (given another chance) or it is called play on (but not consistently) 

[daisycutter 29,894]

5 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Is the new law published?

doh.....that was my initial question of jnr

[george_on_the_outer 7,844]

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

while we have switched to the behind the mark rules, i have to say 10m either side is a lot of real estate.

players frequently retreat 20m, so that means 20 x (10 + 10) = 400m2 which is about the current size of a block of land! Go back 30m and we are talking of 600m2. And that is ignoring the 5m arc behind the player.

 

When BB is kicking for goal, most of the opposition defense will need to be on one side of the ground!!

[La Dee-vina Comedia 17,049]

22 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

They never changed the rule. The then-umps director, Gieschen, couldn't handle the idea that Buddy Franklin was subject to the laws of the game, so he made up an imaginary one on the spot. "Natural arcs" have never been allowed, except in AFL games umpired by AFL umpires.

Not true. Also allowed in cricket for Muttiah Muralitharan's arm in his bowling action.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

This should clear things up.

2021 Laws of the Game.

20.1 STANDING THE MARK AND THE PROTECTED AREA
20.1.1 Standing The Mark
When a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick, one Player from the opposing Team may:
(a) stand on The Mark; or
(b) otherwise be directed by a field Umpire.
For the avoidance of doubt, all other Players from the opposing Team must be positioned behind The Mark or otherwise outside  the Protected Area defined in Law 20.1.2.
20.1.2 Protected Area
(a) The Protected Area after a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick is a corridor which extends from 10 metres either side of The Mark and five metres behind,  to 10 metres either side of, and five metre arc behind, the Player with the football,  as illustrated in Diagram 4.
(b) No Player shall enter and remain in the Protected Area unless the field Umpire calls ‘Play On’ or the Player from the opposing Team is accompanying or following within two metres of their opponent. Any Player caught in the Protected Area must  make every endeavour to immediately vacate the Protected Area. 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

4 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Not true. Also allowed in cricket for Muttiah Muralitharan's arm in his bowling action.

It is true. It's not in the rules, yet the umps allowed it. (Like Murali.)

[drdrake 3,203]

13 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

The AFL have lost control of the officiating of the game. Bandaid after bandaid, when fans on all footy forums can easily see better ways to do it (eg third man up). Meanwhile the standout neon blinking light travesties such as throwing it and dropping it are waved through ... nothing to see here.

 

So one week over their allowed quota? Surprised they weren't all sent up the bush.

I remember they had a couple of weeks paying everything, coaches complained, then a few weeks later they went to paying nothing again coaches complained.  It has always been a hard game to umpire, they just keep marking it harder.  Don't forget most rule changes also get passed down to local footy as well.

[sue 9,197]

30 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

This should clear things up.

2021 Laws of the Game.

20.1 STANDING THE MARK AND THE PROTECTED AREA
20.1.1 Standing The Mark
When a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick, one Player from the opposing Team may:
(a) stand on The Mark; or
(b) otherwise be directed by a field Umpire.
For the avoidance of doubt, all other Players from the opposing Team must be positioned behind The Mark or otherwise outside  the Protected Area defined in Law 20.1.2.
20.1.2 Protected Area
(a) The Protected Area after a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick is a corridor which extends from 10 metres either side of The Mark and five metres behind,  to 10 metres either side of, and five metre arc behind, the Player with the football,  as illustrated in Diagram 4.
(b) No Player shall enter and remain in the Protected Area unless the field Umpire calls ‘Play On’ or the Player from the opposing Team is accompanying or following within two metres of their opponent. Any Player caught in the Protected Area must  make every endeavour to immediately vacate the Protected Area. 

So 20.1.1(a) would seem to mean the player on the mark can't walk backwards after they take position on the mark, nor can they take up position 2m behind the mark initially.  God knows how they get to the mark in the first place.  If they take up position 5m back, will the umpire direct them to move forward to the mark, or pay a 50m penalty for being in the wrong spot, or do nothing.   

Surely it will not become compulsory to man the mark, so being back beyond 5m has to be legal.  But say you are right next to the player who takes the mark or gets the free,  so you are already standing on the mark.  Can you walk backwards 5m?

Of course these rules changes are just a cunning plot to create interest in the forthcoming season so we will be keen to see what hole the AFL have dug themselves into this time.

Edited February 18, 2021 by sue
EDIT TO ADD SECOND PARA

[monoccular 17,653]

1 hour ago, godees said:

This is the worst rule change of the lot. Will be a spectacular mess. Will decide some games.

Agree - looks like an absolute dog's dinner and, yes, will decide games, and will give the likes of Razor Ray opportunities to exert their influence big time.

[jnrmac 20,276]

1 hour ago, Mazer Rackham said:

 

This is what I was alluding to. A player on the mark can go back 5m and then 10m laterally either side. It might be preferable to do that and stop a player from running around...

Of course it will all be interpretation and will all happen fairly quickly.

And like when they introduced the protected zone it will be a dog's breakfast that will be overpoliced in the first 4 weeks and then forgotten about for 18 weeks until melbourne is winning a game to make the finals and we get pinged because some cretinous umpire drags out this rule again. The resulting 50m penalty and goal costs us a spot in the finals...