Jump to content

  • Podcast: Jason Taylor   

  • Podcast: Jason Taylor   

Manning the Mark Rule Change



Recommended Posts

On 2/18/2021 at 6:59 PM, tiers said:

Correct. But only if the umpires are correctly trained to call play on as soon as the player with the ball moves of a straight line over the head of the man on the mark.

No more Buddy curves, no more B Brown long run ins (how can the ump be sure he hasn't deviated from the line), no more feigned give offs to passing player (in fact there should be no passing team mates), limits on banana kicks (strict interpretation must be that player has moved off the line) and no doubt there will be many more absurd examples of when a man on the mark has stood on the wrong blade of grass.

 

It seems that the brainiacs at the AFL read this forum. I read today that the rules will prevent Buddy and others from abusing the latitude of the previous rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 148
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The AFL has warned in briefings to clubs that even the slightest movement to the left or right from the man on the park will incur an immediate 50m penalty.   Umpires now warning that this a

This has the potential to make footy unwatchable with so many 50m penalties, but the big concern for me is it opens up another option for umpires to influence results. For example if they give one tea

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. If a player takes a mark, and takes a cou

Posted Images

11 hours ago, dworship said:

Umm, maybe I'm missing something, regardless of the "stand" command what you said is the current rule and has been so for many years.

However the player in possession regularly moves off-line, sometimes several metres before the umpire calls play on. Unfortunately I think the AFL wants this to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, ManDee said:

However the player in possession regularly moves off-line, sometimes several metres before the umpire calls play on. Unfortunately I think the AFL wants this to happen.

I also think that the AFL wants it to happen this way, but I'm not so sure it's "unfortunate". The AFL has had to find ways to overcome the "defence first" mantra of the coaches. It wasn't prepared to wait for a natural evolution which may never happen, so this is a rule change that deliberately swings the pendulum towards attack.  

Let's wait and see how it pans out.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I also think that the AFL wants it to happen this way, but I'm not so sure it's "unfortunate". The AFL has had to find ways to overcome the "defence first" mantra of the coaches. It wasn't prepared to wait for a natural evolution which may never happen, so this is a rule change that deliberately swings the pendulum towards attack.  

Let's wait and see how it pans out.

Don't just take my word for it. Stephen Hocking on SEN this morning said, “They’re finely tuned athletes and they’ll adapt. We think with the kicking change with the guy standing the mark, the return to 20-minute quarters and this, all of it working together is about finding a better balance between attack and defence.”

Here's the full story.

 

Edited by La Dee-vina Comedia
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2021 at 8:46 PM, DeeSpencer said:

Disagree, as soon as you ban 3rd man up you have to specify who the 2 rucks actually are to stop a decoy situation. 

If Gawn (ruck), Jackson (FF), Grundy (ruck) and Roughead (FB) were all at a ball up deep in our forward line we could hover Gawn around, have him pull out at the last second and then send Jackson up against Grundy with every chance Roughead bumps in to Jackson as he's defending him, triggering a 3rd man up or block in the ruck scenario. Teams would rort it as much as possible.

The umps got really good last year of just identifying when both big men were at the stoppage and getting it going without delay. It just took about 3 years of umpires having conferences with the big boys first which wasn't needed. It's a necessary rule but can be streamlined as it was.

Someone gets it. 

On 2/23/2021 at 8:12 PM, dworship said:

This is a great example of one of the things I've been banging on about. It doesn't matter what came first, it only matters when the Umpire called "play on". So an Umpire has a clear and obvious judgement, no interpretation required and a clear observation to be made. Have I called play on? No. Has the defender moved forward, back or to a side? Yes = 50m penalty. As long as this is applied consistently and it should be because there is no need for interpretation; just the 2 questions. Then I think this might be a good change and is a counter to how defensively based the game has become. If the players cannot adapt then that's on them and the Coaching.

SNAP

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The footy season is finally about to start up again the biggest story is about a manning the mark rule change? that'll get the kids excited!

I could not give a rats clacker

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DubDee said:

The footy season is finally about to start up again the biggest story is about a manning the mark rule change? that'll get the kids excited!

I could not give a rats clacker

It's all the fault of the players. In years gone by, the big off-season stories were about player misbehaviour. That line of storymaking has virtually disappeared (for AFL, not so much NRL) so the footy journos - and supporter bulletin boards - have to find something else to discuss.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2021 at 9:26 PM, low flying Robbo said:

I reckon there will be players with the ball who will run straight towards the guy on the mark and then with a few metres to go they'll dart out to one side. They'll be passed the guy on the mark before the ump has even had a chance to call play on

Good for Hunt coming off half back

Link to post
Share on other sites

the only thing i don't want to see is an umpire being slow on calling play on, the defender being spot on, then penalised on the technicality that he moveda split second before umpire called play on. a good umpire would realise he was a bit slow (maybe he was distracted watching downfield or just slow) and use some common sense, but i wouldn't hold my breath

the other problem is hearing the umpire in front of a big crowd. i.e. not hearing "stand" or "play on"

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, daisycutter said:

the only thing i don't want to see is an umpire being slow on calling play on, the defender being spot on, then penalised on the technicality that he moveda split second before umpire called play on. a good umpire would realise he was a bit slow (maybe he was distracted watching downfield or just slow) and use some common sense, but i wouldn't hold my breath

the other problem is hearing the umpire in front of a big crowd. i.e. not hearing "stand" or "play on"

There is also a delay in the play-on call resulting from the fact umpires breathe -  that affects when the words 'play-on' exit their mouths. As I don't get tired of saying (though some may well be tired of hearing), the solution is to let the player on the mark decide if the player with the ball has played on.  If he gets it wrong the umpire can issue the penalty. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sue said:

There is also a delay in the play-on call resulting from the fact umpires breathe -  that affects when the words 'play-on' exit their mouths. As I don't get tired of saying (though some may well be tired of hearing), the solution is to let the player on the mark decide if the player with the ball has played on.  If he gets it wrong the umpire can issue the penalty. 

Surely time to get real robots to umpire the game - no breathing, no 'feel for the game', just adherence to the rules.  :o

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the past we have seen the man on the mark starting to run in to the mark and jump to make it harder to kick a long goal. If a kicking player is on his kicking range a tall defender runs from behind the mark and jumps thus making the kicker kick higher. No more, if a defender jumps it now must be vertical and he must land in exactly the same spot. If he lands only close call the ball back and award a 50m penalty. The risk is just too great , no more jumping guarding the mark.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching the game yesterday I had the impression players were reluctant to even approach where the mark actually was.  They'd run towards the mark but stop often 5 or more metres short of where they were entitled to be.  I don't know if is due to the new rule - can't think why it would be but..?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jackson 6 posted this in another thread and it raised a question for me:

Quote

Was just reading that stK have been practising standing  5m ‘outside’ of the man-on-the-mark zone instead of actually manning the mark. You can move freely there. Didn’t see that in our practice match.  An interesting move. Feels counter to the spirit of the rule though so I kinda hope the AFL make it 10m+ to give the team with the ball an advantage if players try to do this

How does the umpire decide which player is the man on the mark and therefore has to 'stand'?   Presumably whoever is nearest. And does the umpire first direct him to where the mark actually is?  I didn't see any clear evedence of this in the practice match.

Say a 1 on 1 mark is taken, can the defeated player runaway to a legal position 5 m away  before the umpire calls 'stand', at which point he won't be on the mark?  Can the umpire call him back? 

Even if there is a man on the mark, it may well be worth another player (who would not otherwise run forward) to also man the mark but 5m away to where the man on the mark used to stand in recent years.  

This all seems poorly thought out and coaches cunning plans may cause it to be changed frequently, eg. the above poster's suggestion that he hopes the area is extended to 10m.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sue said:

The Jackson 6 posted this in another thread and it raised a question for me:

How does the umpire decide which player is the man on the mark and therefore has to 'stand'?   Presumably whoever is nearest. And does the umpire first direct him to where the mark actually is?  I didn't see any clear evedence of this in the practice match.

Say a 1 on 1 mark is taken, can the defeated player runaway to a legal position 5 m away  before the umpire calls 'stand', at which point he won't be on the mark?  Can the umpire call him back? 

Even if there is a man on the mark, it may well be worth another player (who would not otherwise run forward) to also man the mark but 5m away to where the man on the mark used to stand in recent years.  

This all seems poorly thought out and coaches cunning plans may cause it to be changed frequently, eg. the above poster's suggestion that he hopes the area is extended to 10m.

The approach allegedly taken by St Kilda makes sense to trial in a practice match. However, I'm not sure of its value as it automatically gives the player with the ball an extra 5 metres added to their kick. It would also allow the player with the ball more freedom to kick on any angle as the man on the (new) mark will be too far away to stop it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mistakes will be made with regards to the adjudication of this new rule but mistakes are made with all adjudications. 

That's the sport and if you want perfection and/or consistency you won't get it

But I really like the new rule in terms of what it could do for the sport as a spectacle ... and that matters to me far more than a few iffy decisions

More open footy and more scoring with less congestion & stoppages is what I want to see and so do many others

So hopefully this new rule helps us get to that point. 

Those who like footy the way it is now need to remember that they used to watch (and enjoy) the sport when it was more open with less congestion and with more scoring

 

  • Like 4
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Macca said:

Mistakes will be made with regards to the adjudication of this new rule but mistakes are made with all adjudications. 

That's the sport and if you want perfection and/or consistency you won't get it

But I really like the new rule in terms of what it could do for the sport as a spectacle ... and that matters to me far more than a few iffy decisions

More open footy and more scoring with less congestion & stoppages is what I want to see and so do many others

So hopefully this new rule helps us get to that point. 

Those who like footy the way it is now need to remember that they used to watch (and enjoy) the sport when it was more open with less congestion and with more scoring

 

I'm sure there will be mistakes, but I just fear they may be out of all proportion because this has not been thoroughly trialled, especially seeing what real coaches do to fiddle it in real matches.    The questions I and others have raised don't seem to be answerable yet.  That is unsatisfactory with the season only weeks away.  

I too would love more open footy (though I don't think we need much more scoring for the game to be a better spectacle) and hope this rule will achieve it.  I just wish it had been trialled first.  The AFL by their own admission are implying that the first few weeks of the season will effectively be the trial and they will tweak things as required.   Supporters of a club which misses the finals because of some losses early in the season due to errors or uncertainties in this rule will doubtless be overjoyed by the improved spectacle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Demonland said:

 

Pretty useless explanation - no detail. Doesn’t even cover the example of the Essendon player turning his back the other day. Unless the word laterally has a new meaning.  Hopefully it will become clear in actual consistent practice   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles

    A WALK IN THE PAST by Whispering Jack

    On Monday night, the Melbourne Football Club handed out four life memberships. Two of those awards went to men who are long gone. Charles ‘Chubby’ Forrester and James ‘Jas’ Byrne played for the club in the 1870s, even before the Victorian Football Association was formed. The other two are current skipper Max Gawn and swingman Tom McDonald, who almost left the club at the end of the pandemic-affected 2020 season. Some fans might have raised their eyebrows and wondered whether the emphasis on hist

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    SOUNDS OF SILENCE by Whispering Jack

    This was my first game for points involving the Demons in more than a year and a half and the long march to Carrara turned out to be worthwhile. The game was won in a single withering quarter that was dominated by Melbourne on the back of an outstanding display from Karen Paxman. The four-time All Australian picked up 13 touches for the stanza to set up a five goal to nothing second term after a lacklustre start in which the cleaner, sharper Gold Coast notched up the first two goals of the game

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    BRIDESMAIDS AGAIN by Whispering Jack

    Historians of the future will have little difficulty in finding words to define the year 2020. “Covid-19”, “pandemic” and “plague” come readily to mind. The Covid-19 pandemic dominated the year in every aspect of life and it certainly didn’t spare AFL football or the Melbourne Football Club. In the circumstances however, it didn’t treat it as badly as the Spanish Flu epidemic which raged a century earlier from February 1918, through 1919 and into 1920 when it finally petered out in April of

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features

    THE TASMANIAN TIGER by Whispering Jack

    I first saw Ben Brown on a cold Tuesday night in May, 2013 playing for the Werribee Tigers against Queanbeyan in a televised Foxtel Cup game before a sparse crowd at Etihad Stadium. His teammate and former Demon Jordan Gysberts was the star of the side’s 85-point belting of the hapless ACT club but the then 20 year old, 200cm Brown was also a stand out.  Earlier that year, the athletic big man had left his native Tasmania in an effort to make the grade after being overlooked in three drafts

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features

    THE TRADING CHRONICLES 2020 by The Oracle

    Part One: The Cure It could be coincidental but since the AFL Free Agency and Trade Period began, the State of Victoria has recorded eight consecutive days of no new active cases and no deaths from Covid19. It might be a little early to announce that a cure for this dreaded virus has been discovered but one thing can be said with some certainty after following the ins and outs of the free agency and trading process — mankind is still a long way off finding a cure for boredom. That stat

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features 1

    CHANGES 2020 by The Oracle

    Part One: A very strange year Things might have been somewhat hairy when the 1919 football season opened up in the wake of the ending of a world war and in the middle of a pandemic that took millions of lives but it’s difficult to imagine a more unusual football season than the one that ended a week or so ago. For starters, the footy is supposed to finish on that one day in September on the MCG in mild spring weather; not deep into October at the Gabba amid warnings of tropical storms and h

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features 1

    DEMONLAND 2020 A TO Z by George on the Outer

    A- Alice Springs. Happy hunting ground.     B- Backline. Finally found the non-leaking version.   C- Cairns & Covid. How a season was ruined.    D- Demonland. Mental Health facility run by the inmates.   E- The grade you get when you don’t make F- F- Finals. What are they? G- Goals. Lack of them. Need a forward who can kick them….lots! H- Hub. Where players got to live with people you can’t stand. I- Injuries. Miracle cure provided by Dr. Burgess.  

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features

    WASH, RINSE, SPIN, REPEAT! by George On The Outer

    Although the Demons got over the line in their must win final round game against the hapless Bombers, they ensured it was Groundhog Day for their supporters who well remember what happened three years ago (although, this time they at least enjoyed the success of victory). Melbourne had its customary start dominating play and having plenty of chances in front of goal, only to find itself down on the scoreboard at the first change. Inaccurate kicking, particularly from set shots would have pu

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    THE LUCK OF THE DRAW by Whispering Jack

    The long awaited clash between Melbourne and Essendon is almost upon us. Thirty-seven rounds of AFL football have passed by since the two clubs met on a balmy early April night last year in a game that produced a high scoring shootout at the MCG with the Bombers prevailing by 18 points. It was their only meeting for 2019 and happened at a time when the pandemic was something on the far distant horizon. Several months later when the 2019 season ended, the AFL issued the first of its fixtures

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    THERE’S STILL A HEARTBEAT by George on the Outer

    When bottom side Adelaide scrapped together a win over the Giants last week, a tiny glimmer of hope opened up for the Demons’ finals chances. The patient was in intensive care but not quite finished — there was a faint pulse, a heart beating ever so slightly but was it enough when two more wins and other results were needed to fall their way? The first step was the resuscitation of a team that had lost its last two matches against sides then sitting fifteenth and sixteenth on the ladder. On

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports 1

    THE FINAL HUMILIATION by The Oracle

    On Sunday, the Melbourne Football Club that won three consecutive games by in excess of 50 points last month returns to the Gabba, the scene of the last of those victories which was a 56 point drubbing of Collingwood. The Demons got off to a good start and won every quarter with a ruthless and powerful brand of football. They kicked 16 goals that day, their accuracy in front of goal a tribute to the skills the put on display throughout the afternoon and evening. In the four matches playe

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    GIVEN THE OLD HEAVE HO’ by George on the Outer

    Fremantle gave Melbourne the old heave ho’ from playing finals in 2020, in conditions that the Demons yet again failed to handle.   With the whole season on the line and the need to win to stay in contention for finals, what the fans saw was much the same as they have been witnessing so many times before — a complete debacle and capitulation against a side that sat 15th on the ladder before the game.     Promises made after the loss to the 16th placed Sydney Swans were rendered h

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports


×
×
  • Create New...