2 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

The main issue with the rules and umpiring is there are too many areas of interpretation. Holding the ball and tackling are always going to be difficult and I think the umpires do a decent job overall. (They always seem do a much better job when I am watching on TV, which gives a closer view, than when I am at the game.)

The main area I think they need to amend are the rules around out of bounds/deliberate to be more black and white. i.e. make last possession over the boundary a free kick and introduce a rule where all rushed behinds result in a ball up at the top of the square. 

They may also need to put some extra markings on the field to help the umpires measure 15m.

They also may need to change the rules to allow throwing in the future. A lot of the reason why tackling is dangerous is that players cannot dispose of the ball with one hand and protect themselves with the other. Allowing throws would increase the pace of the game and reduce congestion.

I am also a fan of reducing number on the field to 16.

Well that's a whole new game with some ovv TV those changes you favour FT.

SOME will NEVER BE PART of AFL thankfully and are: 

1. Throwing the ball away when correctly tackled does not reward the tackler and it's not part of Aussie Rules to introduce throwing the ball.

2. Reducing to 16. Seems like a good idea but we through our superb wingers can see the skill in their position say like Lingers who is  unique and also a differing skill role by Angus superbly and courageously performed in the GF. Maybe  a forward/back pocket like the AFLW could work but let's leave it while we have 30 plus good players!!! Fir so long we had 12/15 and struggled NOW we have more and better players on our list so don't fix anything if it's not broke.

3. Ball ups on the 15 metre line after a rushed behind will cause far too much more congestion. Not needed the rushed behind it has been sorted  only SOME players need to learn the rules. Another skill our defence is so good at clearing or nullifying our opponents Don't  meddle with it It ain't broke.

CHANGE   To last possession over boundary is fine like AFLW but not inside the 50m arc.

LEAVE THE SAME BUT INTERPRET QUICKER.

Holding  the ball which is intended now to be a lot quicker ie not 2by 360 degree rotations but one or deemed prior opportunity far more strictly along with no genuine effort to keep the game moving.

Actually one of the annoying things with AFLW is that so often the girls just curl up and hold  the ball either standing or on the ground and make no effort to move the ball on. This results in about 10/12 ball ups  each quarter FAR tOO MANY. Penalise the ball holders and the game will flow more. It's just lack of skill and a blight on the game!!

Holding  the ball and tackling are and always have been open to interpretation and the AFL are by these changes looking to solve the non decision and fastening the game so let's see how they go this year !! 

So really just add the intended holding the ball/ tackling rules  judgements and time wasting plus maybe the last possession rule and that all that is needed to change.

The other changes are too great for the fabric of the game and if played correctly are a bonus not a negative on the game.

ie if it ain't broke don't fix it!!! 

 

 

19 hours ago, dworship said:

I don't think I've ever seen us stand astride a player who was facedown and place a hand on their back preventing them getting up. The rule around delay of game has been there for a long time and it's non enforcement has irked me for as long. Ben Brown should have been awarded a 50 when it happened in the GF.

I understand we have been guilty of the delaying tactic as well but regardless of my bias, I think we are one of the few teams that don't go overboard with it. If adjudicated correctly and consistently, (I live in hope!) our style/game plan will benefit from this and the likes of Geelong will suffer.

I agree that we don't go overboard. Other clubs seem to do it a lot more than us.

I'd like to think our defensive set up is better than most other clubs such that we're not heavily reliant on buying an extra few seconds here or there in delaying our opponent in moving the ball. Other clubs maybe less so, and indeed if that is right then we may find it easier to score against those clubs who need that additional time to get their back half sorted out.

I really do not like the thought of the last touch OOB free - IMO it would only encourage  a player shepherding the ball OOB without even trying to keep it in play, and also unfairly penalise the spoil by a deep defender or a disputed marking contest.

But deliberate needs to be actually deliberate - I know the R 23 Brayshaw absolutely absurd penalty ultimately worked in our favour, but the [censored] who made that call clearly had zero feel for the game or the situation.  

22 hours ago, dworship said:

I don't think I've ever seen us stand astride a player who was facedown and place a hand on their back preventing them getting up. The rule around delay of game has been there for a long time and it's non enforcement has irked me for as long. Ben Brown should have been awarded a 50 when it happened in the GF.

I understand we have been guilty of the delaying tactic as well but regardless of my bias, I think we are one of the few teams that don't go overboard with it. If adjudicated correctly and consistently, (I live in hope!) our style/game plan will benefit from this and the likes of Geelong will suffer.

I have long been annoyed at the lack of application of punishment for time wasting. I think it will make the game faster and more open if it is enforced. 

The instance dworship  describes above was an example that was blatant in the extreme that went unpunished by the umps and had me yelling at the TV. I also get annoyed when there is a delay in getting the ball back to the player after a free or a mark. I sometimes think it would be a disadvantage for the attacking team to get the ball back in their hands quickly.

I am all for this clampdown on time wasting.   

6 minutes ago, CHF said:

I have long been annoyed at the lack of application of punishment for time wasting. I think it will make the game faster and more open if it is enforced. 

The instance dworship  describes above was an example that was blatant in the extreme that went unpunished by the umps and had me yelling at the TV. I also get annoyed when there is a delay in getting the ball back to the player after a free or a mark. I sometimes think it would be a disadvantage for the attacking team to get the ball back in their hands quickly.

I am all for this clampdown on time wasting.   

Well that Brown incident primed our 3 goals in 45 seconds blitz. If Cordy  hadn’t held Brown down like he did it would never have happened. Thats Karma. 

3 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

Well that Brown incident primed our 3 goals in 45 seconds blitz. If Cordy  hadn’t held Brown down like he did it would never have happened. Thats Karma. 

True.... that is one way of looking at it....the other way is that we may have kicked a forth in that period if brown had not been held down.....

3 minutes ago, CHF said:

True.... that is one way of looking at it....the other way is that we may have kicked a forth in that period if brown had not been held down.....

Brown could have turned the ball over and the dogs score the other way. Scores level. It is what it is. 

22 hours ago, Rocknroll said:

The action that bugs me is the player on the mark with the ball wasting time acting confused who he should give the ball to. Nasher is a master of this. 

Get rid of it with a couple of 50s early on and it should disappear. 

The other one is the player lying on or impeding the free kick/mark winner by making a very clumsy and delayed attempt to stand up. Reckon this will be harder to police but happy for this to go to make the play move faster. 

 

22 hours ago, Pates said:

In relation to the delaying tactics, I want that stupid school-boy looking act of standing on top of the player where the mark would be meaning the player who’s earned the free-kick/mark had to either crawl out or be ridden like a horse be penalised immediately. ... The umpire should communicate immediately “step back, let the player up” as soon as their up “there’s your mark, stand”. If the player doesn’t move, 50m penalty.

 

A scorched earth policy, similar to what was done with deliberate out of bounds, will work wonders. One or two early 50s will lead to an immense  and rapid improvement in players' awareness and dexterity.

It beggars belief why the AFL were so willing to "scorched earth" the deliberate OOB but won't do it for other rules which are worse for the game. Especially throwing.

Preventing delaying tactics is a good one as it will ease congestion.  Delaying the opposition by a few seconds is enough time for the congestion to form. 

On 1/18/2022 at 12:02 PM, Rocknroll said:

The action that bugs me is the player on the mark with the ball wasting time acting confused who he should give the ball to. Nasher is a master of this. 

 

Get rid of it with a couple of 50s early on and it should disappear. 

 

The other one is the player lying on or impeding the free kick/mark winner by making a very clumsy and delayed attempt to stand up. Reckon this will be harder to police but happy for this to go to make the play move faster. 

Sorry I meant nibbler, I have no idea where I got nasher from and I apologies to @Nasher who posts I really rate.

 

On 1/18/2022 at 9:23 PM, monoccular said:

I really do not like the thought of the last touch OOB free - IMO it would only encourage  a player shepherding the ball OOB without even trying to keep it in play, and also unfairly penalise the spoil by a deep defender or a disputed marking contest.

But deliberate needs to be actually deliberate - I know the R 23 Brayshaw absolutely absurd penalty ultimately worked in our favour, but the [censored] who made that call clearly had zero feel for the game or the situation.  

As 58er posted, deliberate OOB if introduced should just be between the 50m arcs which would largely avoid the deep defender situation, but agree with you in general that the last touch OOB rule is unnecessary and would actually be a negative as it would discourage players trying to gather the ball near the boundary line.

Re the deliberate OOB rule, like you I like it as it currently exists but agree it needs to be applied consistently and with common sense. Let's put that R23 decision down to umpire error. The late non-decision in the loss to Adelaide was in my view a result of the umpire lacking the courage to make a game-deciding decision in front of an Adelaide crowd. Particularly frustrating as a decision not to pay prior opportunity holding the ball against Adelaide slightly earlier equally contributed to that loss. I guess umpires are human but the AFL should be saying to umpires that they support them making (correct and consistent) decisions regardless of the time and closeness of the particular game.

Initially I was disappointed that the AFL didn't modify the standing the mark rule. I think it gives the forwards an unfair advantage within the Forward 50. But given the AFL haven’t made any actual rule changes (just interpretations) and they have stated they are trying to consolidate the rules this year, it’s probably fair enough.

The other change I would have liked to see is getting rid of the requirement to name ruckman in around the ground ruck contests. Just throw in up and, if there’s a third man up, penalise the infringing team. In general, let’s get rid of situations where the umpire is slowing the game down for no real gain. Don't warn players about infrinngements, just apply theappropriate penalty.

Other than that, I’m basically OK with the current rules.