Jump to content

Changes to “Holding the Ball” Rule

Demonland
Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

 

This must be the only sport in the world where senior coaches get to have a whinge about a rule in the middle of the season and it gets changed by Tuesday.

It’s a good change, but why does Damian Hardwick get to decide the rules of the game? 

  • Quote
    • Like 9
    • Angry 2
    34 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

    This must be the only sport in the world where senior coaches get to have a whinge about a rule in the middle of the season and it gets changed by Tuesday.

    It’s a good change, but why does Damian Hardwick get to decide the rules of the game? 

    Agree wholeheartedly. Purely bizarre. 

    I am glad we're playing on Sunday as hopefully it's bedded in better by then after the umpires completely eradicate the notion of prior opportunity Thursday to Saturday

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    • Haha 1
    • Clap 2
     

    According to N Buckley it is more to do with the fact a player has the arm holding the ball free. Umpires have been told that if that arm is not held in the tackle, then the current 360 degree tackles arent "Holding the Ball". He also said that umpires may change interpretation this week.

  • Quote

    Has anyone told the umpires?

    Watch the overreaction this weekend

     

    Rule of the week will see 30 HTBs every game

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    Well know the rule works if Cripps can no longer do 720degree turns while looking to dish off a handball

  • Quote
    • Like 7
    • Clap 1

    A lot of the problems are because players are now tackling at 80% force, not wanting to bring the ball carrier to the ground and risk suspension.

    For the umpires, it is not as simple as paying holding the ball more often, as the rules require the ball carrier to have prior opportunity before the tackle is laid. IMO the umpires need to it ball up more, even if there is a bit of momentum in the player being tackled.

    If I were coaching, I think I would tell players to tackle at close to 100% force and risk suspensions. 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
     
    6 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

    Well know the rule works if Cripps can no longer do 720degree turns while looking to dish off a handball

    That won't be changing. He can also run 35 metres without bouncing.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Haha 2

    This will be another overcorrection and disaster. Prepare for another unwatchable round of football ruined by umpiring, this time with even more game deciding unnecessary free kicks 💩

    Edited by Lord Travis

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Clap 2
    2 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

    This will be another overcorrection and disaster. Prepare for another unwatchable round of football ruined by umpiring, this time with even more game deciding unnecessary free kicks 💩

    One of the advantages of being a Sunday game - the umpires should have ‘relaxed’ the overcorrection by then 

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    3 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

    One of the advantages of being a Sunday game - the umpires should have ‘relaxed’ the overcorrection by then 

    After Alice umps will have no fear of being ‘sent to the country’ so hopefully ignore HQ’s rule of the week.

  • Quote

    Seriously what other sport in the world would do this?

    Just leave the game alone during the season.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Love 1

    Sorry to disagree with everyone, but I think it is great. 
     

    Alistair Clarkson said years ago that if they want to get the game more free flowing, they should enforce holding the ball.

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    I just wish they would stop changing the rule 20 times per game and especially when Clarrie gets the ball.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Clap 1
    6 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

    I just wish they would stop changing the rule 20 times per game and especially when Clarrie gets the ball.

     

    Clarry gets pinged for throws all the time and Cripps nothing.... different rules for different players as we all know

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Clap 2
    • Angry 2
    • "It has become clearer throughout the season that  in discharging their duty of care whilst executing a tackle, tacklers are positively electing not to take tackled players to ground in the tackle or are generally doing so in a reasonable way including by not using excessive force," the AFL said in a statement on Wednesday morning. 
    • "As a consequence, we are seeing players hold onto the ball slightly longer and challenging the definition of “reasonable time”.

    So, the AFL is saying the reason players are able to hold on to the ball too long is that they no longer get instantly smashed to the ground.  Something just doesn't ring true and is a recipe for further interpretations to come. 

    • "Our umpires are clear on the interpretation of holding the ball and it continues to be a focus of umpire coaching each week. We want to ensure our Clubs, Coaches and Players understand the rules and how they are being officiated."

    Typical poli-speak. If they are so clear on the interpretation why do we see so many inconsistencies?

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Vomit 1

    The test is the dropping of the ball whilst being tackled with prior opportunity.

    If these adjustments to the rules mean anything it should be holding the ball/ incorrect disposal come Thursday night.

    The rules as they currently stand benefit 2 teams greatly, 1 of them is playing Thursday night.

    Edited by YesitwasaWin4theAges

  • Quote

    mid season rule change

    decided on a couple of days analysis after saying no problem here

    to be implemented within less than a week

    scores of umpires to be "re-educated" (when, how?)

    what could go wrong?

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Haha 1
    • Clap 1

    I don't find myself subject to the Mandela Effect very often, but AFL rule interpretations is an exception. 

    I could have sworn that shortened reasonable time interpretations were instituted at the start of year maybe two or three seasons ago and very quickly dispensed with. Did I just imagine this? 

    Another that I'm certain was tried many years ago (and which made sense, but would have been difficult to umpire) was that if the tackling player dragged the ball in and held it to the player over the ball, they (the tackler) got done for holding the ball. This happens all the time these days. 

    Another was that a push in the back was a free kick. Ha ha. What a duffer I am. As if that would ever be a rule. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Clap 1
     
    1 hour ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

    What is "reasonable time" ?

    It should be immediate. 

    If you get tackled you have to immediately attempt to dispose of the ball. Simples.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    3 minutes ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

    I don't find myself subject to the Mandela Effect very often, but AFL rule interpretations is an exception. 

    I could have sworn that shortened reasonable time interpretations were instituted at the start of year maybe two or three seasons ago and very quickly dispensed with. Did I just imagine this? 

    Another that I'm certain was tried many years ago (and which made sense, but would have been difficult to umpire) was that if the tackling player dragged the ball in and held it to the player over the ball, they (the tackler) got done for holding the ball. This happens all the time these days. 

    Another was that a push in the back was a free kick. Ha ha. What a duffer I am. As if that would ever be a rule. 

    The front on rule is also a joke.

    As is the Goodes sliding the knees. The way Goodes used to slide in was dangerous. Now we have players theatrically diving over a player on the ground to try and elicit a free (ANB is a culprit)

    While we are at it the Intentional OOB, the protected area, the stand rule

    The interpretations of all of these are farcical.

  • Quote

    • 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

    • REPORT: Sydney

      A few weeks ago, I visited a fellow Melbourne Football Club supporter in hospital, and our conversation inevitably shifted from his health diagnosis to the well-being of our football team. Like him, Melbourne had faced challenges in recent months, but an intervention - in his case, surgery, and in the team's case, a change in game style - had brought about much improvement.  The team's professionals had altered its game style from a pedestrian and slow-moving approach, which yielded an average of merely 60 points for five winless games, to a faster and more direct style. This shift led to three consecutive wins and a strong competitive effort in the fourth game, albeit with a tired finish against Hawthorn, a strong premiership contender.  As we discussed our team's recent health improvement, I shared my observations on the changes within the team, including the refreshed style, the introduction of new young talent, such as rising stars Caleb Windsor, Harvey Langford, and Xavier Lindsay, and the rebranding of Kozzy Pickett from a small forward to a midfield machine who can still get among the goals. I also highlighted the dominance of captain Max Gawn in the ruck and the resurgence in form in a big way of midfield superstars Christian Petracca and Clayton Oliver. 

      • 9 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Sydney

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 26th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we analyse a crushing victory by the Demons over the Swans at the G. Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.

      • 45 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: Sydney

      The Demons controlled the contest from the outset, though inaccurate kicking kept the Swans in the game until half time. But after the break, Melbourne put on the jets and blew Sydney away and the demolition job was complete.

        • Like
      • 426 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • VOTES: Sydney

      Max Gawn still has an almost unassailable lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award. Jake Bowey, Christian Petracca, Harvey Langford, Kade Chandler & Ed Langdon round out the Top 5. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • 44 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Northern Bullants

      The Casey Demons travelled to a windy Cramer Street, Preston yesterday and blew the Northern Bullants off the ground for three quarters before shutting up shop in the final term, coasting to a much-needed 71-point victory after leading by almost 15 goals at one stage. It was a pleasing performance that revived the Demons’ prospects for the 2025 season but, at the same time, very little can be taken from the game because of the weak opposition. These days, the Bullants are little more than road kill. The once proud club, situated behind the Preston Market in a now culturally diverse area, is currently facing significant financial and on-field challenges, having failed to secure a win to date in 2025.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • GAMEDAY: Sydney

      It’s Game Day, and the Demons have a golden opportunity to build on last week’s stirring win by toppling Sydney at the MCG. A victory today would keep them firmly in the hunt for a finals spot and help them stay in touch with the pack chasing a place in the Top 8. Can the Dees make it two in a row and bring down the Swans?

      • 643 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All