Moved Thread Incorrect Disposal Interpretation

[Mr Meeseeks]

I love it.

Clarko points it out.

We’re pretty clearly being punished for it as a club for daring to speak ill of the AFL.

Most people will laugh, mock Clarko, have a good time about it all.

And the fact that the AFL is as corrupt as FIFA will be completely overlooked.

But hey, **** da Horks and all that.

Haha spot on.

All week its been amusing watching people and pundits in full agreement with what he said, outwardly battling with their love of a clarko bash.

Then Hawthorn were clearly punished by the umps for clarkos words last night, yet all we will hear is "lol clarko should of shut up" and nothing will be done. Rather than listen to him and move forward, pundits will go back tp trying tp outdo each other with radical rule changes and bam, we are back to square one.

Supporters and pundits in our game are too tribal. Drives me nuts.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[Obeanie1]

Haha spot on.

All week its been amusing watching people and pundits in full agreement with what he said, outwardly battling with their love of a clarko bash.

Then Hawthorn were clearly punished by the umps for clarkos words last night, yet all we will hear is "lol clarko should of shut up" and nothing will be done. Rather than listen to him and move forward, pundits will go back tp trying tp outdo each other with radical rule changes and bam, we are back to square one.

Supporters and pundits in our game are too tribal. Drives me nuts.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Clarko was spot on.

I and others have been saying what Clarko said for the past two years.

Players have been coached to lock in the ball and concede in the tackle to create a defensive stoppage. The Swans for the past 15 years have been creating an in close, ugly ruck and maul style of play that suited their team and the SCG. THAT's one reason why the AFL didn't do anything until now. Other teams and coaches gave up trying to beat the Swans style and just adopted more of it.

To the critics out there just give this new interpretation a decent run before complaining so much. Not interested in protecting the player going for the ball if their aim is to concede in the tackle to create a stoppage.

All you need to do is watch the last few minutes of a close game when a team needs to score, they don't concede in a tackle, they become desperate to move the ball on quickly........SO THEY CAN SCORE!!!

On the weekend I saw a guy being tackled to the ground throw the ball onto his boot as he was literally laying on his back. He didn't want to get pinged and moved it on. He actually kicked it 2m to a team mate and off they went, attacking.

Just watch and see just how creative players will become now they are not allowed to simply concede in a tackle and make no effort to move the ball on.

And yes, the umps will get some calls wrong..........that's just how it is! But the game will be better for having fewer stoppages and more creative play.

 

[11kgm]

one set of rules for non essendon teams and one for essendon

 

[damochandler]

Last night in the third qtr. walla chases a bulldog player down tackles him to the ground. No holding the ball, because he handballed it. That’s what is wrong with the rule

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

From what I've seen so far this weekend , the interpretation is leading to more free flowing play.

Interesting that the rocket scientists down at the AFL have now thrown it out the window and reverted to the old interpretation.

Seriously, what ******* morons they are.

What was the point of changing the interpretation dramatically for 1 week??!!

Sure, there were some howlers given by the umpires (Coffield in the St Kilda v. Freo game for example) but for the first time in years we'd actually seen a sensible rule 'change' that was actually making a difference. In one round we'd already started to see the signs that players were actually trying to clear the ball with quick kicks and not just conceding stoppages over and over and over again.

Finally.

And it would have improved more and more as the players adjusted to the new interpretation.


But no, they change it back after one week. Honestly, WTF does that achieve?

Just idiocy of the highest order

 

[glengowan]

The last couple of weeks has been noticeable that the umpires are not calling holding the ball for incorrect disposal. Clearly this has been mentioned in the umpires coaching meetings - “play on at all costs”.

They should reward the tackler. Call holding the ball. Bad interpretation by the umpires, particularly in the two Adelaide Oval games, the last two weeks.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

There was so many blatantly obvious incorrect disposal frees completely ignored during the Port v Rich game on the weekend (for both sides).

Player takes the tackler on or isn’t aware they are there, gets tackled so just drops the ball loose. Called played on multiple times when it’s a clear as day HTB.

Then in contrast you get players pinned HTB for literally picking it up and being instantly tackled and pinned.

The AFL doesn’t want players forcefully tackling the opposition to the ground so they are releasing early in the tackle when the ball drops loose but then the umpire doesn’t reward the tackle.

It’s either a case of players ensuring you get the free kick by slamming the player into the ground and then being suspended but winning the free kick, or release the opposition player as they drop the ball but then it’s just play on.

No reward for the tackler but all the risk.

Would reduce the risk of players taking the chance of bringing the opposition to the ground and a potential concussion and suspension if they just paid the obvious free kicks!

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

My number 1 pet hate.


Fundamental changes to the fabric of the game, such as legal disposing of the ball, must be sacrosanct unless taken through a thorough and detailed change process. This has been done by stealth.


It's just unacceptable.