Rule interpretations

[cleomenes]

This year's modifications have been good. Holding the ball rulings now look much as they did 40 years ago. The odd umpire makes the odd error, being too strict or not strict enough, but they mostly have it right. The regulation of marking contests needs more work. Players are still held out and only the odd one is pinged. The interpretation being used is probably too difficult to police. As I said, more work.

For the future, the regulation of tackles designed to injure, best practiced by Hawthorn, needs attention before someone is killed or rendered quadriplegic. The tackles that throw players to the ground with their arms pinned are the most risky. They have to go. The use of such tackles, that Roughhead defended in today's paper need to be dealt with as a matter of urgency.
The idea has come from rugby league, where players in all teams are specifically coached to tackle to injure. It should be sent straight back there. Hawthorn's coach has been very inventive in his application of lessons from other codes to ours, but he should never have touched this one.

 

[NSWCROW]

See the 2 frees against Jeremy Cameron last weekend.
1 in the 1st qtr as he charged for a 50-50 ball , VERY harsh , the 2nd free was a disgrace. ( 2nd qtr )

He's gotten to a looseball , jumped on it a full second before his opponent got to the contest , opponent KICKS him in the head.....and Jez gets pinged for " below the knees "

Interpretation gone mad.