I enjoyed it far more than this year's farcical, 'Anyone know when incorrect disposal, in the back, chopping arms etc were removed from the rulebook?'
The Holding the Ball Rule
- Thread starter Mateyman
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Problem is too many are getting pinged without prior op. So often I mutter, 'Now why would you go and get the ball?' - and quite often it's MY team receiving the free kick. I'm as biased as they come but I hate seeing a bloke penalised when he's had no chance whatsoever to dispose of the ball. And I especially hate that one where a player is so pinned that he can't even wriggle his little finger yet the ump pauses (as though giving him more time in his 'strait jacket' will help) pings him and then tells him he needed to make a genuine attempt - in this situation this could only mean miraculously boring a hole in his torso (and the torsos of the three opponents on top of him) and making the ball go through them.
Exactly. It reminds me of the old 'dodgy handball free' they sometimes pay. I get a shocker of a handball from my teammate which means I am instantly tackled. I get pinged for HTB or incorrect disposal seemingly because, well, 'that was a terrible decision by your teammate to give you the ball in that situation' - yeah but I still need to have had prior op.
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,669
- 99,018
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
What rule is in the book and is currently not being implemented that you would like to be implemented? "Dropping the ball" isn't a free kick.
The only time you'll have a free kick paid against you for dropping the ball is if you're being tackled and you've dropped the ball after having prior opportunity to dispose of the ball and have failed to attempt to do so.
And rightly so.
TennisPlayerAndy
Game #6 Klay
- Apr 1, 2008
- 57,706
- 101,697
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Raiders, GSW, QPR, NYM
Are you saying that if you're tackled without prior opportunity to dispose of the ball you are simply allowed to drop it?
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,669
- 99,018
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
The reason the whole "make an attempt" thing came about, where a guy has to punch at a ball that is hopelessly pinned in, was because of Sydney, basically. They'd park 15 men around the ball and hold it in time after time after time. If an opponent got the ball first they'd just tackle gang tackle them, if they got the ball first they'd get tackled, have 3 of their teammates jump on and hold it in.
It was probably the ugliest gameplan ever seen on a footy field. It was disgraceful.
The "make a genuine attempt" rule stops teams from killing a game by locking it in one area of the ground with infinite stoppages. It's a good rule.
Yes, unless the umpire determines that in dropping the ball you could have made an attempt to dispose of the ball correctly (which, let's face it, is almost every time. You can always drop the ball and make an attempt to kick it. If you drop it on the ground and fall on it under a pack, you have to make an attempt to knock it out).
All i'm saying is that whether you drop the ball or not is not a factor in whether a free kick is paid. It's entirely down to whether you had prior opportunity and whether you disposed of the ball legally or, if you didn't have prior, made a genuine attempt to do so.
TennisPlayerAndy
Game #6 Klay
- Apr 1, 2008
- 57,706
- 101,697
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Raiders, GSW, QPR, NYM
Well, you simply can't let the ball go whilst being tackled, prior opportunity or not.
That happens all the time.
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,669
- 99,018
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
Where does it say that in the rules?
The rules pretty expressly state that you must make a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball legally if you're tackled without prior.
Whether you drop the ball or not, all that matters is the umpire's judgement on whether you made a genuine attempt to legally dispose of the ball (or if you're on the ground, knock it out).
"dropping the ball" isn't a rule
Bob_vic
Club Legend
"Dropping the ball" does exist, but only in the sense of what's previously been described.
If you deliberately drop or bounce the ball, that's automatically not making an attempt to correctly dispose.
Making a genuine attempt to dispose is nothing new, it goes right back to the roots of the HTB rule. We're talking multiple generations.
However, I do believe this year they're being harsh on players that are tackled straight away or without a reasonable time/opportunity to dispose, the ball is pinned with no opportunity to make an attempt - you can't make make an attempt if it's impossible, ie. there still needs to be a reasonable time/opportunity. Only if the umpire is not convinced the ball is pinned, does the player need to show a genuine attempt.
I've seen too many instances where a player is tackled straight away then other players pile on top, making it impossible to make any attempt at a disposal - this should always be a ball-up, as per the rules.
15.2.3 Holding the Football — Prior Opportunity/No Prior Opportunity
Where the field Umpire is satisfied that a Player in possession of the football:
(b) has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the
field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if,
upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not Correctly
Dispose or genuinely attempt to Correctly Dispose of the
football after being given a reasonable opportunity to
do so.
If you deliberately drop or bounce the ball, that's automatically not making an attempt to correctly dispose.
Making a genuine attempt to dispose is nothing new, it goes right back to the roots of the HTB rule. We're talking multiple generations.
However, I do believe this year they're being harsh on players that are tackled straight away or without a reasonable time/opportunity to dispose, the ball is pinned with no opportunity to make an attempt - you can't make make an attempt if it's impossible, ie. there still needs to be a reasonable time/opportunity. Only if the umpire is not convinced the ball is pinned, does the player need to show a genuine attempt.
I've seen too many instances where a player is tackled straight away then other players pile on top, making it impossible to make any attempt at a disposal - this should always be a ball-up, as per the rules.
15.2.3 Holding the Football — Prior Opportunity/No Prior Opportunity
Where the field Umpire is satisfied that a Player in possession of the football:
(b) has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the
field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if,
upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not Correctly
Dispose or genuinely attempt to Correctly Dispose of the
football after being given a reasonable opportunity to
do so.
Last edited:
Don't you think that if die hard footy followers don't understand the rule that is in itself an indication that thee rule needs to be altered? It seems most people in this thread, and the majority of fans I encounter, want the rules to:
1: Protect the ball player.
2: Penalise obvious infringements.
3: Make sense - as in they can understand why one infringement was paid and another was not.
It shouldn't matter if a player makes an attempt if he wrapped up immediately.
It should matter that a player can't just let go of the ball.
It should matter that no matter how much prior opportunity a player has that the tackle still needs to be legal and not infringe high, low or in the back.
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,669
- 99,018
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
I've been through this so many times but here we go again.
It really is quite a simple rule, it's just that the average supporter is still playing by 1980s rules. It's why when you go to a game you hear "Kick it! Kick it!" "Get on your man!" and "He dropped it! That's gotta be holding the ball" in the crowd at every single game every single week.
If you have had prior opportunity (as judged by the umpire) to dispose of the football and you are successfully tackled, it's holding the ball. If you don't have prior opportunity, you must make a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball as soon as you can. If you don't, holding the ball.
Yes it absolutely should. Go and watch some Sydney games from the mid 2000s. They force a stoppage, park 15 men around the ball, and lock the ball in time after time after time, never making an attempt to get it out because they don't want to. They either gang tackle the opposition player with the ball, or get the ball, take a tackle and have 5 of their teammates jump on to lock the ball in.
The idea of making a genuine attempt was brought in to combat the most boring style of football that has ever graced the game, and it worked.
But who adjudicates that? Are we arguing that every time a player loses possession it should be HTB? Because that's absolute rubbish. Are we asking the umpires to adjudicate whether the drop was deliberate or not? Because they have enough to worry about without making judgement calls on intent like that.
If you start to pay dropping the ball in modern football there would be 60 free kicks per match and it would be a frustrating stop start bore, with so much booing from the crowd that everyone who went to a game would have ringing in their ears for weeks.
Added to that, the vast, vast majority of the time, if someone drops the ball they are pinged anyway because the umpire interprets the drop as prior opportunity to legally dispose of the ball, so we're only really talking about the ball and players being on the ground, and quite often in that case, a player has his arm pinned and has to drop the ball to be able to knock it out without throwing it.
Totally agree. In the back has hardly been paid at all this year, it's really weird. On the one hand I prefer that they've relaxed a bit on this rule because it caused players to just drop onto their stomachs every time they got tackled in the hope of winning a free, but it's taking some getting used to.
It really is quite a simple rule, it's just that the average supporter is still playing by 1980s rules. It's why when you go to a game you hear "Kick it! Kick it!" "Get on your man!" and "He dropped it! That's gotta be holding the ball" in the crowd at every single game every single week.
If you have had prior opportunity (as judged by the umpire) to dispose of the football and you are successfully tackled, it's holding the ball. If you don't have prior opportunity, you must make a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball as soon as you can. If you don't, holding the ball.
Yes it absolutely should. Go and watch some Sydney games from the mid 2000s. They force a stoppage, park 15 men around the ball, and lock the ball in time after time after time, never making an attempt to get it out because they don't want to. They either gang tackle the opposition player with the ball, or get the ball, take a tackle and have 5 of their teammates jump on to lock the ball in.
The idea of making a genuine attempt was brought in to combat the most boring style of football that has ever graced the game, and it worked.
But who adjudicates that? Are we arguing that every time a player loses possession it should be HTB? Because that's absolute rubbish. Are we asking the umpires to adjudicate whether the drop was deliberate or not? Because they have enough to worry about without making judgement calls on intent like that.
If you start to pay dropping the ball in modern football there would be 60 free kicks per match and it would be a frustrating stop start bore, with so much booing from the crowd that everyone who went to a game would have ringing in their ears for weeks.
Added to that, the vast, vast majority of the time, if someone drops the ball they are pinged anyway because the umpire interprets the drop as prior opportunity to legally dispose of the ball, so we're only really talking about the ball and players being on the ground, and quite often in that case, a player has his arm pinned and has to drop the ball to be able to knock it out without throwing it.
Totally agree. In the back has hardly been paid at all this year, it's really weird. On the one hand I prefer that they've relaxed a bit on this rule because it caused players to just drop onto their stomachs every time they got tackled in the hope of winning a free, but it's taking some getting used to.
Bob_vic
Club Legend
Why they're being more harsh on it is because players try to pretend the ball is pinned, when the ball is still free to attempt a disposal. They just lay there doing nothing and hope for a ball-up.
If the umpire can see the ball is genuinely pinned - yes, the player doesn't need to make an attempt that is not possible. This is where they're sometimes getting is wrong. Where there's no reasonable time/opportunity to dispose, it's meant be be a ball-up.
This part of the HTB rule has not changed since the 70s/80s, contrary to popular belief.
If the umpire can see the ball is genuinely pinned - yes, the player doesn't need to make an attempt that is not possible. This is where they're sometimes getting is wrong. Where there's no reasonable time/opportunity to dispose, it's meant be be a ball-up.
This part of the HTB rule has not changed since the 70s/80s, contrary to popular belief.
"El_Scorcho, post: 32865269, member: 47067"
It really is quite a simple rule, it's just that the average supporter is still playing by 1980s rules. It's why when you go to a game you hear "Kick it! Kick it!" "Get on your man!" and "He dropped it! That's gotta be holding the ball" in the crowd at every single game every single week.
If you have had prior opportunity (as judged by the umpire) to dispose of the football and you are successfully tackled, it's holding the ball. If you don't have prior opportunity, you must make a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball as soon as you can. If you don't, holding the ball.
Sorry but your the one saying the die in the wool followers don't understand the rule and need to be educated - that suggests it is poorly conceived.
Yes it absolutely should. Go and watch some Sydney games from the mid 2000s. They force a stoppage, park 15 men around the ball, and lock the ball in time after time after time, never making an attempt to get it out because they don't want to. They either gang tackle the opposition player with the ball, or get the ball, take a tackle and have 5 of their teammates jump on to lock the ball in.
And? Just because a team is willing to force stoppages does not mean we have to penalise the guy who gets the ball and then has it pinned to him immediately by the tackler. The game is bigger than transient tactics, other coaches would have come up with counter measures and the Sydney game plan would have disappeared - just as it has in the past.
The idea of making a genuine attempt was brought in to combat the most boring style of football that has ever graced the game, and it worked.
See above
But who adjudicates that? Are we arguing that every time a player loses possession it should be HTB? Because that's absolute rubbish. Are we asking the umpires to adjudicate whether the drop was deliberate or not? Because they have enough to worry about without making judgement calls on intent like that.
So we allow players to drop/throw the ball? Great idea. The onus has to be on the player to correctly dispose of the ball. If you are happy for a player to be penalised because he didn't make a genuine attempt to get rid of a ball when in reality he has no chance why is it unreasonable to expect a player to correctly dispose of the ball when he can? I have little problem with the ball genuinely knocked free at the point of a tackle being called play on but it is clear players these days know they can simply let go of it without even attempting a legal disposal.
If you start to pay dropping the ball in modern football there would be 60 free kicks per match and it would be a frustrating stop start bore, with so much booing from the crowd that everyone who went to a game would have ringing in their ears for weeks.
No, players would actually start to truly make genuine efforts to dispose of the ball correctly.
Added to that, the vast, vast majority of the time, if someone drops the ball they are pinged anyway because the umpire interprets the drop as prior opportunity to legally dispose of the ball, so we're only really talking about the ball and players being on the ground, and quite often in that case, a player has his arm pinned and has to drop the ball to be able to knock it out without throwing it.
Really? you don't see the "rolling maul" as one long pick up drop, pick up drop? With no one pinged for incorrect disposal. You don't see players actually now managing to drop the ball to their teammates advantage?
Totally agree. In the back has hardly been paid at all this year, it's really weird. On the one hand I prefer that they've relaxed a bit on this rule because it caused players to just drop onto their stomachs every time they got tackled in the hope of winning a free, but it's taking some getting used to.
It really is quite a simple rule, it's just that the average supporter is still playing by 1980s rules. It's why when you go to a game you hear "Kick it! Kick it!" "Get on your man!" and "He dropped it! That's gotta be holding the ball" in the crowd at every single game every single week.
If you have had prior opportunity (as judged by the umpire) to dispose of the football and you are successfully tackled, it's holding the ball. If you don't have prior opportunity, you must make a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball as soon as you can. If you don't, holding the ball.
Sorry but your the one saying the die in the wool followers don't understand the rule and need to be educated - that suggests it is poorly conceived.
Yes it absolutely should. Go and watch some Sydney games from the mid 2000s. They force a stoppage, park 15 men around the ball, and lock the ball in time after time after time, never making an attempt to get it out because they don't want to. They either gang tackle the opposition player with the ball, or get the ball, take a tackle and have 5 of their teammates jump on to lock the ball in.
And? Just because a team is willing to force stoppages does not mean we have to penalise the guy who gets the ball and then has it pinned to him immediately by the tackler. The game is bigger than transient tactics, other coaches would have come up with counter measures and the Sydney game plan would have disappeared - just as it has in the past.
The idea of making a genuine attempt was brought in to combat the most boring style of football that has ever graced the game, and it worked.
See above
But who adjudicates that? Are we arguing that every time a player loses possession it should be HTB? Because that's absolute rubbish. Are we asking the umpires to adjudicate whether the drop was deliberate or not? Because they have enough to worry about without making judgement calls on intent like that.
So we allow players to drop/throw the ball? Great idea. The onus has to be on the player to correctly dispose of the ball. If you are happy for a player to be penalised because he didn't make a genuine attempt to get rid of a ball when in reality he has no chance why is it unreasonable to expect a player to correctly dispose of the ball when he can? I have little problem with the ball genuinely knocked free at the point of a tackle being called play on but it is clear players these days know they can simply let go of it without even attempting a legal disposal.
If you start to pay dropping the ball in modern football there would be 60 free kicks per match and it would be a frustrating stop start bore, with so much booing from the crowd that everyone who went to a game would have ringing in their ears for weeks.
No, players would actually start to truly make genuine efforts to dispose of the ball correctly.
Added to that, the vast, vast majority of the time, if someone drops the ball they are pinged anyway because the umpire interprets the drop as prior opportunity to legally dispose of the ball, so we're only really talking about the ball and players being on the ground, and quite often in that case, a player has his arm pinned and has to drop the ball to be able to knock it out without throwing it.
Really? you don't see the "rolling maul" as one long pick up drop, pick up drop? With no one pinged for incorrect disposal. You don't see players actually now managing to drop the ball to their teammates advantage?
Totally agree. In the back has hardly been paid at all this year, it's really weird. On the one hand I prefer that they've relaxed a bit on this rule because it caused players to just drop onto their stomachs every time they got tackled in the hope of winning a free, but it's taking some getting used to.
Last edited:
From the current AFL lawbook, the Incorrect Disposal law:
15.3 FREE KICKS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF THE FOOTBALL
15.3.1 Correct Disposal
A Player Correctly Disposes of the football if the Player Kicks
or Handballs the football.
15.3.2 Incorrect Disposal and Payment of Free Kick
When the football is in play, a Free Kick shall be awarded
against a Player who hands the football to another Player
or throws the football.
This is just badly written - what is dropping the ball? It is neither a correct or an incorrect disposal. IARC the rule used to list explicitly the various types of incorrect disposals (throwing, handing to a teammate, scooping, rolling, etc).
I can remember only one free kick paid against a player dropping the ball deliberately when not in a tackle - against Darren Milburn against Richmond in the mid-2000s. Milburn, about to fall out of bounds, dropped the ball inside the boundary line, came back inside the boundary and picked up the ball.
15.3 FREE KICKS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF THE FOOTBALL
15.3.1 Correct Disposal
A Player Correctly Disposes of the football if the Player Kicks
or Handballs the football.
15.3.2 Incorrect Disposal and Payment of Free Kick
When the football is in play, a Free Kick shall be awarded
against a Player who hands the football to another Player
or throws the football.
This is just badly written - what is dropping the ball? It is neither a correct or an incorrect disposal. IARC the rule used to list explicitly the various types of incorrect disposals (throwing, handing to a teammate, scooping, rolling, etc).
I can remember only one free kick paid against a player dropping the ball deliberately when not in a tackle - against Darren Milburn against Richmond in the mid-2000s. Milburn, about to fall out of bounds, dropped the ball inside the boundary line, came back inside the boundary and picked up the ball.
Bob_vic
Club Legend
You've quoted the wrong law. Also, it's not illegal to deliberately drop the ball on the ground, when not being tackled...
Yes, "by definition", the ball being dropped deliberately or forced out in the tackle is not classified as a "correct disposal" or an "incorrect disposal", because it is covered by the laws elsewhere. The free kicks under the HTB laws are for HTB, not for incorrect disposal under 15.3.2. The HTB laws don't refer to the term "incorrect disposal".
15.3.1 is only a definition of what a "correct disposal" is, for the purposes of the HTB law. This isn't the whole HTB law. HTB includes 15.3.1, but is mainly covered by 15.2.3, 15.2.4, 15.2.5 and 15.2.6. The laws 15.2.1, 15.2.2 and 15.4.1 are also relevant.
15.3.2 is for the purposes of paying a free kick for a throw, illegal handball or handing to another player.
You also need to read the definitions law, which is law 1.1.
Throw: shall be given its ordinary meaning, but also includes the act
of propelling the football with one or both hands in a scooping motion.
A Player does not throw the football if the Player hits, punches or taps
the football without taking possession of the football.
Handball: the act of holding the football in one hand and disposing of
the football by hitting it with the clenched fist of the other hand.
Last edited:
Thanks for the reference to 1.1, I overlooked this.
As the rules stand, deliberately dropping the ball is illegal if tackled but legal otherwise, as you say. Dropping the ball is not defined anywhere as a correct or incorrect disposal. This seems to me downright sloppy.
Holding the Ball laws refer to 15.3.1, but this clause itself is included in 15.3 (Laws relating to Disposal of the Ball) and therefore it relates directly to incorrect disposals as outlawed in 15.3.2.
- Aug 1, 2008
- 15,149
- 25,675
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Banned
- #92
there was no pussy intrepretation such as prior opportunity for a 100 years and everything was crystal clear.
If your teammate has handballed to you and taking possession is going get you pinged, well you don't take possession, do you? Then we have less rugby scrums too.
Similarly if we get rid of this stupid interchange, which we also did not have for a 100 years, we would not have these high speed collisions between fresh and fatigued players, we would have less scrums as play would open up.
We keep stuffing around with the rules year after year and have made a farce of the game.
If your teammate has handballed to you and taking possession is going get you pinged, well you don't take possession, do you? Then we have less rugby scrums too.
Similarly if we get rid of this stupid interchange, which we also did not have for a 100 years, we would not have these high speed collisions between fresh and fatigued players, we would have less scrums as play would open up.
We keep stuffing around with the rules year after year and have made a farce of the game.
The interpretation of the rules is so flexible that umpires can find a free kick to advantage one side over the other whenever they like and thus influence ,unfairly, the outcome of a game. eg Holding the ball,in the back, deliberate out of bounds. And yes I am biased.
situations that don't make sense.
i) prior op, gets tackled, drops ball, play on
vs: ii) prior op, gets tackled with one hand pinned in tackle, drops ball, holding the ball
a) prior op, gets tackled, drops ball, play on
vs, (b) prior op, gets tackled, attempts to kick but it misses foot due to tackle, HTB
el scorcho - I think most footy fans want to see a situation where:
prior op, gets tackled, does not correctly dispose of ball = HTB, whether dropped, jarred out in tackle, failed effort to handpass or kick.
i) prior op, gets tackled, drops ball, play on
vs: ii) prior op, gets tackled with one hand pinned in tackle, drops ball, holding the ball
a) prior op, gets tackled, drops ball, play on
vs, (b) prior op, gets tackled, attempts to kick but it misses foot due to tackle, HTB
el scorcho - I think most footy fans want to see a situation where:
prior op, gets tackled, does not correctly dispose of ball = HTB, whether dropped, jarred out in tackle, failed effort to handpass or kick.
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,669
- 99,018
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
A lot of the things you say don't make sense I totally agree with, but more often than not it's due to the umpire making a poor decision as opposed to an issue with the rule.
As for your last line, that's currently the rule as it stands. If you have prior op, get tackled, and fail to immediately correctly dispose of the ball, it's holding the ball, assuming the umpires get it right. It's the most straightforward one, where a guy gets chased down or something. The rule is actually pretty straightforward when there has been prior opportunity and a player is tackled because he's basically always gone unless he instantly gets a legal disposal away.
The ones most people struggle with is where there isn't clear prior opportunity or where a player has dived on a ball etc.
Bob_vic
Club Legend
Often not posted, the list of examples where it is "play on" , if there's NO prior opportunity. (a) and (b) apply even if there IS prior opportunity.
15.2.4 Application — Specific Instances where Play shall Continue
For the avoidance of doubt, the field Umpire shall allow play to continue when:
(a) a Player is bumped and the football falls from the Player’s hands;
(b) a Player’s arm is knocked which causes the Player to lose possession of the football;
(c) a Player’s arms are pinned to their side by an opponent which causes the Player to drop the football...(unless prior opp)
(d) a Player, whilst in the act of Kicking or Handballing, is swung off-balance and does not make contact with the football by either foot or hand...(unless prior opp)
(e) a Player is pulled or swung by one arm which causes the football to fall from the Player’s hands...(unless prior opp)
15.2.4 Application — Specific Instances where Play shall Continue
For the avoidance of doubt, the field Umpire shall allow play to continue when:
(a) a Player is bumped and the football falls from the Player’s hands;
(b) a Player’s arm is knocked which causes the Player to lose possession of the football;
(c) a Player’s arms are pinned to their side by an opponent which causes the Player to drop the football...(unless prior opp)
(d) a Player, whilst in the act of Kicking or Handballing, is swung off-balance and does not make contact with the football by either foot or hand...(unless prior opp)
(e) a Player is pulled or swung by one arm which causes the football to fall from the Player’s hands...(unless prior opp)
Last edited:
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,669
- 99,018
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
Bob_vic
Club Legend
Not likely...
the (no prior op) should apply to (a) and (b). you've had prior opportunity, you've got tackled... should not matter if the ball gets knocked out you're already holding the ball.
Bob_vic
Club Legend
Knocking an arm or bumping is not a tackle.
