Oppo Camp The Non-North FOOTY DISCUSSION ONLY & Matchday Chat Thread III

[DarkPhoenix]

Only nominated ruckmen will be able to compete at a contest for a throw-in or ball-up, with players no longer permitted to contest a ruck contest as a third man up


Goldy licking his lips

 

[muttley45]

So for high tackles, Joel Selwood will continue to receive frees for shrugging incorrect tackles high, and Lindsay Thomas to receive nothing for lowering his height, yeah ?

 

[Grogg]

Some very interesting wording on that high contact rule as well.

 

[Grogg]

So for high tackles, Joel Selwood will continue to receive frees for shrugging incorrect tackles high, and Lindsay Thomas to receive nothing for lowering his height, yeah ?

With that wording it could be construed as raising the arm to draw the contact as deliberate.

I hope so anyway.

 

[Firestarter]

The word interpretation gives me hives.

 

[giantroo]

 

[giantroo]

 

[giantroo]

 

[Donkey Chop]

Best part about this is it's good for North and shit for Western.

 

[Saintly35]

Even though favours us i think it's a stupid ruling.

A 3rd man up penalises the team as they are one mid down. Sure some come off, many don't and quality ruckmen should still beat any 3rd attempt anyway if hit at highest point.

I'm tired of rule changes, leave the game alone FFS!!

It's like the AFL make changes just to create attention, not because it's required.

 

[Firestarter]

Even though favours us i think it's a stupid ruling.

A 3rd man up penalises the team as they are one mid down. Sure some come off, many don't and quality ruckmen should still beat any 3rd attempt anyway if hit at highest point.

I'm tired of rule changes, leave the game alone FFS!!

It's like the AFL make changes just to create attention, not because it's required.

It isn't like. It is

 

[kangaspurs]

Even though favours us i think it's a stupid ruling.

A 3rd man up penalises the team as they are one mid down. Sure some come off, many don't and quality ruckmen should still beat any 3rd attempt anyway if hit at highest point.

I'm tired of rule changes, leave the game alone FFS!!

It's like the AFL make changes just to create attention, not because it's required.

Nah, this one was required imo and a very positive change by the AFL.

There is now significantly less risk of injuries to ruckmen in 3rd man up scenarios and there is less ambiguity over blocking at a stoppage as players know that no one is going to go 3rd man up.

Not a case of a change for the sake of change at all for me.

 

[Hojuman]

What's the story G.R.?

 

[giantroo]

What's the story G.R.?

Tongue in cheek. Making a reference to the removal of the 3rd man up rule. Geelong used Blicavs in that role and he has basically been made redundant.

 

[giantroo]

Looks like Chris hasn't returned either.

 

[Only Forwards]

Sure some come off, many don't and quality ruckmen should still beat any 3rd attempt anyway if hit at highest point.

So any quality ruckman should be able to beat an opponent when they are being grappled out of the contest by the "nominated ruckman"?

Rubbish, third man up comes in at speed from any direction and is used as a tactic by teams who have shitbox junker ruckmen.

This change is solid. The reason it is solid is there is no grey so umpires don't interpret shit.

Yeah they don't get rule changes right all the time, by far the worst is when they change things mid season.

Your plea to "leave the game alone" is somewhat humorous, I mean the rules have almost always been in a perpetual state of flux. If they weren't, teams would still kick the ball out of bounds down the field to have it thrown back in.

 

[Arden]

So any quality ruckman should be able to beat an opponent when they are being grappled out of the contest by the "nominated ruckman"?

Rubbish, third man up comes in at speed from any direction and is used as a tactic by teams who have shitbox junker ruckmen.

This change is solid. The reason it is solid is there is no grey so umpires don't interpret shit.

Yeah they don't get rule changes right all the time, by far the worst is when they change things mid season.

Your plea to "leave the game alone" is somewhat humorous, I mean the rules have almost always been in a perpetual state of flux. If they weren't, teams would still kick the ball out of bounds down the field to have it thrown back in.

Agreed. This rule change kind of is 'leaving the game alone' because it brings ruck contests back to what they were for over a century.

And a ruckman standing flat footed while being grappled by an opposition donkey ruck, can easily be jumped over by an athletic player who gets a run at it. All while driving his knees into the opposition ruck's back.

Can't see why Hodge and Danger are cutting up about it. If nobody can do it, nobody is really disadvantaged. Just allows ruckman to you know, ruck.

 

[Only Forwards]

Can't see why Hodge and Danger are cutting up about it. If nobody can do it, nobody is really disadvantaged. Just allows ruckman to you know, ruck.

They'd be cut up by it because it will effect their teams. THey are not exactly elite in the ruck stocks at either of these clubs.

It will effect the dogs, West Coast (this year) Richmond.

If the AFL could make cut and dry rules that stopped flooding, or the swamp, or zoning, they would, because straight up 1v1 head to head two players go at it is a far better game.

It is the game that most people understand. Evidenced by the multiple kick it long calls.

 

[Roozee]

So NOW "prior opportunity" is added into the LAW on the deliberate rushed behind (and rightly so if it is to be administered that way) ......which means it wasn't there before.

The game is governed by the laws not a ******g memo with a passing statement in it with a season well under way.

Still seething over THAT Spud call!

 

[Roozee]

More shit for umpires to **** up 2017
December 21, 2016 5:11 PM

AFL General Manager of Football Operations, Mark Evans, today advised clubs that the AFL Commission had considered a number of matters around the Laws of the Game for the 2017 Toyota AFL Premiership Season and approved the following:

• Only nominated ruckmen will be able to compete at a contest for a throw-in or ball-up, with players no longer permitted to contest a ruck contest as a third man up
• There will be a stricter interpretation of Deliberate Rushed Behinds
• The interpretation of where a player draws high contact will be simplified

Mr Evans said the AFL’s Football Department’s recommendations to the Commission had been guided by widespread industry consultation with Clubs, the AFLPA, AFL Coaches Association, AFL Medical Officers, key industry groups and fan research, along with a recent club meeting with coaches to discuss the Laws.

“These Law changes and amendments are in keeping with the AFL’s strong stance to protect players against injury and to promote exciting football in all parts of the ground,” Mr Evans said.

“Eliminating the third man up at ruck contests will support the recruitment of tall players and ensure our game continues to be played at the elite level by players of various sizes and differing abilities.

"A stricter interpretation of what constitutes a Deliberate Rushed Behind is designed to keep the ball in play and promote contested football, which is the preference of our fans.

“Umpires will be instructed that whether a tackle is reasonable should always be their first assessment when adjudicating high contact.”

Mr Evans said further detail on each point was as follows:

Third Man Up:
After analysis of third-man up contests over the past two seasons, it was determined there was no discernible advantage to the game when this tactic was used.

The Law change also supports the recruitment of tall players with a specific skill set, with injury to ruckmen another factor considered by the Commission.

The removal of the third man up is expected to make a ruck contest easier to adjudicate.

Deliberate Rushed Behinds:
Under the amended rule a field umpire shall give consideration to:

• Whether the player had prior opportunity to dispose of the ball;

• The distance of the player from the Goal or Behind Line;

• The degree of pressure being applied to the player.

Mr Evans said the AFL Umpiring Department would work closely with clubs during the pre-season to establish clearer interpretations of the points above.

High Tackle - Players Drawing High Contact:
The first assessment for the umpire will continue to be whether the tackle was applied in an appropriate manner.

Umpires will be asked to call play on when a tackle is assessed as reasonable (no swinging arm or contact being incidental) and the player with the ball is responsible for the high contact.

It is important to note that at all times the ball carrier retains protection against high or indiscriminate tackling.

Other matters considered
The AFL has advised clubs on a minor amendment to the wording of Law 15.6 – Deliberate Out of Bounds – to better describe the stricter assessment implemented in 2016.

Clarification on the interpretation of the ‘protected area’ rule was also provided with a focus to be placed on whether players enter the protected area in a manner which impacts or could impact the kicker, particularly once the kicker has established a set position.

The AFL Laws of the Game Committee comprises: Mark Evans (Chairman), Brett Burton, Wayne Campbell, Michael Christian, Neil Craig, Chris Fagan, Tom Harley, Chris Judd, Hayden Kennedy, Leigh Matthews and Jack Riewoldt.

Separately, the operations of the Match Review Panel will have a number of changes for 2017:

• Apply a stricter interpretation of impact for Intentional Strikes to the Body where the force of the strike warrants a suspension;

• Where a jumper punch / strike to the head has minimal impact, provide an ability for the MRP to impose a Fixed Financial Sanction as per Attempt to Strike;

• Provide the ability for the MRP to recommend a sanction to Clubs for large Melees or multiple breaches in a single season;

• Merge the currently independent records for Engaging in a Melee and Wrestling charges given their similarity, to further disincentivise repeat offenders.

EFA

 

[Twinkletoes]

Hodge's son and mine have landed in the same group for next year's 4yr old kinder, and by crikey I'll be saving that tweet for the first kinder pickup arvo in 2017.

 

[Passmore]

Agreed. This rule change kind of is 'leaving the game alone' because it brings ruck contests back to what they were for over a century.

And a ruckman standing flat footed while being grappled by an opposition donkey ruck, can easily be jumped over by an athletic player who gets a run at it. All while driving his knees into the opposition ruck's back.

Can't see why Hodge and Danger are cutting up about it. If nobody can do it, nobody is really disadvantaged. Just allows ruckman to you know, ruck.

Dangerfield has taken Judd's role as the ****in oracle of everything. Must be a clause in the come home contract. FFS, he was even on AFL.com draft coverage.

I don't give a **** what the smug campaigner thinks. I'm sick of hearing and reading his opinions.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[Gasometer]

Looks like the rushed behind re write is now known as the 'Spud Rule'

 

[Gasometer]

Clubs get to have input into melee penalties.

A shift at Wallan KFC would be an adequate punishment.

 

[Saintly35]

Nah, this one was required imo and a very positive change by the AFL.

There is now significantly less risk of injuries to ruckmen in 3rd man up scenarios and there is less ambiguity over blocking at a stoppage as players know that no one is going to go 3rd man up.

Not a case of a change for the sake of change at all for me.

I see benefits in the rule change, but personally I see it as unnecessary and the 'random' nature of our game is a key feature compared to other sports. With better umpiring it could have been dealt with (Ie: 3rd man not allowed to jump on opposition ruckman from behind)

Good ruckman have still thrived without this rule. The AFL should stop stuffing around with changing something every two seconds and let the game evolve on its own.