Pay holding the ball

[its free real estate]

Just pay it. It’s a fundamental feature of the game. Pay it.

The game would improve immeasurably if they paid it.

 

[ferrisb]

Agreed.

If the ball falls out when you're tackled, you didn't dispose of it properly...

 

[its free real estate]

You want to fix footy: pay holding the ball.

This sport has been ruined by listening to moron players who think winning the ball means you get protection. Abolish prior opportunity and pay holding the ball.

 

[wedgetail]

If the ball falls out when you're tackled, you didn't dispose of it properly...

Is incorrect disposal / dropping the ball even a rule anymore?

 

[ChookMFC]

The number one blight on footy is the rule that "attempting to dispose of the football" is an excuse to dispose of it incorrectly.

 

[Cosmic Energy]

You want to fix footy: pay holding the ball.

This sport has been ruined by listening to moron players who think winning the ball means you get protection. Abolish prior opportunity and pay holding the ball.

So if the ball is in between two players you’re probably better off letting the other bloke get it and tackle him.

That’s not a game I want to play or watch.

 

[Big Papa Ted]

So if the ball is in between two players it’s probably better off letting the other bloke get it and tackle him.

That’s not a game I want to play or watch.

Thank god for this piece of common sense.

 

[longsuffreosupp]

I reckon if you’re going to instantly pay Htb, then give the player a chance to dispose. What I mean is ala Jake Stringer, standing up in the tackle and getting the ball out. If the ball is pinned then pay htb.

 

[btdg]

Agreed. Id even get rid of the prior opportunity (which is so subjective and causes half the inconsistency) and it becomes so simple. If you take possession of the ball you have to legally dispose of it.

Would speed up the game so much and make it so much clearer to everyone.

 

[its free real estate]

So if the ball is in between two players it’s probably better off letting the other bloke get it and tackle him.

That’s not a game I want to play or watch.

No, because the player who is first to the ball will always have the advantage

 

[PP34]

I love how over the last decade they’ve they’ve gone from allowing you to dispose straight away or being pinged.

These days you can be thrown in a 360 or tackled to the ground and still be given time to get a handball off.

It’s a disgrace.

Then they pay these absurd ones where a bloke attacks the footy, has no prior and has ten blokes sit on him and they ping him for failing to dispose. Deadset disgraceful.

 

[benneth]

Abolish prior opportunity and pay holding the ball.

Even without prior players make no attempt to legally dispose of the ball.

If they won't get rid of prior atleast umpire it by the book, players must make a legitimate attempt, no benefit of the doubt given, none of this half arsed shytte players do now where they know if they havent had prior they can just drop it.

 

[fnerd]

Reckon if you could point to the one rule causing so much confusion amongst players, fans, coaches etc it’s this one atm.
I honestly don’t know exactly what constitutes htb anymore

 

[Luv_our_club]

If a player has prior and is taken to ground then that is holding the ball.... once you are taken to ground your time is up.

 

[Bardo State]

Getting rid of prior opportunity altogether would be the worst rule change made to the game. Ever.

You know how a player will tap the ball and not take possession so they can't get (legally) tackled? Now imagine that's the case for every single contest. It would be comical.

If anything you could loo at shortening the amount of time a player has to dispose of the ball after a tackle is applied when there is prior.

 

[Cosmic Energy]

No, because the player who is first to the ball for the ball will always have the advantage

Sometimes it’s a split second on a bouncing ball, sometimes it’s a ball in the air that is “touched played on”, so the less courageous thing to do is let someone get it first, line them up and tackle them. There’s not much of an advantage in getting the ball first if you don’t get any opportunity to try to extract yourself from that situation. I’d think that stricter interpretation would lead to guys less willing to take possession, and certainly less willing to take on a would-be tackler, which would be a shame.

 

[shaqsuns]

The number one blight on footy is the rule that "attempting to dispose of the football" is an excuse to dispose of it incorrectly.

Is worse then a warning to a team for not have 6-6-6???? But I’m with you I don’t care if umpires pay 200 free kicks a game, just pay the correct decision and keep the game flowing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheEnsign]

Sometimes it’s a split second on a bouncing ball, sometimes it’s a ball in the air that is “touched played on”, so the less courageous thing to do is let someone get it first, line them up and tackle them. There’s not much of an advantage in getting the ball first if you don’t get any opportunity to try to extract yourself from that situation. I’d think that stricter interpretation would lead to guys less willing to take possession, and certainly less willing to take on a would-be tackler, which would be a shame.

+1. There were some ordinary calls today for sure but you want to protect/reward taking possession of the footy.

 

[Dazzler9]

You have to allow prior opportunity, lest the game descends into a farce where nobody takes possession. It'd just be a rolling rugby maul half the time.

Worth consideration, is paying HTB where a player is tackled and the ball spills out. So if you don't have prior, you have to ensure the ball doesn't spill loose. I dunno, might make things worse on second thoughts. But geez, I'm sick of seeing so many iffy-looking disposals.

 

[btdg]

Getting rid of prior opportunity altogether would be the worst rule change made to the game. Ever.

You know how a player will tap the ball and not take possession so they can't get (legally) tackled? Now imagine that's the case for every single contest. It would be comical.

If anything you could loo at shortening the amount of time a player has to dispose of the ball after a tackle is applied when there is prior.

That wouldn’t be the case for every contest. In most contested situations it is still better to possess the ball and move it your way forward. We might see more Richmond style scramble ball, with teams bringing numbers to the contest, hacking the ball forard then chasing and tackling in waves. The key would be getting the extra number at the contest and sticking tackles so the opponents can’t get the ball out


What it would get rid of is 1-on-2 situations where the 1 takes possession, gets wrapped up and holds it for a ball up while pretending to try and handball. It would get rid of repeat ball ups. It would eliminate a lot of confusion. Mostly, players would probably adjust and things would move on

 

[its free real estate]

Sometimes it’s a split second on a bouncing ball, sometimes it’s a ball in the air that is “touched played on”, so the less courageous thing to do is let someone get it first, line them up and tackle them. There’s not much of an advantage in getting the ball first if you don’t get any opportunity to try to extract yourself from that situation. I’d think that stricter interpretation would lead to guys less willing to take possession, and certainly less willing to take on a would-be tackler, which would be a shame.

It wouldn’t. Players have multiple options to move the ball on to their advantage without taking possession.

 

[its free real estate]

You know how a player will tap the ball and not take possession so they can't get (legally) tackled? Now imagine that's the case for every single contest. It would be comical.

That’s how it was in the 80s. Hawthorn were masters at it.

 

[its free real estate]

If a player has prior and is taken to ground then that is holding the ball.... once you are taken to ground your time is up.

Twice the players were confused today by the umpire not paying HTB. If that is happening then the interpretation is wrong.

 

[JT_the_Man]

I’m more worried that throwing/dropping the ball doesn’t even seem to be a rule anymore. It’s like the umps would genuinely rather players throw the thing than hold it in the tackle.

 

[its free real estate]

Keep in mind that prior opportunity as a concept is not much more than 20 years old.

Holding the ball is 150 years old and has gradually been eroded by reinterpretations of the original rule.

The idea that taking possession of the ball and not disposing of it correctly after being tackled is a free kick is a fundamental of the game. Bring it back.