Running bounce 15m vs Paid mark 15m
- Thread starter Espio
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Topkent
Confirmed ITK Drafting King
Counting steps is moronic. You can't expect an umpire to start counting every single time a player gets the valll
- Banned
- #53
Don't know how to add videos but you can add another one to the collection from tonight. Check out the cats first goal tonight, guy gets it a couple meters inside the 50 then kicks it from maybe 3-4m from the goal square. At best he has run 30m, in all likelihood 35 or even more.
You can understand when a player is zigzagging around how the umps can lose count, but it's unacceptable when a player is running dead straight between easily identifiable marks and they still can't even get it close to right. You know the umpire would have paid a kick that distance.
A unique skill to our game has been turned into a farce by the utter incompetence of the umpires. This isn't one where they can be let off the hook because of a grey area, it's utter incompetence.
You can understand when a player is zigzagging around how the umps can lose count, but it's unacceptable when a player is running dead straight between easily identifiable marks and they still can't even get it close to right. You know the umpire would have paid a kick that distance.
A unique skill to our game has been turned into a farce by the utter incompetence of the umpires. This isn't one where they can be let off the hook because of a grey area, it's utter incompetence.
- Apr 6, 2020
- 7,620
- 17,036
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- The Void
Agree completely. It's been bad this year. Been a few times where tiger players should have been pinged running into goal also.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,483
- 40,655
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Was easily 25m to 30m. I remember Burgoyne being pinged once. 8 steps so at full stride cant have been much over 15m. Yet sometimes they run and run. Then chip it 8m for a mark.
Make both 20m and enforce both heavily. Game improves enormously.
Grockadoc
Brownlow Medallist
- Jul 25, 2008
- 25,192
- 48,057
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Fighting Furies, Man Utd, Cavaliers
Here is the goal in question.
Takes it at 46-48, and kicks it from maybe 3m out of the goalsquare.
So he has easily ran 30m without a bounce.
Takes it at 46-48, and kicks it from maybe 3m out of the goalsquare.
So he has easily ran 30m without a bounce.
- Jul 28, 2012
- 11,060
- 10,410
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- QPR, Buffalo Bills
That was a shocker, definitely ran too far! He's run 30 metres!
Its not a shocker, but actually a statement made on an incorrect assumption. Its not a given that the mown strips are 10m+.
In the later picture posted of the Richmond v Collingwood game you can see that the grass strips are about the width of the distance between the goal post and the point post. Thats just 6.4 metres.
Then have a look how far Dan Houston has run based on that knowledge.
Wrong. You can't see the start of the mown strip between the posts in the second pic so how can you say the distance is "about the width of the distance between the goal post and the point post"? It was stated in commentary at the time that the width of the mown strip was approximately 10m and if you look at either pic you can see it's nowhere near 6.4m.
Even if you were correct it means that in the second pic the ball travelled around 8-9m for a paid mark.
- Banned
- #62
hes halfway from the goal square to the 50m arc. you dont need mowing strips to see that.
Well yes, I thought the mark was well short of what it needed to be.
I remember BT insisting on that. I also remember when he got out the measuring wheel and had to go past the edge of the strip to reach the 10 he'd insisted on. I think it was closer to 8 when they actually measured.
From the top corner of the qoal square to around where Houston is kicking the ball is maybe 20ish. So not that excessive either.
Last edited:
Now that Connor McKenna has returned to Ireland, are you just as pro about allowing it ??
- Jun 6, 2012
- 4,482
- 5,623
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Am sick of marks being measured from where the player kicks vs the man on the mark.
Also sick of different time rules inside the last 2 minutes of a game. Why do you have 20-30 seconds to kick the ball, but in the last 2 minutes it's play on after 5 seconds?
Also sick of different time rules inside the last 2 minutes of a game. Why do you have 20-30 seconds to kick the ball, but in the last 2 minutes it's play on after 5 seconds?
Getting ridiculous this season with how many dinky 10-12m kicks are being paid marks.
BT made a point, several times, that the mowed strip was 12m wide. All game kicks barely travelling that distance were being paid marks and in turn STAND!
I would much prefer an 18m kicked called play on than a 12m one being paid.
They are paying them as marks so players keep doing them, if an umpire had the ballz to call play on not 15 a few times the players would start looking for longer options.
BT made a point, several times, that the mowed strip was 12m wide. All game kicks barely travelling that distance were being paid marks and in turn STAND!
I would much prefer an 18m kicked called play on than a 12m one being paid.
They are paying them as marks so players keep doing them, if an umpire had the ballz to call play on not 15 a few times the players would start looking for longer options.
As others have mentioned the 15m distance without bouncing the ball seems to be most often not adhered to during kickouts. It might look a bit ugly but why don't they add a thin line running 15m from the edge of the square like below? Of course it depends on where exactly the player actually steps out of the square, but that would be a pretty good guide for the umpires and would also act as a marker for the opposition team (who also can't come within 15m of the square during a kickout)..
