Of course you can.
-
AFLW 2025 - AFLW Trade and Draft - All the player moves
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Rules The new man on the mark rule is utterly ridiculous.
- Thread starter Donakebab
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
ossie_21
Premium Platinum
Actually surprised it seems to have been going ok so far in this round of warm up matches, but ask again once it is game on, 4pts on the line & everything to play for.
Dying minutes of a close game when pressure is through the roof, instinct will take over and a 50m penalty or two will kill the show.
What I’m most worried about is that there is meant to be a 1m level of tolerance, but there has been a couple given for a step. Being down to the umpires discretion, that’s what is going to make this a massive issue when consistency goes down the toilet
Dying minutes of a close game when pressure is through the roof, instinct will take over and a 50m penalty or two will kill the show.
What I’m most worried about is that there is meant to be a 1m level of tolerance, but there has been a couple given for a step. Being down to the umpires discretion, that’s what is going to make this a massive issue when consistency goes down the toilet
- Apr 29, 2012
- 28,277
- 43,480
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The man on the mark is not an exploit of the game. It doesn't take away from the enjoyment of the game or impact the end result. Introducing a rule to change the man on the mark to try and cause some predetermined change to gamestyle is contrived. That's self evident. Its a contrived rule.
telsor
Hall of Famer
At the moment, this is a big focus for the umps...calling stand, and being quick with the play on call.
See how it looks a few rounds in when it's 'just another rule' and the umpires are busy looking at other things, so the play on doesn't come until the guy with the ball has run past the man on the mark.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
The rule seems ok. Interpretation will suck here and there, but I can see how it opens the game up.
Geelong did run off the mark a couple of times yesterday which should have been 50, but I don't mind given its preseason.
Geelong did run off the mark a couple of times yesterday which should have been 50, but I don't mind given its preseason.
It doesn't gift anyone goals though. There are still 17 other defenders on the ground.
Coaches have become too good at clogging the game up. It's what they all strive for.
That's bad. That's not a traditional Aussie rules footy contest. It's a new thing and I don't understand why people are crying about losing it and want to protect it!
Rolling mauls, 5 on 5 pack situations, gang tackling, 18-man defenses, forced stoppages etc. are all strategies that have been introduced relatively recently by coaches with one goal in mind - to slow the game down, to stop highly skilled players, to reduce scoring and to prevent teams from moving the ball freely.
Although I agree that the AFL rarely gets it right when introducing changes, and almost always they are ill-thought out and often create bigger problems - I don't think this applies in this case.
Only about 30 Years ago, kicking across goal was a cardinal sin. You just didn't do it. So all the man on the mark was doing was stopping the guy from gaining any ground from where he had the ball, and maybe hoping to get the odd smother or touched off the boot.
You never moved sideways anyway. There was no point.
So it's not as if the AFL have cost someone their role in AFL footy or anything. And not as if they've removed some time honoured tradition of the game. They're really just reducing the influence of 1 defender on the ground.
So that's why I actually support this one. I'd rather something relatively trivial like this, than 16 per side or zones.
That's very naive.
It's very influential as a defensive tactic, and it is coached heavily by Clarkson, Scott and Hardwick in particular.
Michael Voss used to talk about it in the media just after he finished coaching actually. He said that it was a critical defensive tool and that coaches use it to slow down the opposition. He actually stated that if the AFL want to speed the game up, they should address the manning of the mark.
In my opinion, I'd rather players and teams contest a game based on traditional skills. Not how clever you are at manning the mark. It's these sorts of bullshit tactics from coaches that detract from the game of AFL footy.
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,555
- 29,452
- AFL Club
- West Coast
You’re right. A better comparison would be practice games versus previous years’ practice games.
- Apr 29, 2012
- 28,277
- 43,480
- AFL Club
- Carlton
It gifts goals through the imposition of silly 50m penalties, which turns a ball on the wing into a shot on goal. Goals go up and Hocking's mandate is met because it means another ad break for the AFL. This is the only reason it has been introduced and those out here trying to justify it are just playing into the AFL's hands.
Oh I see what you mean.
Personally I think that aspect will sort itself out. It's a very simple rule really, so aside from some instinctual errors from players early on, they should be able adapt pretty quickly.
No it isn't "self-evident" at all. You are confusing your own fanatical conviction with fact.
The first 4 games of 2020 preseason compared to the first 4 games of 2021 preseason
2020
St Kilda vs Hawthorn - 108 tackles
Western Bulldogs vs North Melbourne - 168 tackles
Melbourne vs Adelaide - 141 tackles
Gold Coast vs Geelong - 164 tackles
2021
Carlton vs St Kilda - 93 tackles
Collingwood vs Richmond - 92 tackles
North Melbourne vs Hawthorn - 109 tackles
Geelong vs Essendon - 106 tackles
May I also say that the AFL website sucks for getting this sort of information. Footywire is so much better but footywire doesn't do preseason games.
So much better to hear “Stand” than “East-West”. And easier to adjudicate that the instruction is being followed, I would have thought.
The East-West call is not traditional and I’m happy to see it gone.
I also like the quicker”Play on” calls when the kicker goes off his line, or waits before kicking. Balances the advantage a little.
The East-West call is not traditional and I’m happy to see it gone.
I also like the quicker”Play on” calls when the kicker goes off his line, or waits before kicking. Balances the advantage a little.
Can i ask a question?
When two or three blokes gang tackle someone, do all 3 get a Tackle stat for it?
- Apr 11, 2002
- 38,232
- 41,179
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Iggles, Georgia.
I've only watched a couple of games but it looks like play has opened up & players have adapted without too much trouble, gets a pass so far for mine.
- Apr 11, 2002
- 38,232
- 41,179
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Iggles, Georgia.
Definitely has been less congested. Tuning into the Swans Giants game shortly so fingers crossed the trend continues.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
same applied last year. The ump yells "come back 2 metres" but the crowd noise is too loud for the player on the mark to hear. 50 metres is paid
it's a minor change with a substantial effect. For example, a teammate can now stream past the player with the ball knowing the man on the mark won't have noticed them and moved laterally to block their path. Teammates up the ground can confidently make a lead knowing the player with the ball wont move laterally to intercept a low pass.
The more I see it in action the more I like it
- Apr 11, 2002
- 38,232
- 41,179
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Iggles, Georgia.
another fairly free flowing game Giants & Swans,
