Hocking’s Mess

[NoobPie]

Quite often you see players penalised 50m because the player has clearly played on so the other has reacted, but the umpire simply hasn't technically had the opportunity to call play on. Is that a good look for the game?

There is no "technically" about it. It's a discreet black and white act.

And will only be made worse with this new rule (which I like btw).

It will be made unambiguous by the new rule

And it has a simple solution which has proven to work in other Sports, which doesn't change the fabric of the game at all.

You haven't made that case at all.

1) Australian football is a much faster game than soccer or rugby union and has three umpires. The advantage rule is not "simply" transferable.
2) There is no analogous situation in either of those sports to the "man on the mark" situation in Australian football. Soccer has a dead-ball free kick. In rugby a conversion kick the opposition can break once the player starts moving. In Australian football it is very grey as to when a player has ran off the line of the mark sufficiently enough to be called play-on.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Which year/season was it the crowds stopped attending and watching the sport because there was not enough scoring? I wish someone would inform me when that was which lead the AFL to think the sport needed saving.

Did my team win or did they lose. That's all spectators want from the sport, I don't know anyone who cares what the score actually was or how many goals were kicked and I have been heavily involved in this sport my entire life.

It's not just the scoring it's the style of play. Rules have been evolving since day dot to keep the game a free flowing and relatively high scoring affair. Why do you think we should stop making any alterations to the rules when that has never happened in the sports history.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

How will this stop sides being defensive? I can't see how 15 a side would increase scoring ( not that increased scoring is important by the way)
The forward lines will still be clogged up with players, you may get some nice pretty ball movement side to side throughout the middle of the ground but we have that uncontested stuff now.
I don't see it as simple as you think it will be and again which fans again deserted the sport because the scoring was to low? Never been broken and does not need fixing.

Because fewer players on the field makes defensive zones impossible to implement. A player with the ball can kick the footy 50m in a a second or two. If you have players set up in a zone in the field ahead of the player with the ball fewer players will stretch the zone meaning the player with the footy can just pick their way through. The defensive players will not be able to cover the ground in between them in the time it takes the ball to get from the kicker to his teammate. It will force teams to go more man on man.

No doubt there will still be instances of teams "flooding" but for the most part general play will open up and get back to more one on one contests that we grew up loving (Jakovich/Carey, Silvagni/Ablett, Knights/Van Der Haar etc)

 

[footyfan1978]

Flower, Hawkins, Greig, Schimmelbusch, Turner, Dennis Collins, Dipper, Ricky Barham.....won't anyone think of the wingers?

 

[theyellowsash]

not a fault with t

There is no "technically" about it. It's a discreet black and white act.






It will be made unambiguous by the new rule





You haven't made that case at all.

1) Australian football is a much faster game than soccer or rugby union and has three umpires. The advantage rule is not "simply" transferable.
2) There is no analogous situation in either of those sports to the "man on the mark" situation in Australian football. Soccer has a dead-ball free kick. In rugby a conversion kick the opposition can break once the player starts moving. In Australian football it is very grey as to when a player has ran off the line of the mark sufficiently enough to be called play-on.

Free kicks in soccer are exactly like marks/free kicks in footy. There's a line (let's call it a 'mark') which is a set distance from the kicker which the defending players cannot cross until the player plays the ball. The umpire doesn't need to call 'play on', and If the players go over this mark too early the umpire can call the ball back, although in our case the penalty would be a 50m penalty instead of a re-taking of the kick. It's a pretty simple idea. Penalty kicks are even more like a free kick.

 

[PP34]

I'm a person who will watch almost any game of Aussie Rules. VFL, AFLW, I'm there. Juniors playing when I'm on the way to the shops? I'll stop and watch. sh*t, I'll go stand in the rain on a cold Sunday to watch my local team, and they have finished bottom few in Div 3 for years. I don't stop watching because of congestion, or low scoring. I stop watching when it's noncompetitive.

Except for AFL. I've watched less and less each year because I don't understand the rules anymore, after four decades of playing, coaching and umpiring.

What problem is this fixing again?

Apparently the game is supposedly broken because each team doesn’t kick 20 goals a game and have a key forward kicking 8 each week.

In reality channel 7 is missing out on ad revenue from more goals and the last few years surprise surprise they’ve led the push to tell everyone how broken footy is.

 

[PP34]

You missed the whole point. The fact you are taking away one attacking option is not a good thing for the game.

The thing that seems to get missed as well is the loose man in defence can actually create a lot of rebounding opportunities.

Richmond’s end to end counter attacks all come from a loose defender intercepting the ball and taking the game on.

 

[Antifa Hooligan]

After this season Hocking will introduce the foam spray for the umps to mark a circle around the man on the mark - it would at least provide a few laughs.

 

[PP34]

Correct. He’s acting as if no other sport has made changes to try and better the game. Basketball 3 point line, hockey offside. AFL if anything refuses to change enough.

Well the NBA was basically in its infancy still when the 3 point line came in.

The AFL is 100+ years old with big crowds, good TV numbers etc and they change things on a yearly basis because apparently the game is so broken. I’ve been hearing the same garbage for over a decade now. The media and the vocal fans with issues almost always are it was better back in my day types. Just refusing to accept that sports change organically. Coaches being the big driver of this.

Everyone with a lot of things are in the habit of looking at things through a nostalgic lens which leads to us all thinking something was better than it really was. We remember all the good games of the past, the stars, the things that made that era. But we forget all the garbage games. When talking about today’s games the s**t games get far more attention than necessary because of the media saturation and more footy being far more accessible.

 

[Lsta062]

Someone might like to attribute it but it is a pretty weak basis

Whether or not you think any rule changes have been effective or not it is the increasingly effective defensive systems and the defensive ball movement that are the reason scores have dropped.

It is, but I just think that they halted the organic changes that occur to the game.

Coaches spend a lot of time trying to counteract the changes Hocking brings lately and that in my opinion takes away from the time spent counteracting each other’s styles. It’s harder to put in place an effective offensive style than a defensive style with all of these changes that occur. When these changes started occurring, teams already found a good defensive system. So, all they have to do is just adapt to Hocking’s changes and they should be OK. Those who want to implement a good offensive style need to counteract Hocking’s style AND the current defensive styles in place. What we are seeing now is coaches just adopting successful defensive styles because it is easier. St Kilda’s probably one of the only sides that I’d call offensive and that is just recently with Ratten coming in (who was offensive-minded at Carlton as well).

I agree that this doesn’t have strong evidence, but I think it’s a possible reason why this is happening

 

[NoobPie]

Free kicks in soccer are exactly like marks/free kicks in footy. There's a line (let's call it a 'mark') which is a set distance from the kicker which the defending players cannot cross until the player plays the ball. The umpire doesn't need to call 'play on', and If the players go over this mark too early the umpire can call the ball back, although in our case the penalty would be a 50m penalty instead of a re-taking of the kick. It's a pretty simple idea. Penalty kicks are even more like a free kick.

Free kicks in soccer a precisely not like marks and free kicks

In soccer, a free kick involves kicking a dead ball. There is no ambiguity when that has occurred which is completely different to determining when a player has sufficiently run off his line in football.

Under your approach, the umpire will pay a 50 m penalty if the man on the mark incorrectly second guesses when the umpire thought the player had sufficiently run off his line to be deemed "play on". Can you imagine trying to umpire that?

It is not a "pretty simple idea" and it would create an enormous grey area (which was what set off this discussion in the first place).

 

[NoobPie]

Because fewer players on the field makes defensive zones impossible to implement. A player with the ball can kick the footy 50m in a a second or two. If you have players set up in a zone in the field ahead of the player with the ball fewer players will stretch the zone meaning the player with the footy can just pick their way through. The defensive players will not be able to cover the ground in between them in the time it takes the ball to get from the kicker to his teammate. It will force teams to go more man on man.

No doubt there will still be instances of teams "flooding" but for the most part general play will open up and get back to more one on one contests that we grew up loving (Jakovich/Carey, Silvagni/Ablett, Knights/Van Der Haar etc)

Teams will still zone with 15/16 players on the field and players will still cover the field.

We are never going back to pure man-on-man football. It is not the number of players on the field it is that systemised defensive structures are more effective than reactive man-on-man defenses.

This would be true with 15 players on the field. There might be slightly more space for teams to "pick their way through" but there are also less attacking players to link with.

This is why the man on the "stand" rule for the man on the mark is great. It essentially takes a player out of play that is currently the most critical player in the defensive zone.

 

[theyellowsash]

Free kicks in soccer a precisely not like marks and free kicks

In soccer, a free kick involves kicking a dead ball. There is no ambiguity when that has occurred which is completely different to determining when a player has sufficiently run off his line in football.

Under your approach, the umpire will pay a 50 m penalty if the man on the mark incorrectly second guesses when the umpire thought the player had sufficiently run off his line to be deemed "play on". Can you imagine trying to umpire that?

It is not a "pretty simple idea" and it would create an enormous grey area (which was what set off this discussion in the first place).

what extra thing is the umpire having to adjudicate that will cause them so much trouble?

 

[theyellowsash]

Footy star’s goal the latest example of AFL rule change chaos

Expect some teething problems with the AFL’s new rules this season.

www.news.com.au

"It’s possible that the time it takes for the umpire to notice a kicker moving off the straight, call play on, and the defender to hear that call, may be too long for the player on the mark to take any meaningful action before the attacker makes contact with the ball."

when you're right you're right...

 

[doppleganger]

Footy star’s goal the latest example of AFL rule change chaos

Expect some teething problems with the AFL’s new rules this season.

www.news.com.au

"It’s possible that the time it takes for the umpire to notice a kicker moving off the straight, call play on, and the defender to hear that call, may be too long for the player on the mark to take any meaningful action before the attacker makes contact with the ball."

when you're right you're right...

What are you right about?

The premise of the rule change is to promote high scoring and stop teams using the man on the mark to delay the game or drop back into a zone, which will only benefit the attacking team.

That is what people want.

Daniher was having a set shot, what "meaningful action" could the player on the mark ever make in that circumstance?

As per usual, people get outraged over change

 

[theyellowsash]

What are you right about?

The premise of the rule change is to promote high scoring and stop teams using the man on the mark to delay the game or drop back into a zone, which will only benefit the attacking team.

That is what people want.

Daniher was having a set shot, what "meaningful action" could the player on the mark ever make in that circumstance?

As per usual, people get outraged over change

im not against the standing rule, im for it. the problem is the player on the mark needing to wait for the umpire to physically blow the whistle and call play on, which takes a few seconds and is therefore entirely useless. the player on the mark might as well get their phone out the way it is here.

Remove the need to wait for the umpire to call play on, and allow the umpire to adjudicate after the fact. in that situation, the player on the mark can take the risk that he believes danniher has played on (which he clearly has) and move off the mark. if the umpire agrees, play on. if the umpire disagrees, 50m penalty.

this would 'let the play go' and 'let the players play' with less whistle blowing and umpiring, which is exactly what everybody wants. or at least, what people say they want.

 

[Dr Tigris]

Perhaps, but if the area around the ball is unpredictable coaches will put extra players back. As #Owen87 notes coaches will react first with defence. Then attack but they change the rules again before that phase comes in.

Agree. The issue there is that it's fairly easy for a club to have evasive players take the game on and create problems by 1) getting the ball in fast and (hopefully) accurately to a dangerous spot, and 2) forcing teams to have area coverage behind the man on the mark, thus losing another player in your defensive set up.

I can see kick mark teams getting an initial sugar high, but that will dry up. Teams that take the game on will continue to have an advantage. Question is whether it'll be important or just marginal. Knowing SHocking it'll probably lead to a few more scoring chances but substantially greater defensive effort and structures.

 

[owen87]

Agree. The issue there is that it's fairly easy for a club to have evasive players take the game on and create problems by 1) getting the ball in fast and (hopefully) accurately to a dangerous spot, and 2) forcing teams to have area coverage behind the man on the mark, thus losing another player in your defensive set up.

It's an offensive biased rule though, the entire point is that it will benefit teams moving the ball forwards more than the teams defending.

Anything that limits the ability of coaches to set up full ground defensive zones is going to appeal to the AFL, the problem is in them picking which ones are going to result in the actual outcome they want (increased scoring) and not the unintended outcome (slower ball movement, more focus on defense, lower scores, and/or athletes being drafted ahead of footballers).

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Teams will still zone with 15/16 players on the field and players will still cover the field.

We are never going back to pure man-on-man football. It is not the number of players on the field it is that systemised defensive structures are more effective than reactive man-on-man defenses.

This would be true with 15 players on the field. There might be slightly more space for teams to "pick their way through" but there are also less attacking players to link with.

This is why the man on the "stand" rule for the man on the mark is great. It essentially takes a player out of play that is currently the most critical player in the defensive zone.

So if you take it to the extreme and it becomes say 8 players per team (it won't happen but just for arguments sake), teams will still implement zone defense? No, they won't be able to because the field is too large to implement a zone with fewer players on the field. So then it becomes what is the magic number. I think reducing the number of players to 14 or 15 makes sense, there will still be an element of zoning the further you get up the ground but it will make full ground zones (ala Clarko's Cluster) obsolete because the zone will be spread too thin so it will become ineffectual.

Not only will this free up space it will also mean the talent pool isn't spread as thin and may also help make a case for a 19th & 20th team.

And all this without fundamentally changing the way the game is played.

Nb I'm not necessarily against this "stand the mark" rule - I hope it isn't officiated in too strict a manner as no one wants to see 50m penalties resulting in multiple goals a game or deciding games. But I don't think it is the silver bullet, none of the newly introduced rules are. The elephant in the room is that there are too many players on the field, in the early 20th century 18 a side was fine when players were amateur/part time, held their positions and didn't have the capacity to run half marathons every game. But in the 21st century these factors mean the ground has shrunk relative to the capacity of the players and the game has become far more congested as a result. As I said previously, if you were creating the game from scratch today I don't think you would have 18 a side. On SEN last week Watson & Lyon were discussing the game and Watson said the issue is players no longer have the time and space to actually play the game. Well, the answer is staring everyone in the face but for some reason they are so dogmatic about "18 a side" that they refuse to look at the simplest solution.

 

[living_in_syd]

What are you right about?

The premise of the rule change is to promote high scoring and stop teams using the man on the mark to delay the game or drop back into a zone, which will only benefit the attacking team.

That is what people want.

Daniher was having a set shot, what "meaningful action" could the player on the mark ever make in that circumstance?

As per usual, people get outraged over change

The point is it looked ridiculous daniher just strolling past and man on the mark having to watch him like a statue. A quicker player like Dangerfield could just run right through pretending to line ip for goal only deviating last minute

 

[owen87]

The point is it looked ridiculous daniher just strolling past and man on the mark having to watch him like a statue. A quicker player like Dangerfield could just run right through pretending to line ip for goal only deviating last minute

 

[greatwhiteshark]

It's not just the scoring it's the style of play. Rules have been evolving since day dot to keep the game a free flowing and relatively high scoring affair. Why do you think we should stop making any alterations to the rules when that has never happened in the sports history.

We are having the people running the game making change for change sake. I have no issue with the league once every 5 years sitting down looking at the game, taking the last 5 years of evolution into account, listening to the fans, coaches and players and tweak or change things that may have become an issue.
But they are simply now just doing it yearly and trying to fix errors they had already made in the past.
Has every rule change worked? Of course it hasn’t. Did they change it back and admit they got it wrong? No so why not?
Ruck nomination and the new stand still on mark is seriously Auskick stuff.
If the modern players are so goddam awesome and have evolved so much why do they need help bringing the ball back into play after a behind is scored? why do they need help being able to execute a simple 45degree angle kick by making man on the mark stand still? I could go on and on, the AFL is the elite of the sport and no assistance or help should be granted under any circumstance to any of them. Help out the Auskickers as they learn the sport but not the elite.
Look each to their own and people see it as they see it, I see it that most changes they make fail and dont achieve what they wanted to achieve. Some of those changes for me make the sport look an entirely different sport. Some people think the more change the better. They are entitled to that view.

 

[theyellowsash]

no, the point is to prevent the man on the mark from moving sideways to cut off kicks going on a slight angle, not to allow the player with the ball to run around the mark unchallenged

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Has the AFL enforced by rule that a player must stand the mark? If they haven’t then I have no doubt the players will simply be told to not stand the mark and stand 5 meters further back so they can do as they wish.

 

[footyfan1978]

We are having the people running the game making change for change sake. I have no issue with the league once every 5 years sitting down looking at the game, taking the last 5 years of evolution into account, listening to the fans, coaches and players and tweak or change things that may have become an issue.
But they are simply now just doing it yearly and trying to fix errors they had already made in the past.
Has every rule change worked? Of course it hasn’t. Did they change it back and admit they got it wrong? No so why not?

here is a list of many of the changes across the years. I think it is fair enough what you say about the 5 years thing.

Note from 1994 through most of rest of 90's they got on a run of making changes and I think there is where your point of do they change it back is where they got quite a few wrong. Previously they seem to amend mistakes or completely throw the new rules out when they saw they did not have effect they thought they would make..

My biggest issue about changes, is not about rules changes as such, but fixing the ones they get wrong and for most of the last 25 years it seems the momentum has become to change for change sake.

Good ones over the years are out of bounce on full in 1969 and a centre diamond that got altered to a centre square a year or two on All before my time but nobody has ever complained about those changes from those times.

The big mistakes for mine are the interchange bench in mid to late 90's they never fixed since and the holding the ball alterations and 50 metre crap. Along with those the ruck nomination rule is complete bullshit and so is the umpire direction that seemed to go hand in hand with changes in later 1990's of holding the ball etc etc. Instead of fixing mistakes or altering them to what they should be they just left them and made other changes since that only complicated their more recent attempts to try to relieve congestion but not really address the mistakes that lead to way more congestion in first place.

1858
No time limit existed for matches. The team first to score two goals was declared the winner.
Either spherical or oval footballs could be used.

1859
The playing area to be a maximum of 182 metres wide.
The length of the field and the distance between pairs of goalposts to be decided by the participating captains
The captains to toss for choice of goal. The loser’s team to kick off from the centre to start play.
A goal had to be kicked fairly between the posts without touching a teammate or opponent.
Kick-off posts to be positioned 18.2m from each goal post in a straight line.
After the ball passed behind the goal line, it had to be kicked in directly towards the opposite goal by a member of the defending team from any part of a line drawn 18.2m from and parallel to the goal line.
A player catching the ball directly from a kick by a foot to call ‘mark’ and take a free kick. No opponent to come inside the spot where the mark was taken.
Tripping and pushing permitted, but no hacking (forcing a player off balance by taking his feet from under him) when the ball-carrier was in rapid motion.
The ball could be taken in hand only when caught from a kick, or on the first hop (bounce). It could not be lifted from the ground.
After going out of bounds along a sideline, the ball to be thrown in at right angles.
The ball not to be thrown in general play.

1860
Tripping, holding and hacking outlawed.
Unless umpires were appointed, the participating captains to be the sole judges of infringements.

1866
The maximum playing area to be 182m long by 136.5m wide.
A pair of goalposts to be seven yards apart, of unlimited height.
A protected 4.5m area surrounding a player taking a free kick or mark) introduced.
After each goal was kicked, teams to change ends.
Holding to be permitted only when an opponent had the ball in hand during general play.
The ball to be carried by a player no further than what was necessary for a kick, unless it was struck against the ground every 4.5m or six yards 5.4m.
Each team in a match to appoint an umpire. The nearest one to be appealed to in the case of dispute.
Time limit for matches introduced. Team scoring most goals declared the winner. Field umpires acted as timekeepers.

1869
One field umpire only appointed to control play.

1874
When half the time arranged for play had expired, the teams changed ends. The second half to start when the umpire threw the ball up.
A kick defined as from the leg below the knee.
A player with the ball required to immediately drop it if tackled by an opponent.
Field umpire required to start second halves of matches by throwing the ball in the air.

1877
A size two rugby ball of 66cm long circumference to be used in matches.
The kick-off line reduced from 18.2m to 9.1m from the goal line.
The ball not to be handed to a teammate.
Each participating team to appoint a goal umpire to be the sole judge of goals and shots passing behind the goal line.
A field umpire being appealed to could either award a free kick, call play on or stop play and throw the ball into the air to discourage scrimmages.

1886
Matches consisted of four 25-minute quarters instead of two 50-minute halves.

1887
Timekeepers and bell system introduced. Field umpire no longer required to keep time.
Field umpire required to bounce the ball at the start of each quarter instead of throwing it up into the air.
Goal umpires empowered as sole judges in scoring decisions.
System of waving flags to signify goals implemented.
The distance of the behind posts from the goal posts decreased from 18.2m to 9.1m.
Pushing from behind prohibited.
Minimum distance of ball-travel for a mark decreased from 4.5m to 1.8m.
Unfair interference with an opponent who had marked became reportable.

1889
Player kicking off from centre required to cover a minimum forward distance of 18.2m.
Goal umpires required to inform field umpire of all scoring decisions.
Players unnecessarily delaying disposal from marks or kick-offs were deprived of possession and a ball-up resulted.

1891
Introduction of centre bounce after every goal as well as at the start of quarters.
The distance of the behind posts from the goal posts decreased from 9.1m to 6.4m.

1897
The ‘little mark’ abolished.
Free kick for push from behind introduced.
Present scoring system introduced – six points for a goal and one point for a behind

1899
Teams were reduced from 20 to 18 players (two followers instead of four).

1904
Boundary umpires were used for the first time in all VFL matches. They punched ball back into play.

1905
Unintentional interference when going for a mark was permitted for the first time.

1906
Clubs were to be fined by the VFL if they were not ready to play by 3pm. Late starts had previously been common.

1908
A 4.5m square in the centre introduced for the Collingwood v Essendon semi-final.
No player was permitted within two metres of the ball until it touched the ground following a ruck contest at a centre bounce.
Boundary umpires, for the first time, were given the power to report players.

1910
Goal umpires, for the first time, were given the power to report players.
A 2.4m centre circle replaced the square.
Boundary umpires obliged to throw ball in overhead instead of using the punch off the palm.

1912
Introduction of an on-field steward for each match. His role was to report players.

1918
Steward system abolished because of complaints by players and umpires that they obstructed play.

1920
Boundary umpires were required to throw the ball into play a distance ranging from 9m to 22m instead of 4.5m to 13.5m.

1921
Boundary umpires first required to return the football to the centre after a goal was scored.

1924
Only one player was permitted to stand on the mark.

1925
Free awarded against player who kicked or forced the ball out of bounds was introduced.
Boundary umpire required to bounce ball 5m in from boundary instead of throwing in.
Handball rule clarified. Ball to be punched out not just struck. (Flick pass was permitted previously.)

1927
Goal umpires required to compare scorecards at the conclusion of each quarter.

1930
Use of a replacement (19th man) permitted for the first time. Once replaced a player could not return to the field.
Holding man-holding ball rule amended. A player was not permitted to drop the ball when tackled. A handpass or kick had to be attempted. The amendment was repealed two months later because of its unpopularity.

1933
System of determining percentage altered. Points for were divided by points against and multiplied by 100. Previously points against were divided by points for and multiplied by 100.

1934
Handball rule altered. The ball could be held in one hand and knocked with the other (ie the flick pass was again permitted).

1938
Shepherding in ruck duels prohibited.
Introduction of rule allowing a player the option of another scoring opportunity if he is interfered with after the all-clear has been given.

1939
Reintroduction of general boundary throw-in. Frees were no longer awarded when the ball was kicked out of bounds.
Holding man-holding ball rule revised. Free to be paid against player who deliberately dropped ball when tackled.

1940
The centre circle was increased from 2.4m to 3m.
Introduction of rule determining that the ball could not be kicked in after a behind had been scored, until the goal umpire had finished waving the flag.

1945
Introduction of a free downfield if player is interfered with after disposing of the ball.

1946
Two reserves (19th and 20th men) permitted for the first time. Once replaced, a player could not return to the field.
Siren replaced bell at the MCG.

1950
Siren replaced bell at all venues.

1952
White footballs used in wet conditions.

1953
June: Trainers banned from delivering coaches’ messages.

1955
Introduction of 15-metre penalty for time-wasting.
Coaches’ runners (a trainer) used for first time. They were permitted to talk to team members during matches.
Boundary umpires’ whistles first used in place of white handkerchiefs.

1960
New ball used in each quarter when unfavourable conditions prevailed.

1964
Coaches were permitted to address players on field at quarter-time for the first time.
Goalposts fitted with protective padding.
Coaches’ runners were permitted to speak to team captains and vice-captains only on the
field during matches.

1965
Coaches’ runners were again free to speak to all team members.

1966
June 2: Flick pass outlawed. Ball had to be struck with a clenched fist.
Centre rectangle (45m x 27m) experiment used by coaches Ron Barassi (Carlton) and Bill Stephen (Fitzroy).

1968
An opponent became obliged to return ball to recipient of mark or free if the opponent had possession of the ball at the time of the umpire’s decision.

1969
Introduction of the free against player kicking ball out of bounds on the full.

1972
Umpires required to toss coin for captains for the first time.

1973
Centre diamond (sides 45 metres long) introduced. Four players only from each team permitted in the area at centre bounces.

1975
Centre diamond amended to become centre square.
Video-tapes of incidents became admissible evidence at VFL tribunal hearings.

1976
Introduction of the two field umpire system.

1978
Interchange player system introduced.
Goal umpires required to touch goal post if the ball had hit post. Also two flags were positioned at one post and one flag at the other to save time when signalling scores.

1980
Introduction of line across centre circle to avoid physical interference at centre bounces. Ruckmen had to stand on the defensive side of the line.
Fifteen-metre penalty extended to include kick-in after behind scoring situations.
Field umpires required to carry notebooks to record details of reportable incidents.

1981
Fifteen metres instead of 10 metres allowed for running with ball without it making contact with the ground.

1986
Fifty-metre arcs in goal areas introduced.
Video investigations for on-field misconduct introduced.

1988
Player awarded free obliged to kick the ball.
Replacement of 15-metre penalty with 50-metre penalty.
Player kicking in from goal-square obliged to clear ball at least two metres from the goalsquare before regaining possession.
Emergency umpires were empowered to report players.

1990
Player awarded free again given option of kick or handpass.

1994
Playing time for a quarter amended to 20 minutes plus time-on instead of 25 minutes plus time-on.
Introduction of third field umpire.
Introduction of third interchange player.
Introduction of third boundary umpire, using rotational interchange system in pairs.

1995
Revised system of adding time-on. Recorded when boundary or goal umpires signal, until the next act of play.
Tripping by hand becomes reportable. Penalty: Free & 50 metres.
Tripping by foot remains reportable. Additional penalty: Free & 50 metres.
Player must kick ball back into play following the scoring of a behind immediately after one warning from field umpire. Penalty for delay: Ball-up on centre of kick-off line.
Player kicking in after a behind is allowed to kick ball clear of hand and foot within the goal-square before playing on.

1996
Any player receiving treatment from medical staff required to be removed from centre square prior to centre bounce.
Protected area around player taking set disposal from free or mark changed from 10-metre semi-circle to five-metre corridor on either side.
Amendment in the interpretation of the holding ball law. If player has had a prior opportunity to dispose, he must kick or handball immediately once tackled.
Deliberate tripping by hand incurred a free plus 50-metre penalty. The offence was no longer reportable.

1997
Repeated abusive language to an umpire incurred a free plus 50-metre penalty. The offence was no longer necessarily reportable.

1998
Introduction of fourth interchange player.

1999
Bringing the ball into play from a mark or free permitted beyond the boundary line provided that the player moves in one direction while in the act of disposal.
Tripping by hand reverted to being reportable.

2000
Introduction of free against team whose team official interferes with the play. Fifty-metre penalty automatically imposed on a player when reported for an offence. (Rescinded after Round 17.)

2001
Time-saving second goal umpiring behind flag introduced. It was placed on the same post as the goal flags.

2002
Minimum distance of ball travel for a mark increased from 10 metres to 15.

2003
Play-on to be called if a player unnecessarily delays disposal after mark or free.
Playing on from a kick-in after the registering of a behind permitted provided that the ball is kicked clear of hand and foot within the goal-square.
Shepherding at centre bounce ruck contests outlawed.
Elimination of advantage free from a centre square infringement.
Penalty introduced for deliberate tapping of ball out-of-bounds on the full in a ruck contest.
Player catching ball from centre or field bounce or throw-in to be deemed to have had prior opportunity to dispose of it.

2004
Size of centre square increased from 45m to 50m.

2005
Introduction of a 10-metre diameter outer circle, where ruckmen must be positioned at centre bounces.

2006
Removal of the requirement of a player kicking in after the scoring of a behind to wait until the goal umpire completes waving the flag. The kick-in can occur as soon as the goal umpire signals the score as a behind.
Allowance of a set shot at goal from a mark or free awarded within the goal-square to be taken from directly in front.
Introduction of automatic time-on from when a field umpire crosses his arms until a ball-up.

2007
Introduction into official laws of the game of an automatic free kick to a player with his head over the ball or if any high contact made in any way. This also became an automatic reportable offence.

2008
Interchange rule violation penalised with a free kick against the offending team, 50 metres forward of the centre circle (introduced mid-season).
Introduction of a four-boundary umpire system (introduced in round 21).

2009
Umpires empowered to recall an errant bounce at a stoppage and replace it with a throw-up.
Penalty for interchange rule violation became a free kick, plus a 50-metre penalty from wherever play is stopped.
A free kick paid against a player engaged in any form of misconduct.
The scoreline to be aligned with the back of the goalpost padding.
A player in possession of the ball, when the play is stopped for stretcher usage, to retain it when the game restarts.
If an umpire impedes a player when setting the mark for a shot at goal, play to be stopped and the mark to be re-set to avoid a disadvantage.
After the all-clear is given for a score and an infringement against the defending team occurs before play restarts, the free kick to be taken either where the infringement occurs or 50 metres from the kick-off line, whichever is to the advantage of that team.

2011
Interchange: three interchange plus one substitute. The three interchange players able to rotate off the bench as four have done in previous years. The substitute player empowered to go on at any time to replace a player. The player he replaces cannot come back on to the ground.
The infringed player, rather than an umpire, given the power to determine the advantage rule.
A player who elects to apply a bump in any situation will become liable if he makes forceful contact with the head, unless: the player was contesting the ball and did not have a realistic alternative way to contest the ball; or the contact was caused by circumstances outside the control of the player which could not be reasonably forseen.
Emergency field umpire empowered to award prohibited contact free kicks from interchange bench.
Stricter interpretation placed on deliberate out of bounds rule to focus on less benefit of doubt for the player who has the ball and walks over the boundary line.

2012
Goal line technology introduced to assist goal umpiring decisions.

2013
A free kick to be awarded against any player who makes forceful contact below the knees of an opponent (does not apply to smothers with the hands or arms).
Umpires to throw the ball up for all field stoppages during the game. The bounce will continue to be used at the start of each quarter and after goals.
Separation of ruckmen at stoppages, with no contact permitted until the ball has left the umpire.

2017

Law 5.1 will be modfied such that each team will have 16 players on the Playing Surface and 6 interchange players

A size 4 football will be utilised for the competition instead of a size 5, a variation of Law 4.1

The timing of AFLW matches will be 15 minutes plus time on for goals and other major injuries, a variation of Law 10.1 and AFL Regulations

There will be no interchange cap for the AFLW competition, a variation of AFL Regulations.

Contact from a Reportable Offence will be deemed as either body or high/groin/chest, a variation of AFL Regulations.

AFLW players will not be punished by fines for low-level Reportable Offences, and will instead receive Reprimands, where two Reprimands within a single AFLW season will equate to a 1 match suspension.

2018

A player will be penalised with a free kick if they kick or handball the ball over the boundary line without it being touched by an opposition player (Last Disposal Out of Bounds Rule)

The number of interchange players will be reduced from 6 to 5

Time-on for all match stoppages will be implemented in the last two minutes of each quarter.

2019

The Last Disposal Out of Bounds Rule will now only operate between the 50m arcs.

The boundary umpires will bring the ball in 10m for throw-ins.

Runners will be permitted to continue their duties on-field during a match, a variation of the 2019 AFL Regulation change.

The AFLW Low-Level Classifiable Offences sanction table be modified to comprise Reprimands and financial sanctions only;

The early plea discount is removed for suspensions, and AFLW clubs risk a $5000 bond (with 50% included in the cap) by challenging charges at the AFLW Tribunal.