Rules AFL to propose introduction of last touch rule from 2026

[voorhees]

it has worked well in the SANFL.
support bringing in this new rule

 

[SellarStardom]

Am I the only one who thought the insufficient intent rule was actually one of the least controversial ones this year?

Unlike the ruck rules and holding the ball or incorrect disposal I could actually tell which way it was going to be paid 95% of the time.

Yep 95% of the time they ruled as if there was a last disposal rule on place already. So let's get rid of the 5% where the unpire is swayed by the crowd and make it black and white, that's what the last disposal rule will achieve

 

[Great8]

it has worked well in the SANFL.
support bringing in this new rule

Except in typical AFL fashion they want to make themselves a point of difference so instead of making it over the whole ground which works well in the SANFL they are going to make it just between the arcs so we will no see umpires stuffing up anything close or borderline and the rule won’t actually reduce throw ins by the amount they want

 

[Harris 10]

To simplify the rules the AFL want to go to the last disposal rule, so we'll be left with this:

In between the arcs:

• Out on the full, free kick.
• Last disposal, free kick.
• Throw in if touched over the boundary.
• insufficient intent to keep the ball in play, free kick.
• Ruckman punches the ball over boundary line on the full at a throw in, it's a free kick.
• Ruckman directly punches the ball out of bounds from a throw in and it hits the ground first, it's a throw in.
• In a marking contest a player is allowed to deliberately punch the ball out of bounds and it's a throw in.

Inside the arcs:

• Same as above, although you can dispose of the ball out of bounds unless you have insufficient intent to keep the ball in play.

AFL keeping it simple.

 

[Cookie]

Am I the only one who thought the insufficient intent rule was actually one of the least controversial ones this year?

Unlike the ruck rules and holding the ball or incorrect disposal I could actually tell which way it was going to be paid 95% of the time.

Get back to a basic. Deliberate out of bounds. This insufficient intent crap is a just a tweaking of deliberate.
The deliberate rule has been around for decades but the problem now is its interpretation and its application by the umpires and whoever is directing them.
So now the AFL is discussing a last touch rule. It's just an admission that they have it wrong and they will try to fix the wrong by introducing yet another latent problem.
There is not another organisation in Australia that seems to continually make problems for itself, many of which are avoidable.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

I find it really strange that the 'last touch' rule change protects forwards so much. Surely 'last touch' in a team's forward line should result in a free kick too?

I have no problem with the defending team is not being penalised in their own backline, not that it happens very often anyway.

 

[WA ROO]

Get rid of it
Just another grey area introduced by the AFL to engineer the results desired

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Seems weird that they penalise a disposal over the line but not a bloke carrying the footy over the line.

Let's face it, it's been done half-arsed.

 

[shaqsuns]

It would be a good rule, if they continued to pay deliberate out of bounds

 

[Corn Cobbers]

Seems weird that they penalise a disposal over the line but not a bloke carrying the footy over the line.

Let's face it, it's been done half-arsed.

Yep made it worse than ever the idiots

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Jon Ralph on On The Couch says players diving to touch the ball (showed Rankine against the Cats) will be penalised for "insufficient intent". They just make it up as they go, absolute joke of an organisation.

Also since when is the video review able to be used for non scoring decisions? Where does it end, the arc telling umpires someone was tripped? Held? Taken too high? A player had prior/no prior? Who is in the arc? It's not an umpire so who is making these decisions? The AFL is a basket case of a comp.

 

[Sentinel]

The most ridiculous thing about the so called 'last touch rule' is that it isn't a rule at all, it's just an interpretation. The Laws of the Game weren't modified from last year to this year to cover this change, so the AFL is completely open to changing the interpretation as they see fit and no one knows exactly how it should be applied.

18.10 OUT OF BOUNDS
18.10.1 Spirit and Intention
Players shall be encouraged to keep the football in play.
18.10.2 Free Kicks - Out of Bounds
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player who:
(a) Kicks the football Out of Bounds On the Full;
(b) Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Boundary Line and
does not demonstrate sufficient intent to keep the football in play; or
(c) fails to immediately hand the football to the boundary Umpire or drop
the football directly to the ground once the football is Out of Bounds.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

I actually don’t mind the intent of the last disposal rule however the accidental toe pokes from a resulting smother etc confuses me.

As far as I’m aware, this isn’t actually recorded as a disposal. So if it’s not a disposal, how is it deemed last disposal out of bounds?

It’s a shit look when the ball is in dispute and the most minor of accidental ball contact to the foot when already on the boundary is resulting in last disposal.

Errant kicks/handballs going out, fair enough.

 

[p4p1]

I actually don’t mind the intent of the last disposal rule however the accidental toe pokes from a resulting smother etc confuses me.

As far as I’m aware, this isn’t actually recorded as a disposal. So if it’s not a disposal, how is it deemed last disposal out of bounds?

It’s a shit look when the ball is in dispute and the most minor of accidental ball contact to the foot when already on the boundary is resulting in last disposal.

Errant kicks/handballs going out, fair enough.

It was argued back to me that the same applied for an errant deflection on the foot that went out on the full, but this seems to happen more often. There was one against Brisbane on the weekend where Jack Silvagni handballed at a Lions players feet/legs, the ball deflected and was a St Kilda free. I'm not sure if he meant to do it, but it was very smart play if he did because he was against the boundary and under pressure as was everyone within handballing distance. But I would hate to see it become a tactic teams use with any kind of consistency.

Google AI said this about a player being awarded a disposal from a soccer.
'Yes, an AFL player is awarded a kick (and a disposal) stat if they "soccer" the ball off the ground, provided it is a intentional, successful kick to a teammate or a score.'
So in one of the deflections we are talking about the player would not have a disposal recorded.