20 Metre Minimum Kick

[Drummond]

There have been a whole lot of rubbish rules implemented to the NAB Cup over the years, but this is BY FAR the worst of the lot. Can the AFL please tell me how the heck this rule possibly benefits the game? I mean seriously, I’m watching the replay of the Saints/Tigers game and a Tigers player had a free kick 50 metres out from their goal on the boundary line. He chips short to Riewoldt, and despite the fact the kick went about 25 metres, the umpire immediately yells, “not 20”. First of all it clearly was, and secondly, how can a kick that travels TWENTY metres be considered not adequate distance?

If this rule ever comes into the H&A season then help us all. Thankfully though it won't, so why bother having it for the pre-season? This is one rule that has frustrated me so much over the past few years and it continues to do so.

 

[Beckers]

The rule is there to stop the chip-chip-chip passing that ruins the game. I think it has more to do with umpiring inconsistency.

Some umps will give a 15mtr kick a mark while others call 25mtr pass play on. Umpiring inconsistency makes it frustrating for fans and players......but then that seems to be their main aim these days like talking to players like they are little kids etc.

 

[Rough_Edges]

Your a DT hack.

fwiw I do agree

The 16 changes for the entire match is the worst of the lot IMO.

Who cares how much a team uses the interchange....I don't see the problem?

 

[metallichris]

Amen!

 

[Tas]

Umpires were paying 10m kicks last night, my favourite was the Johnson pass to a team mate in front of goal which was almost parallel to the man on the mark, would have struggled to be 10m.

 

[NimChief]

Pity they didn't enforce it last night.

Dogs got two goals from short 5 metre chips that were counted as marks.

If you're going to introduce bullshit rules, then ****ing enforce them.

 

[__aria__]

That was disgraceful last night.

Why bother with the shitty rule if you aren't even going to enforce it?

 

[SirJimi05]

Excellent rule as long as it is enforced.

Ditto play on if the ball goes backwards.

I am sure just about every football follower is sick of the chip-chip crap.

 

[Bombers1234]

I agree with OP. Shocking rule.

 

[Bruce the Great]

There have been a whole lot of rubbish rules implemented to the NAB Cup over the years, but this is BY FAR the worst of the lot. Can the AFL please tell me how the heck this rule possibly benefits the game? I mean seriously, I’m watching the replay of the Saints/Tigers game and a Tigers player had a free kick 50 metres out from their goal on the boundary line. He chips short to Riewoldt, and despite the fact the kick went about 25 metres, the umpire immediately yells, “not 20”. First of all it clearly was, and secondly, how can a kick that travels TWENTY metres be considered not adequate distance?

If this rule ever comes into the H&A season then help us all. Thankfully though it won't, so why bother having it for the pre-season? This is one rule that has frustrated me so much over the past few years and it continues to do so.

So you're annoyed with its interpretation not the rule itself? Basically i think the rule will encourage flooding which is why i dont think it will work.

 

[Smokin]

An absolutely horrible rule which, if you think about it more than 2 seconds, make no sense.

It actually encourages "flooding", as it takes away more of the ground hence options the person in possession has.

The reason for the "chip chip" game is A RESULT OF flooding, not THE problem. Players only chip short when their downfield options are limited.

Why would we want to take away options the attacking team has against moses-style floods?

So amazingly stupid a rule, it should have been expected by the frauds "running" this game.

 

[SirJimi05]

An absolutely horrible rule which, if you think about it more than 2 seconds, make no sense.

It actually encourages "flooding", as it takes away more of the ground hence options the person in possession has.

The reason for the "chip chip" game is A RESULT OF flooding, not THE problem. Players only chip short when their downfield options are limited.

Why would we want to take away options the attacking team has against moses-style floods?

So amazingly stupid a rule, it should have been expected by the frauds "running" this game.

What are your thoughts on removing points against from the ladder/%?

If they reverted to points for only teams would become far more attacking and it would do away with the chip-chip type play.

Thoughts?

 

[ApplecrossWC]

A couple of the Bulldog passes resulting in goals last night would have been lucky to have been 10 metres!

 

[Robbie]

Shocking rule, impossible to police, 10m kicks get paid and 25m kicks don't, it's rubbish.

IMO just about every NAB Cup rule is poor. I like Supergoals in the NAB Cup but if it ever gets brought in to the H+A season I'm done with footy.

Interchange restrictions are useless, they won't change the speed of the game, and what about the centre rectangle around the umpires bouncing area! Brought in to the one part of the ground where the umpires rarely get hit, because it's such a set start.

 

[SirJimi05]

Shocking rule, impossible to police, 10m kicks get paid and 25m kicks don't, it's rubbish.

IMO just about every NAB Cup rule is poor. I like Supergoals in the NAB Cup but if it ever gets brought in to the H+A season I'm done with footy.

Interchange restrictions are useless, they won't change the speed of the game, and what about the centre rectangle around the umpires bouncing area! Brought in to the one part of the ground where the umpires rarely get hit, because it's such a set start.

How is it impossible to police?

How is it any different to policing a 10m or 15m rule?

Are you saying there should be no minumum distance at all, like indoor football?

 

[Drummond]

Excellent rule as long as it is enforced.

Ditto play on if the ball goes backwards.

I am sure just about every football follower is sick of the chip-chip crap.

How the heck is it an excellent rule? It takes away a huge part of the game. When a team is on the attack, say at the 50 metre line, they will often look for a short pass to a player on the lead. With the kicking distance at a minimum of 20 metres, this becomes almost impossible.

Terrible rule, and the umpires trying to judge the length of a kick is, as others have pointed out, comical.

 

[Hodgies Heroes]

Nothing at all wrong with the rule, don't blame the rule just because the umpires got some wrong last night. if we did that then every rule in the AFL would be scrapped.

 

[Hodgies Heroes]

How the heck is it an excellent rule? It takes away a huge part of the game. When a team is on the attack, say at the 50 metre line, they will often look for a short pass to a player on the lead. With the kicking distance at a minimum of 20 metres, this becomes almost impossible.

Terrible rule, and the umpires trying to judge the length of a kick is, as others have pointed out, comical.[/quote]

They have done so for 100 years - the current rule is 15m - why is 20 so different ?????

 

[SirJimi05]

How the heck is it an excellent rule? It takes away a huge part of the game. When a team is on the attack, say at the 50 metre line, they will often look for a short pass to a player on the lead. With the kicking distance at a minimum of 20 metres, this becomes almost impossible.

Terrible rule, and the umpires trying to judge the length of a kick is, as others have pointed out, comical.

As the other guy stated, the umpires have had to judge the length of the kick for 100 years so how is it now just become comical?

There is no difference in judging 10m,15m or 20m.

And if you truly think it is almost impossible for players to spot up a player over 20m, around the 50m line you are seriously deluded OR all AFL players are absolute spuds.

 

[Drummond]

As the other guy stated, the umpires have had to judge the length of the kick for 100 years so how is it now just become comical?

There is no difference in judging 10m,15m or 20m.

The longer the kick, theoretically the harder it is to judge. Just watch a few NAB Cup games, you will see.

And if you truly think it is almost impossible for players to spot up a player over 20m, around the 50m line you are seriously deluded OR all AFL players are absolute spuds.

No one is saying it’s impossible, but it takes away from the game. Trying to pinpoint a short pass when about 15 players are in your attacking zone is hard enough with a 15 metre kick, let alone 20! Think about it for a second.

 

[Hodgies Heroes]

The longer the kick, theoretically the harder it is to judge. Just watch a few NAB Cup games, you will see.


No one is saying it’s impossible, but it takes away from the game. Trying to pinpoint a short pass when about 15 players are in your attacking zone is hard enough with a 15 metre kick, let alone 20! Think about it for a second.

What rubbish - harder to judge !!!! I have watched every minute of every NAB cup game and the umpires have made a few mistakes with distance, as they have for the last 100 years with the 10 and 15 metres ....but they make mistakes with every rule - you are being ignorant.

Yes it is harder to pinpoint the 20 metre pass - that is the idea of the rule, to stop the short chipping tactics.

 

[Jabso]

They should definately not bring this into the main seasons.

The only reason they changed it from 10m to 15m was to stop plenty of 5-9 metre passes not necessarily to stop 10-14 metre passes. It gives the umpire a bit more margin for error.

 

[Drummond]

What rubbish - harder to judge !!!! I have watched every minute of every NAB cup game and the umpires have made a few mistakes with distance, as they have for the last 100 years with the 10 and 15 metres ....but they make mistakes with every rule - you are being ignorant.

Yes it is harder to pinpoint the 20 metre pass - that is the idea of the rule, to stop the short chipping tactics.

How many rules that they've tried to implement have actually worked? Anyone who cares about the future of this game wouldn't have any time for this rule, it's an absolute joke.

Chipping tactics happen, you can't stop them. This rule will certainly not stop them. It will continue to happen. All the AFL care about is the speed of the game, it's fast enough how it is. The umpires just hate seeing marks being taken from little chip passes, so they often call play on even if it has travelled the required distance. Speed, speed, speed. It's becoming a joke.

Another thing I've noticed, umpires give players about 6 or 7 seconds now before calling play on. What the heck? I don't like seeing players wait forever but they deserve to have a decent amount of time. Speed, speed, speed!!!!!!! It will be the death of the game.

 

[SirJimi05]

How the heck is it an excellent rule? It takes away a huge part of the game. When a team is on the attack, say at the 50 metre line, they will often look for a short pass to a player on the lead. With the kicking distance at a minimum of 20 metres, this becomes almost impossible.

Terrible rule, and the umpires trying to judge the length of a kick is, as others have pointed out, comical.

As the other guy stated, the umpires have had to judge the length of the kick for 100 years so how is it now just become comical?

There is no difference in judging 10m,15m or 20m.

And if you truly think it is almost impossible for players to spot up a player over 20m, around the 50m line you are seriously deluded OR all AFL players are absolute spuds.

The longer the kick, theoretically the harder it is to judge. Just watch a few NAB Cup games, you will see.


No one is saying it’s impossible, but it takes away from the game. Trying to pinpoint a short pass when about 15 players are in your attacking zone is hard enough with a 15 metre kick, let alone 20! Think about it for a second.

Come again.

 

[Drummond]

Come again.

http://www.answers.com/topic/almost