Opinion 2025 rule interpretations watch

[baldandbroke]

<Bump>

Some updates that have come up in conversation over the year

HTB - still crap, getting rid of prior still the best way forward. If you are tackled and don't kick / handball it your are gone!

Not 15 - Good additional idea, there is no "minimum distance" if you mark a kick from the opposition.

High tackles - getting worse, some of our players are doing it a lot. Seeking high contact is a bad outcome and needs to be paid holding the ball when you drop your head/neck into the tackle (eg Soligo, Peatling, Wizard etc...)

Insufficient intent - still just needs to be last touch between the 50m arcs, although I do like allowing defenders to deliberately kick to touch from within their own 50m.

Rushed behind - add half-circle from point post to the corner of the goal-square - you can rush from anywhere inside the the extended area - with kick-ins the player taking the kick-in must dispose of the ball / cannot immediately rush the ball through. Consider making a rushed behind worth 2 points?

Stand rule - Make the nearest player stand the mark - they can only move towards the mark, not away from it. No more running up to the mark and then scrambling to get outside 5m.

Another pet-hate - Clock stops if the player claims they are taking a shot on goal (mark must be within 50m?) only re-starts after disposal / play-on call ... fixes the running down the clock with pretend shots on goal.

 

[baldandbroke]

<BUMP>

Got some of them.

THE AFL is introducing seven new rule changes ahead of the 2026 Toyota AFL Premiership season


https://www.afl.com.au/news/1447460

 

[WaynesWorld19]

The Ruck nomination IMO is going to be the most confusing ....They're still going with the stupid nominating of Ruckmen

But if neither gets to the ball-up in time ....both teams have to let the ball bounce, b4 play continues



So what happens in front of 50K + crowd .....ruckmen are racing to the bounce location ....umpire can't hear anything & so the ball must hit the ground .....or will they wait, and defeat the purpose of the rule changes

There'll be an enormous outrage over this .....1 min to go, a point or 2 in favor of one team .....and the ball has to hit the ground ......just bookmark it now

 

[baldandbroke]

The Ruck nomination IMO is going to be the most confusing ....They're still going with the stupid nominating of Ruckmen

But if neither gets to the ball-up in time ....both teams have to let the ball bounce, b4 play continues

View attachment 2466844

So what happens in front of 50K + crowd .....ruckmen are racing to the bounce location ....umpire can't hear anything & so the ball must hit the ground .....or will they wait, and defeat the purpose of the rule changes

There'll be an enormous outrage over this .....1 min to go, a point or 2 in favor of one team .....and the ball has to hit the ground ......just bookmark it now

It’s going to be abused to hell.

Watch some teams use the confusion to generate bogus free kicks.

It’s just stupidity.

Sometimes I wonder who comes up with this crap.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

It’s going to be abused to hell.

Watch some teams use the confusion to generate bogus free kicks.

It’s just stupidity.

Sometimes I wonder who comes up with this crap.

Yep, 100% ......just like these stupid clubs that continually have players running past the player, about to take a kick from a mark or free kicks .....obviously trying to draw a 50 mtre penalty

But it largely negates the ability of the kicking player to play on around the player standing the mark

If Clubs spent more time trying to win games, than endlessly plotting to exploit rules ....maybe they may win something

You'll notice in the Finals .....there were no stupid antics to draw free kicks .....it was footy at its purest .....see ball, attack ball

 

[1970crow]

The Ruck nomination IMO is going to be the most confusing ....They're still going with the stupid nominating of Ruckmen

But if neither gets to the ball-up in time ....both teams have to let the ball bounce, b4 play continues

View attachment 2466844

So what happens in front of 50K + crowd .....ruckmen are racing to the bounce location ....umpire can't hear anything & so the ball must hit the ground .....or will they wait, and defeat the purpose of the rule changes

There'll be an enormous outrage over this .....1 min to go, a point or 2 in favor of one team .....and the ball has to hit the ground ......just bookmark it now

It’s not just ruckman that can nominate, if the ruck is too far away, another player will nominate. And if not, the ball hits the deck, who cares.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The Ruck nomination IMO is going to be the most confusing ....They're still going with the stupid nominating of Ruckmen

But if neither gets to the ball-up in time ....both teams have to let the ball bounce, b4 play continues

View attachment 2466844

So what happens in front of 50K + crowd .....ruckmen are racing to the bounce location ....umpire can't hear anything & so the ball must hit the ground .....or will they wait, and defeat the purpose of the rule changes

There'll be an enormous outrage over this .....1 min to go, a point or 2 in favor of one team .....and the ball has to hit the ground ......just bookmark it now

Just get rid of the ruck nomination rule & penalise any team that has a 2nd player go up or interferes with the likely opposition ruckman.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Just get rid of the ruck nomination rule & penalise any team that has a 2nd player go up or interferes with the likely opposition ruckman.

Sensibility doesn't exist in the AFL

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

At least the inconsistent deliberate out of bounds should be less of an issue adopting the sanfl & aflw last touch rule.

 

[George CantStandYa]

At least the inconsistent deliberate out of bounds should be less of an issue adopting the sanfl & aflw last touch rule.

I don’t get this within the perimeters ruling, I’m sure I’ve seen frees given within 50 metres in the SANFL

 

[MarcusP2]

I don’t get this within the perimeters ruling, I’m sure I’ve seen frees given within 50 metres in the SANFL

Pretty sure the AFLW and SANFL rules are different. SANFL goes across the whole field.

 

[George CantStandYa]

Pretty sure the AFLW and SANFL rules are different. SANFL goes across the whole field.

Should be across the whole field, just leaving the contentious umpire calls for the forward line is dumb

 

[MatthewB]

 

[Coopers]

Just get rid of the ruck nomination rule & penalise any team that has a 2nd player go up or interferes with the likely opposition ruckman.

Don't do that even. Just throw the ball up and let stuff happen.

 

[1970crow]

Don't do that even. Just throw the ball up and let stuff happen.

I think they stopped the third man up to reduce injury to ruckmen. In terms of impact on play, it achieved what they’re aiming for as the third man up mostly hammered the ball forward and away from the contest area.

 

[baldandbroke]

Just get rid of the ruck nomination rule & penalise any team that has a 2nd player go up or interferes with the likely opposition ruckman.

Another subjective rule for the umpires to interpret? No thanks. I say we drop the fear of the third man up - just throw it up.

 

[baldandbroke]

Should be across the whole field, just leaving the contentious umpire calls for the forward line is dumb

Agree - with a small tweak. Allow deliberate kick from inside your own 50m (defensive) to outside your own 50m. A deliberate kick to touch.

 

[WeeBlake]

Shrug = prior is good (but not for Soligo and Peatling)

 

[Apsaalooke]

Selwood shrug gone at last. It’s just cheating

Centre bounce jumping - wait till the PCL and front on injuries mount

Ruck nomination - sounds like an unworkable mess. Just have 2 guys rucking without nominating or third man up

Last possession rule is well overdue.

 

[Coopers]

I think they stopped the third man up to reduce injury to ruckmen. In terms of impact on play, it achieved what they’re aiming for as the third man up mostly hammered the ball forward and away from the contest area.

Maybe? I seem to recall a bit of dialogue around them saying "the ruckman is going to be obsolete" because of 3rd man up.

I doubt it, as there are a lot of ruck contests. Also tall guys are still tall. The team with the extra man up is also committing an extra player to the ruck, so there's someone free somewhere.

It's just not a thing that needs to be policed by the umpires. Let anyone ruck. Let 20 players ruck, whatever. Just extra rules that don't need to be part of it.

 

[Coopers]

Selwood shrug gone at last. It’s just cheating

It's not gone, it's just the second action that pulls the tackle up higher is theoretically gone, which is hella dubious in lots of cases. What if it is legitimately the tacklers fault that the tackle slips up from an initial grab around the shoulders and gets someone high? How are they going to tell the difference between who caused the high contact when guys are zooming around at a million miles per hour and there's a tackle every 5 seconds.

You can still fall to your knees and if the initial tackle gets you high, then it's high.

It will be a mess.

 

[baldandbroke]

Maybe? I seem to recall a bit of dialogue around them saying "the ruckman is going to be obsolete" because of 3rd man up.

I doubt it, as there are a lot of ruck contests. Also tall guys are still tall. The team with the extra man up is also committing an extra player to the ruck, so there's someone free somewhere.

It's just not a thing that needs to be policed by the umpires. Let anyone ruck. Let 20 players ruck, whatever. Just extra rules that don't need to be part of it.

Yep - they were worried about monster rucks disappearing… then they made a couple of rules that actually do that.

The centre bounce rule and the reduction in throw ins due to the last touch rule means they might as well go the whole hog.

So many rules get twisted and then end up being worse than they started!

 

[WaynesWorld19]

As I posted recently .....all these rule changes, particularly the interchange rule, is simply cyclic .....we've been down these paths B4, a few years later, they want to rehash something already tried

These rulemakers are short of a sensibility gene ......any bets now on how long the Ruck nomination rule lasts .....or the current NEW interchange Rule .....make no bones, it will change again !!

 

[Coopers]

Yep - they were worried about monster rucks disappearing… then they made a couple of rules that actually do that.

The centre bounce rule and the reduction in throw ins due to the last touch rule means they might as well go the whole hog.

So many rules get twisted and then end up being worse than they started!

Yep, it's a mess.

The bloody insufficient intent rule is nuts. Interpreting a players intent is dumb. Just do last touch or let players put the ball out of bounds as a tactic. Remove the interpretation for the umpire.

On the goal line it's worse. Farcical in fact. Just let defences put it over the goal line as a tactic as much as they want. Remove the interpretation.

 

[Apsaalooke]

It's not gone, it's just the second action that pulls the tackle up higher is theoretically gone, which is hella dubious in lots of cases. What if it is legitimately the tacklers fault that the tackle slips up from an initial grab around the shoulders and gets someone high? How are they going to tell the difference between who caused the high contact when guys are zooming around at a million miles per hour and there's a tackle every 5 seconds.

You can still fall to your knees and if the initial tackle gets you high, then it's high.

It will be a mess.

There’s some obvious ones where the arm goes up which shouldn’t be hard to pick, especially when the guy getting tackled gets up up with a smirk on his face and high fives his teammates when within sight of the goal.

I saw somewhere that Greg Swann will have a close look at knee droppers next.