30 second shot for goal time

[Deepthroat]

I understand the purpose.

To allow a player to regain composure and give themselves every opportunity to make their best attempt at goal.

My change idea is that this should remain.

My change idea is that the kick must have the following result;

1) It is kicked for a score or out on the full

2) The opposition marks from the kick and is awarded a mark

3) Any other outcome is play on

Too often players are exploiting the 30 seconds to wind down clock with no real intention of using the 30 seconds for the intended purpose (allow a player to regain composure and give themselves every opportunity to make their best attempt at goal).

All too often players are getting control 50m + out and suddenly turning into Bernie Quinlan to then not have a shot.

It kills the game when tight finishes are in play.

It's a no brainer for me. Nothing subjective on how calls are made. They are all outcome based and do not consider intention.

If a player raises the ball and say's "give me 30" they open themselves up to the consequences of not scoring.

 

[Quivorir]

If a better option presents itself why should you be penalised for taking it? Leads should be happening up until the kick is pretty much taken.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

I'd go further. If no score, it's a free against.

Make the player call for time (point at the goals). Clock stops.
Player can NOT play on and must kick over the mark that is set by the umps. (Can still kick around the corner so long as they kick over the mark).
Wherever the ball lands (other than a score) - is free kick to the opposition.

 

[The Punter]

This is an easy fix - if a mark by the same team results from the kick that got the 30 seconds, then around the ground rules apply to the subsequent mark (no 30 followed by another 30).

 

[Deepthroat]

If a better option presents itself why should you be penalised for taking it? Leads should be happening up until the kick is pretty much taken.

That's exactly the point.

No where else on the ground is a player afforded a full 30 seconds to wait for a leading option.

 

[Deepthroat]

This is an easy fix - if a mark by the same team results from the kick that got the 30 seconds, then around the ground rules apply to the subsequent mark (no 30 followed by another 30).

I saw a classic case of time wasting on the weekend where a player took possession at 55m, waited the 30 seconds then did a 180 and kicked behind them.

I don't think that marking player should be afforded any time under the marking rule. I believe it would be better if it was automatic play on.

 

[lalorGOAT]

Better solution: Don't concede a mark in the forward line.

 

[quotemokc]

I would also make it a firm 30 seconds.

None of this timer goes away once they start their walk in nonsense.

 

[Sam_100]

The umpires should give players the same time for a shot on goal as they give them in general play from a mark or a free. It would move things along quicker which is what the AFL is always striving for.

The only reason we have the 30 secs for a shot on goal is because of the ludicrous amount of time Matthew Lloyd would take preparing for a shot on goal. It got so ridiculous the AFL had to bring in a time limit. I remember watching those Bombers games and I would be able to knock down a couple of beers between Lloydy marking the ball and then starting his run to kick the ball for a score.

 

[Corn Cobbers]

10 seconds is plenty

 

[hcd199]

I don't rate these suggestions - the incessant creation of restrictive rules to help teams do the attacking or defending for them is why umpiring is in such a state in the first place, and it's ultimately up to the team that conceded the mark or free to close off receiving options just like in any other phase of the game.

I just don't get what people think would be more exciting about stopping play to pay a free against for a poor shot that falls short? Or players trying to work out if they're allowed to tackle the guy who clearly marked the ball because it hinges on whether the umpire thought the player who kicked it was 'taking their 30' or not? Or a player taking a mark and not knowing/having to be told whether they've got 6 or 30 seconds for the same reason? Or introducing a nomination rule where you only get longer than 6 seconds if you actively tell the umpire you're taking a set shot, with or without the additional consideration of whether the umpire thinks it's legitimate? When does the 'play on only'/'6 seconds only' limitation expire?

All of these seem farcical to me, in the same way some of the ruck nomination/third-man-up ban nonsense already plays out - frees against because the ball happened to hit you, or because you went up but the umpire thought your teammate nominated, or neither team nominating so everyone has to wait for the ball to hit the ground, or only one ruck nominating and the other team just tailing him ready to tackle when he grabs it clean... just like with ruck rules, these are rigid, technical rules that regiment and lock up the game into drearily defined patterns which are completely antithetical to the notion of a contested sport - huge changes to the basic way the game works, all to 'solve' the 'problem' of, what, kicking to a teammate when that's deemed the better option? Which, in any other phase of play, is the defending team's job to defend against? Why should this be any different?

 

[Deepthroat]

I don't rate these suggestions - the incessant creation of restrictive rules to help teams do the attacking or defending for them is why umpiring is in such a state in the first place, and it's ultimately up to the team that conceded the mark or free to close off receiving options just like in any other phase of the game.

I just don't get what people think would be more exciting about stopping play to pay a free against for a poor shot that falls short? Or players trying to work out if they're allowed to tackle the guy who clearly marked the ball because it hinges on whether the umpire thought the player who kicked it was 'taking their 30' or not? Or a player taking a mark and not knowing/having to be told whether they've got 6 or 30 seconds for the same reason? Or introducing a nomination rule where you only get longer than 6 seconds if you actively tell the umpire you're taking a set shot, with or without the additional consideration of whether the umpire thinks it's legitimate? When does the 'play on only'/'6 seconds only' limitation expire?

All of these seem farcical to me, in the same way some of the ruck nomination/third-man-up ban nonsense already plays out - frees against because the ball happened to hit you, or because you went up but the umpire thought your teammate nominated, or neither team nominating so everyone has to wait for the ball to hit the ground, or only one ruck nominating and the other team just tailing him ready to tackle when he grabs it clean... just like with ruck rules, these are rigid, technical rules that regiment and lock up the game into drearily defined patterns which are completely antithetical to the notion of a contested sport - huge changes to the basic way the game works, all to 'solve' the 'problem' of, what, kicking to a teammate when that's deemed the better option? Which, in any other phase of play, is the defending team's job to defend against? Why should this be any different?

We must be following a different game.

When a player takes 30 seconds it is always clear they are taking 30 seconds.

Every party knows they are taking 30 seconds.

 

[bobs head soup]

The simplest solution is just to say whenever a mark/free kick is paid, the clock stops counting down until the ball is in play again, the same as if it has gone out of bounds.

The clock should really only be running when the ball is in contest.

If this requires an adjustment to minutes per quarter, so be it.

 

[flyinghi64]

Been saying this since they brought the rule in.
It is used just as much to run the clock down as it is to get composed for a kick at goal.
As already suggested, if you elect to point at the goals saying you are taking a shot you can't play on and no mark can be paid on the kick. It is either a score or play on regardless.
Could pay mark to opposition only but I would like to see how teams would set up for an oppo shot on goal knowing it is play on regardless. Golden fists flying everywhere.

 

[The Punter]

Also, worth saying, the rule is at the pleasure of the umpire. Bloke marks 55 metres out (say like Luke Shuey

13

Luke Shuey

Age

35

Ht

184cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.7

5star

K

13.0

5star

HB

10.7

5star

M

3.3

3star

T

4.9

5star

CL

5.6

5star

D

18.7

4star

K

10.8

4star

HB

7.8

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

2.7

4star

CL

4.3

5star

D

17.0

5star

K

9.2

4star

HB

7.8

5star

M

3.0

3star

T

2.8

5star

CL

1.4

4star

in the 2018 GF) and points at the goals. Shuey knows he can't make the distance but he's trying to run down the clock.

So to make it easier to umpire and fairer, make it only for kicks where the player on the mark is inside the 50m arc. Any kick to a teammate outside the 50m arc is play on. Any kick (whether intentional or unintentional) to a teammate inside 50m gets the standard 7 second treatment from any subsequent kick.

 

[VL3OJ]

Simple fix without more vagaries... Drop it to 15 to 20 seconds and includes and kick. It keeps the atmosphere but reduces the time wasting component by more than a third.

 

[Goosecat]

Not too worried about this in reality, as long as the kicker is actually in range. If someone wants to take there 30 sec with the mark set inside 50m and then decide to pass; fine. That's been in the game since forever really. The real interpretation is: you get 30 sec to shoot or pass when within goal range. The grey area really is "within goal range" interpretation and the abuse of that with umpires affectively guessing whether you can actually make the distance or not and will actually have a shot. It's yet another farcical, grey, guess area. However that grey can be removed entirely.

The real change needed is to limit the 30sec clock to shots where the standing mark is inside the 50m arc. We have to stop adding grey area rules to the game, it's the biggest issue period with all rule changes in reality.

When the mark is set outside 50m and the shot is effectively taken from 55m plus with most knowing they can't make it and the 30 sec shot on goal is being used to run the clock down or get setup options for passes etc. We need to stop that because it's obviously abusing the rule and forms another "farce" area.
If the standing mark is set outside 50m, you don't get 30sec. That's all that needs to change. Yeah but what about the players that can make the distance I hear you say? Fine; If they want to have a shot they can, go for it, but you get the same time as normal kicks outside the 50m arc. Move it on (go for goal or pass it off, whatever) in time or call play on. No bullshit 30 sec when the mark is standing outside the 50m arc.

The pluses of this are that it is black and white, easy to umpire, no grey. The "line in the sand" for the rule is literally the 50m arc on the ground and the stationary standing Mark, no guessing of intentions required. You can still go for goal if you want, we're not ****ing with that, but you do not get to blow 30 sec from outside 55-60m pretending, with the umpire having to guess about genuineness. That bullshit is gone.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

I would also make it a firm 30 seconds.

None of this timer goes away once they start their walk in nonsense.

Thats the big change thats needed. Play on once 30s is reached.

Take a Ben Brown length run up and you can use up another 10-15s on top of the 30.

 

[WindyHillZephyr]

Why don't they just keep the shit clock paused after the kick. If it ends up as a completed pass the shot clock restarts from where it left off ( say 6 seconds for example)

 

[FootyIslanders]

The simplest solution is just to say whenever a mark/free kick is paid, the clock stops counting down until the ball is in play again, the same as if it has gone out of bounds.

The clock should really only be running when the ball is in contest.

If this requires an adjustment to minutes per quarter, so be it.

They could stop the clock only during last ten minutes when it matters most. And any other mark during the game at or outside fifty must be kicked over the mark. Both would address milking the clock when there is no realistic attempt at goal.

 

[hdi]

I would also make it a firm 30 seconds.

None of this timer goes away once they start their walk in nonsense.

100%. I'm amazed in tight games that I've never seen a player take like a 50m run up and just start walking in at a slow but steady pace to chew up time

 

[My_Username]

The obvious solution is just to give them the same amount of time as any other free kick/mark gets.

But let's start by cutting the 30 seconds down to 30 seconds...I know while watching on kayo that after 2 15 second jumps forward, the player is usually only just starting to move forward.

 

[caveman72]

Simple just stop the clock if the player stuffs around for over 25 seconds free kick to the other side. No chance of winding the clock down on a shot for goal wanna try that start kicking the ball around to a loose man