7 new rules - AFL Rule Changes for 2026

[zyzzbruh]

Don't sweat it, you're going to love it. I follow SANFL and was dubious when we introduced it. By the end of the first season, I loved it. No more worrying about insufficient attempts, etc.

I feel like people referring to the SANFL aren't looking at it from an AFL aspect. i.e when i watch local footy consistently bad umpiring decisions are literally part of the game and people just cop it on the chin - i feel it's the same for people watching the SANFL, the frustration of a ruling is less pronounced because it's a state league at the end of the day, it's just taken for what it is and everyone moves on. It's going to be a completely different story in the AFL - if it creates new scenarios that are even slightly erroneous people will be up in arms. There is way too much emotional attachment for people to cop anything less than perfect, hence everyone always complaining about something.

I personally just want to see footy. That means seeing throw ins as it creates a situation where pure footy decides who gets the ball out of the contest, whereas freekicks purely for the ball going out just gifts the opposition the footy and creates a contrived uncontested play. I'm also in the camp of incorrect 'insufficent intent' call being completely overblown - I genuinely think 99% of the calls we've seen this season have actually been spot on. Everytime there has been even the slightest inkling of it being deliberate, it's paid, which imo has been interpreted really well. And the people complaining subconsciously have no idea what they're complaining about, one minute they want the deliberate rule umpired better when it'd be in their favour, but when their team gets rightly pinged they're up in arms about it. And unlike others arguing they don't want it left up to 'interpretation', i rekn it's pretty bloody obvious when the ball is deliberately played out, and the umps have been all over it.

People want to see less freekicks, not more.

You're also going to see less variation in situational game play, and will see more blowouts as teams will be reluctant to slow play around the boundary to stop momentum and turn a game or save a game. This will force teams to only use the corridor majority of the time which means the best teams are going to be way too good with minimal variations in momentum.

Essentially you're going to end up with a diluted, uncontested arcade style version of our game. And to add to it the stricter stand rule and disposal rules are just going to increase 50m penalties and freekicks further.

 

[zyzzbruh]

It takes out umpires guessing in half the ground. The deliberate is a joke it's paid half and half at most and never against the top sides. This removes the ambiguity it's there or it's not.

Grossly exaggerated for the sake of being sensationalistic. Majority of deliberate calls this year have been spot on. People just complain when it goes against them even if it's 100% the correct call - saying they're 'guessing' is just a buzzword, they're not, it's actually pretty obvious when players play for the boundary and they have been interpreted perfectly fine.

We're going to see more freekicks, and for pure footy lovers, that is a shit watch. We want to see players winning it in a contest rather than it being who can play kick to kick better.

 

[crows dude]

So instead of having teams like Geelong appealing for LBW after the ball goes out of bounds... we're going to get finger pointing just like in the Spider-man gif..... every player pointing at the other claiming that they touched it last.

Its who kicks it or handballs last. Not touching it last like basketball/netball. If they can tell in a pack situation if it came of someones foot or not then its a throw in.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Read the rules - if a player sheppards the ball out or could make a play for it, a free kick WILL NOT be awarded.
We will see less deliberate calls with this i reckon, but we willalso see more frustration because people dont know the whole rule, and will whine that its "last touch"

As for the ruck rule, time for "free kick hawthorn" to get an almighty run, given the legnths opposition went to to negate meek. Now we have a beanpole who should be knocking 30 hitouts down to advantage every week

 

[Bluelegs]

Grossly exaggerated for the sake of being sensationalistic. Majority of deliberate calls this year have been spot on. People just complain when it goes against them even if it's 100% the correct call - saying they're 'guessing' is just a buzzword, they're not, it's actually pretty obvious when players play for the boundary and they have been interpreted perfectly fine.

We're going to see more freekicks, and for pure footy lovers, that is a shit watch. We want to see players winning it in a contest rather than it being who can play kick to kick better.

A handful of extra free kicks instead of throw ins doesn't really make footy less watchable imo. If players avoid the boundary line as a result of this rule it will make for better viewing.

 

[zyzzbruh]

Read the rules - if a player sheppards the ball out or could make a play for it, a free kick WILL NOT be awarded.
We will see less deliberate calls with this i reckon, but we willalso see more frustration because people dont know the whole rule, and will whine that its "last touch"

As for the ruck rule, time for "free kick hawthorn" to get an almighty run, given the legnths opposition went to to negate meek. Now we have a beanpole who should be knocking 30 hitouts down to advantage every week

Or it just creates a different 'interpretation' issue where umpires are guessing if the player shepparded it or not. What if the player was gassed and genuinely couldn't get to the footy, or what if he acts gassed?

this really is the last thing from a silver bullet.

 

[Bostonian]

Have you actually watched it in the SANFL? It works well.

Creating a rule for something that didn't need a rule?

We want umpires less involved in the game, not more.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Grossly exaggerated for the sake of being sensationalistic. Majority of deliberate calls this year have been spot on. People just complain when it goes against them even if it's 100% the correct call - saying they're 'guessing' is just a buzzword, they're not, it's actually pretty obvious when players play for the boundary and they have been interpreted perfectly fine.

We're going to see more freekicks, and for pure footy lovers, that is a shit watch. We want to see players winning it in a contest rather than it being who can play kick to kick better.

Problem is they haven’t been spot on we only have to watch a few games where identical “deliberates” one paid and one not. Thats the issue. Inconsistent at best interpretation and that’s worse than a few extra “free kicks”.

 

[zyzzbruh]

A handful of extra free kicks instead of throw ins doesn't really make footy less watchable imo. If players avoid the boundary line as a result of this rule it will make for better viewing.

No it won't because then there is less variation in play. Teams would have to go down the corridor most of the time which means the best teams are just going to cream everyone.

I enjoy seeing teams working their way in and out of momentum by using the boundary etc, makes the game half interesting.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Creating a rule for something that didn't need a rule?

We want umpires less involved in the game, not more.

This does this. It means less interpretation. Players will just get the ball and get it moving. Less players crying like a spin bowler every time the ball goes out.

 

[zyzzbruh]

Problem is they haven’t been spot on we only have to watch a few games where identical “deliberates” one paid and one not. Thats the issue. Inconsistent at best interpretation and that’s worse than a few extra “free kicks”.

eh i beg to differ. Hardly ever noticed it, they pay the dubious ones more often than not. Plus you're talking about missing maybe 1 or 2 freekicks per game - so no, this ain't just a few extra free kicks it's a shit tonne more. It really was barely an issue.

 

[crows dude]

in the SANFL you see players let the ball go over knowing they have the free kick

 

[Bostonian]

This does this. It means less interpretation. Players will just get the ball and get it moving. Less players crying like a spin bowler every time the ball goes out.

Does what?

Same as the other stupid rule that penalises a player for moving the ball forward towards their own goals?

 

[zyzzbruh]

This does this. It means less interpretation. Players will just get the ball and get it moving. Less players crying like a spin bowler every time the ball goes out.

why don't we just line the players up and just have shots on goal then? best score wins. Free kick everyone.

 

[Blackhawk42]

I'm a but surprised at the pushback on the ruck rule change.
Isn't it simply reverting to what the ruck looked like until only quite recently?

I actually felt that a massive part of the excitement of a game was lost when a crowd was anticipating the opening bounce, only to have one ruck walk across the line and engage with the opposition.
The two ruckmen coming in to actually jump and contest the footy in the air is a classic part of Australian Rules football.

 

[TheEscapeClub]

Yes AFL, let's have the last touch rule, but then have 15 caveats so that the umpire needs to take into consideration all of those caveats and just make it difficult.

Keep it simple, pay for the last touch no matter what. ****ing idiots.

No more calling for nominations by the umpire, but if no-one from a team nominates then that team can't have a representative. Why don't we just not require a nomination, anyone can contest a ball up, but they just continue to enforce the 3rd man up rule. ****ing idiots

I don't understand not being able to creep backwards from the mark in the stand rule. If they're creeping back, then the person with the ball can just keep moving forward and taking territory, the person with the ball just needs to remember where they mark is for when they will be called to play on, and they need to be aware of anyone behind them waiting to pounce when they go over the mark.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Does what?

Same as the other stupid rule that penalises a player for moving the ball forward towards their own goals?

The reason you are against it wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact your side can’t kick would it? Draft guys that hit targets. It’s the new age. All this does is make the game flow more

 

[Purple Suit]

Read the rules - if a player sheppards the ball out or could make a play for it, a free kick WILL NOT be awarded.
We will see less deliberate calls with this i reckon, but we willalso see more frustration because people dont know the whole rule, and will whine that its "last touch"

As for the ruck rule, time for "free kick hawthorn" to get an almighty run, given the legnths opposition went to to negate meek. Now we have a beanpole who should be knocking 30 hitouts down to advantage every week

It's going to be free kick against Hawthorn with the shrug rule.

 

[Bostonian]

The reason you are against it wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact your side can’t kick would it? Draft guys that hit targets. It’s the new age. All this does is make the game flow more

It would to do with it being a stupid rule that's not needed.

There's nothing new age about it.

It's a rule for other sports that need it.

We do not need it, we already have a mechanism of the game to deal with it.

 

[Bucking Bronco]

I have only seen the last touch rule in the AFLW, but it is absolutely diabolical and makes the game look like a Mickey Mouse sport.

It also makes out of bounds on the full essentially redundant

 

[zyzzbruh]

Read the rules - if a player sheppards the ball out or could make a play for it, a free kick WILL NOT be awarded.
We will see less deliberate calls with this i reckon, but we willalso see more frustration because people dont know the whole rule, and will whine that its "last touch"

As for the ruck rule, time for "free kick hawthorn" to get an almighty run, given the legnths opposition went to to negate meek. Now we have a beanpole who should be knocking 30 hitouts down to advantage every week

I rekn it all take 3 minutes into the first game of the season at most before you see a player corral the ball over the line without trying to make it too obvious, and gaining the freekick.

 

[Fadge]

It makes the game more like soccer and discourages important AFL strategies.
The solution to a bad rule is not to make a far worse rule to avoid ambiguity.

Disagree.

The less grey areas, the better.

 

[Fadge]

Have no issues with any of the rule changes other than the stand rule. Doubling down on this insanity is wild to me.

I agree with this part of your comment.

But for the most part, the rule changes are for the better.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

That shrug rule is gonna be so hard to consistently umpire

Well ginni and watsons careers are now at a crossroad

 

[Rickee]

I always find it interesting that the extensive discussions about rule changes feature the clubs, umpires, players and players association but never members or supporters.

Are they just assuming we'll go along with whatever changes they make passively and not have thoughts or opinions?