Below the knees rule is a ****ing embarrassment

[The Fact]

Just wait until your on the the wrong end of it. The one with Reilly in particular was absolutely disgusting. How any football fan could support that kind of ruling is beyond me. He should have every right to go hard at the ball. Rewarding players who are second to the contest is weak minded and terribly unfair to the player actually going for the ball.

What Reilly did is what the afl are trying to stop. He cannoned into the ground straight into Daveys legs you just can't do that anymore. What he should have done was kept his feet and scooped up the ball, the players know the rules and hird even said in his press conference that they have been training the players to deal with the new rules.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

What Reilly did is what the afl are trying to stop. He cannoned into the ground straight into Daveys legs you just can't do that anymore. What he should have done was kept his feet and scooped up the ball, the players know the rules and hird even said in his press conference that they have been training the players to deal with the new rules.

I can't wait until its one of your defenders whose on the wrong end of one of these bullshit calls. All he did was go for the ball like any good defender would. He put his body over the ball. If Reilly slid it was because of the wet conditions, he wasn't purposefully using it as a tactic to try and trip Davey. It was simply the result of wet, slippery conditions and a defender going hard at the ball. Why the hell should Davey get a free when he was clearly out-positioned and second to the ball? Explain to me how AFL players, in wet conditions, are supposed to go in low and get the ball at a quick pace without some form of sliding on the ground. Think about the speed the game is played. Its impossible to expect defenders to live up to this standard.

I don't blame you for having team bias but you have to consider how bad these calls are for the game as a whole. Its absolutely ludicrous to start rewarding free's to players who are second to the ball, and just happen to cop some incidental contact on the way there. Now its different if a player is deliberately using sliding as a tactic to hurt or suppress their opposition. This needs to be stamped out but that doesn't really apply to the Reilly situation at all.

Think of the potential for drama if something like this was to determine a Grand Final. The AFL are just asking for a media shitstorm. Every year they make the game harder and harder for umpires to accurately enforce the rules.

Nothing against Essendon though, they were easily the better team last night and deserved the 4 points.

 

[Archie87]

What Reilly did is what the afl are trying to stop. He cannoned into the ground straight into Daveys legs you just can't do that anymore. What he should have done was kept his feet and scooped up the ball, the players know the rules and hird even said in his press conference that they have been training the players to deal with the new rules.

The problem many Aussie Rules fans have is why do they need to stop it? That exact same kind of contest would happen hundreds of times each AFL season every year and no injury comes from it whatsoever. Bad breaks like what poor Rohan suffered occur once in a blue moon. If the AFL want to prevent injury, then let's ban tackling (to prevent shoulder/arm/head/knee injuries); sprinting (don't want to put those hamstrings under any stress do we!) and all jumping (knees/ankle injuries). It's a contact sport, freak accidents are going to happen. The AFL should just get back to protecting the head of the bloke going for the footy and that's it.

I've watched the reply of the contest a few times now. Had Reilly stayed in the same position, kept his feet, and scooped the balled up, he would have clashed heads with Davey who was about also attempt to scoop up the ball OR the other option Reilly had was to keep his feet, keep low and get his body between Davey and the ball, picking up the ball at the same time as shirt fronting him. That also probably would have resulted in bumping Davey in the head and Reilly getting suspended for a shirt front.

 

[OldCrowBloke]

I think the rule is pretty good it clear the afl wants to stamp out sliding into the contest and players kept doing it tonight. IMO its pretty clear keep your feet and no free against

The problem is - it is NOT "pretty clear".
There were several instances last night where a Crows player kept his feet, and a player head-butted his knee and received the free for high contact!
In the split second that it happens, the 2 different rules are to hard for an umpire to adjudicate.

 

[amer]

Last night my wife - american - said the game is dead to her as of the free against Reilly. She has adored footy since she first saw it, in love with the culture, and the one thing she has raved to her family about is how the game rewards you for sheer will and desperation like no other sport does. That changes with this rule.

Either the AFL fixes it, or fans will start deserting the game. I'm telling you, this rule, of them all, will be the one to drive people away from the gate. Absolutely ****ing horrifying.

 

[OrdinaryJoel]

The rule is a joke. Why the AFL makes knee-jerk changes to the rules is what will **** up the way players play the game each year.

Just because last year a few isolated instances of broken legs due to sliding occurred, doesn't mean a ****ing rule should be implemented!!!

At this rate, we will see a completely different game in 10 years time. Wait, scratch that, 3 years time.

****ing hell.

 

[Crowked]

The rule is a joke. Why the AFL makes knee-jerk changes to the rules is what will **** up the way players play the game each year.

Just because last year a few isolated instances of broken legs due to sliding occurred, doesn't mean a ******* rule should be implemented!!!

At this rate, we will see a completely different game in 10 years time. Wait, scratch that, 3 years time.

******* hell.

Its already a different game than the game I grew up watching.

This rule is a joke.

Its the tough contest I go to see, not some gutless numpty taking the soft option and getting the free kick.

 

[OrdinaryJoel]

Its already a different game than the game I grew up watching.

This rule is a joke.

Its the tough contest I go to see, not some gutless numpty taking the soft option and getting the free kick.

Unless...

Unless this is a secret ploy for the AFL, to use this rule to their advantage to get more money from players!

Here's how it works:

• They brought in the 'diving rule' last year, which penalises players via fine.
• That didn't happen much last year, and this new 'sliding' rule is a stealthy way of subconsciously encouraging the players to exaggerate the contact to the lower limbs of their body.
• Therefore, more occasions where this rule takes place, equals more opportunities for players to be smart arses and try to exploit the rule by staging, which inturn, will cause them to be sanctioned via fine for staging, which finally, will result in more money to the AFL.

A devious scheme if I've ever seen one... Bastards!

 

[Gus Poyet]

I ****ing hate this rule with a passion!

I could not believe they awarded a free to a soft **** like Davey who was standing around creating little contest compared to the hard at it Crows player.

Absolutely sickened me to the stomach when they paid that shit.

AFL truly is going to the utter shit under Demetriturd.

 

[OrdinaryJoel]

I ******* hate this rule with a passion!

I could not believe they awarded a free to a soft **** like Davey who was standing around creating little contest compared to the hard at it Crows player.

Absolutely sickened me to the stomach when they paid that shit.

AFL truly is going to the utter shit under Demetriturd.

Demetriou needs to retire and **** off...

 

[Gus Poyet]

Demetriou needs to retire and **** off...

He's a despot. They are hard to remove from their seat of power.

 

[OrdinaryJoel]

He's a despot. They are hard to remove from their seat of power.

Which is what aggrieves everyone... **** he's a cancer to the game of AFL...

 

[WAG]

I've watched the "Reilly Incident" a few times, and at no time was it a deliberate slide to affect the contest. In wet conditions, he dived on the ball, desperately trying to get the 'ball' first, deep in enemy territory. At no time did he lead with his feet in an attempt to take out the opposition player who was second to the contest.

Football lost today and it saddens me that our game has come to this. Think I'll encourage my son to take up korfball instead!

Vale Australian Rules Football.

 

[Archie87]

If the AFL are worried about these occasional freak accidents like leg injuries from contests such as the Davey/Reilly one, why not just ban tackling?

Far more careers have been ruined by tackles (i.e. Hentschel) than leg injuries caused by contests similar to the Davey/Reilly one.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

This is easy to simply say, but what happens when you're running towards a ball in the wet and another player is coming towards the ball from the other direction, slightly closer than you are. Do you both just kind of put your heads down and charge at each other and hope the other loses their feet (or head!) first? Do you just concede that you're not going to win the ball and hope to win an absurd HTB decision? Going in low to the ground at the ball can be an effective way of attacking the ball in many situations, just as diving on the ball can be an effective strategy in many situations.

No, what happens is that Player A dives onto the ball and ground. Player B keeps his feet.

Player A gets a soft free because he was taken 'high.'

Player B gets his legs taken out from under him.

Yeah, that was awesome. Bring it back. Stupid AFL.

We need to permit umpires to make interpretations again. If someone is sliding in recklessly, ping them. Otherwise, play on. If someone is diving on the ball in an attempt to stifle play, ping them. Otherwise, play on. If someone is deliberately shoving someone in the back, or taking an opponent's head, ping them. Otherwise, play on.

One of the things that made our game great was that rules were interpreted. You're allowed to bump players, just not bump them too hard, or too recklessly. You're allowed to hold onto the tackle after they dispose of the ball, just not for too long. You're allowed to kind of dispose of the ball so it goes out of bounds, but not too obviously. But now it seems the AFL is determined to make every single rule 100% black or white, to the detriment of the game.

You're actually campaigning for grey area?

 

[cmndstab]

No, what happens is that Player A dives onto the ball and ground. Player B keeps his feet.

Player A gets a soft free because he was taken 'high.'

Player B gets his legs taken out from under him.

Yeah, that was awesome. Bring it back. Stupid AFL.

This should not occur any more than the sliding rule should. Both are examples of an awful rule designed to fix an issue that needn't have existed to begin with.

You're actually campaigning for grey area?

Absolutely I am. Because football is a contact sport, but there is always going to be contact that is excessive. There absolutely must be grey areas. You can't simply say "this kind of contact is always allowed, that kind isn't" for everything. It doesn't work and you end up with the sorts of ludicrous decisions we've been seeing for years now. There are situations in which contact with the legs is completely reasonable, and part of the game. There are other situations in which it's dangerous.

We should pay umpires enough that it's reasonable to expect them to be able to tell the difference, and if they consistently get it wrong, there are enough others waiting in the wings that we're able to move them on.


I hate this ridiculous notion that umpires are machines, completely incapable of exercising some common sense unless the rules are spelled out to cover every single eventuality. They've been making those common sense adjudications for 100+ years.

 

[DREAM TEAM BUFF]

Tex Walker ‏@texwalker13
So as a kid you get taught to go and get the footy.. Yet someone can just stand there, get hit in the legs and get a free kick #ahhhhhisee

Fine incoming.

He has been told off about his tweets in the last few months , Tex won't learn

 

[Crow-eater]

He has been told off about his tweets in the last few months , Tex won't learn

Who gives a shit. It's refreshing to see players speak their mind about the crap the AFL is bringing into the game. He gets fined, big deal.

 

[ruscy002]

Rule changes with the aim of injury prevention don't bother me so much, even if they are "against the fabric of the game" (whatever the hell that means).

What shits me in this instance (as with many of the AFL's rule changes) is the lack of foresight - there is now an increased likelihood that the next disgusting leg/ankle injury that we'll see will result from two guys trying to soccer the ball off the ground at the same time because they're too damn scared to take possession.

I'm sure the powers that be will love seeing a soccer-style foot/ankle turned 180 degrees type injury...what will the mums and dads of Australia think!?

 

[JP Sauce]

So because of this tackle, sliding is banned:



I assume the AFL will also ban the following things asap.

Smothering:



Running back with the flight to mark:



Spoiling:



Leading and sliding to mark:



I mean otherwise the game is just too unsafe.

 

[JP Sauce]

To make a slightly more useful (but no more serious) post, that Matt Maguire one... Is sliding to take a mark banned? It *should* be, or does the rule not apply to marking attempts?

Edit: Actually smothering should be banned too (like in the Brown video). The Melbourne player dived for the ball, does it matter that it's in possession?

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Who gives a shit. It's refreshing to see players speak their mind about the crap the AFL is bringing into the game. He gets fined, big deal.

Absolutely. He can afford the fines and earns major respect for being honest and speaking his mind. I don't think Tex is any sort of genius but he's always honest and I've yet to disagree with any of his comments. He's a good egg this kid.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Absolutely I am. Because football is a contact sport, but there is always going to be contact that is excessive. There absolutely must be grey areas. You can't simply say "this kind of contact is always allowed, that kind isn't" for everything. It doesn't work and you end up with the sorts of ludicrous decisions we've been seeing for years now. There are situations in which contact with the legs is completely reasonable, and part of the game. There are other situations in which it's dangerous.

We should pay umpires enough that it's reasonable to expect them to be able to tell the difference, and if they consistently get it wrong, there are enough others waiting in the wings that we're able to move them on.

I hate this ridiculous notion that umpires are machines, completely incapable of exercising some common sense unless the rules are spelled out to cover every single eventuality. They've been making those common sense adjudications for 100+ years.

I hate this ridiculous notion that the umpiring used to be awesome.

The reason umpiring gets criticsed - and has always been criticised - is because of the grey areas. With some rules, two people can watch the same thing and make different decisions.

Anyway, this rule will help Dangerfield.

Diving on the ball and being on the bottom of packs looks great - "Go Danger, what a legend! He goes in so hard for the footy!!!" - but actually achieves very little. Maybe a ball up if we're lucky. Keeping his feet, using his speed, getting some more clean ball - this will all help him.

 

[Mattrox]

It helped get Dangerfield a free against when he had taken possession and was about to make a clearance that has always been allowed. I don't even think he slid, just bumbed into Watson a little as he grabbed the ball.

I want to see a replay but I'm sure it wasn't dangerous or a slide, just a good contested possession...... or it used to be.

 

[Mattrox]

I really hope you were taking the piss when you say achieves very little because last year he lead the team in contested possessions last year with 405.

And 2nd in the team with effective disposals at 421.

And when you break down Clangers to take into the number of disposals he makes he had 8 point something disposals per clanger and is slightly better than GAJ to contrast Swan make 9 something disposals and at the other end of the scale Fyfe and Franklin were the worst with 4 point something. Schoenmakers is bang on 5..... Anyway I found this more useful than total clangers as high possession winners always top the list.