Changes for 2014 - Duck season open.

[Maddo11]

From http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-12-17/crackdown-on-duckers

THE AFL is cracking down on players who duck into opponents to draw high contact under new rules to be introduced in 2014.

...

The AFL Commission approved a raft of changes on Tuesday for season 2014 after hearing recommendations from the AFL Laws Committee.

These changes applied to:
- Head clashes involving bumps.
- Players leading with their head to initiate contact.
- Forceful contact below the knees.
- The use of strength in marking contests.
- Reducing the number of runners from two to one.
- Automatic penalty for being in the protected area.
- Use of the interchange.

...
Changes have also been made to the head clash rule which will state that a player bumping should reasonably foresee a head clash occurring if the bump is incorrectly applied.

Under the new rule an incident similar to the one involving North Melbourne's Lindsay Thomas and Collingwood's Ben Reid in round one this year would see Thomas charged with rough conduct.
A free kick would also be paid against Thomas if that case was repeated.

The ducking amendments seem reasonable. Soft free kicks for players initiating high contact was happening far too often.

I'm a little concerned about the fix for the Thomas - Reid head clash scenario though. I suspect it will be the true "end of the bump" that's been being thrown around for the last few years.

The current high contact rules slay players that bump and go above the shoulder. Fair enough. So what does the player do to combat this? Bump lower. Unfortunately this is more likely to result in head clashes, which will now see you sitting on the pine for a couple of weeks.

It's really now not worth the risk of even trying to bump low at all.

Also, an amendment to the sliding rule:

The AFL Commission also backed strengthening the rule halting forceful contact below the knees. A free kick will now be paid if a player either makes forceful contact below the knees or acts in a manner likely to cause serious injury, even if contact does not occur.

Will this bring about more diving over contests in an effort to win a free? Next step yellow card/red card.

Thoughts?

 

[Engimal]

Gee whiz, not too sure about this. If a player bumps another player in the head, there should be a free kick and I think most would agree. But giving away a free kick because of an accidental head clash? Not too sure at all about that one...

 

[S for September]

Report for a headclash... I'm pretty much done with this sport.

 

[Axcellence]

Penalised for attempted diving

 

[Boxhead_31]

Watch all the folks complain when Joel Selwood still gets free kicks for high contact next season for what he does isn't what is covered by the rule change

 

[checkraiseulite]

Selwood/West Coast gonna be offended.

 

[Peta Credlin]

Not fussed about the head clash, all that is doing is ensuring players don't get off like Lindsay Thomas did.

 

[Bobby_]

Selwood/West Coast gonna be offended.

add Lewis/Puopolo to the mix

 

[Suma Magic]

Selwood/West Coast gonna be offended.

Add Ziebell and A. Swallow to that list.

 

[ChomperJones]

Joel Selwood's career will come into question now.

 

[ziad]

Watch all the folks complain when Joel Selwood still gets free kicks for high contact next season for what he does isn't what is covered by the rule change

yep - the 'new' laws look like those of 20 years ago.

high tackles are still illegal.

 

[juss]

Next year we are going to see someone rubbed out due to a head clash, and we are going to be wild.

 

[Boxhead_31]

Joel Selwood's career will come into question now.

Why pray tell?

 

[Boxhead_31]

Selwood/West Coast gonna be offended.

Selwood doesn't do what the rule is going to prevent, the players who are going to be effected by it are the guys like Jordan Lewis and Luke Hodge who lower their heads and ram at the opponents chest then look towards the umpire for a free kick.

2014 RULE CHANGES
High contact - Where a player ducks into a tackle and is the cause of high contact the umpire will call play on. (What Lewis, Hodge and Puopolo do so well)
However, players who drop their knees to draw high contact free kicks could still be rewarded.
AFL operations manager Mark Evans said that technique was harder to adjudicate.
"It does still make it difficult for an umpire to assess if a player (in possession) has dropped his knees," Evans said. (What the Selwoods and West Coast players do)

 

[checkraiseulite]

selwood ducks, dives, flops and is a confirmed CHEAT.

learn to spell.

 

[D-N-R]

Not fussed about the head clash, all that is doing is ensuring players don't get off like Lindsay Thomas did.

You're not fussed until one of your players is cited for it.

There are 4 grades of impact - low, medium, high and severe. The LT one would be classed as severe as bones were broken. Players can still be cited for a clash which doesn't break any bones, but causes some bruising or concussion (high). They can also be cited for something which causes a player to be put in the hands of the trainer or to show some ill effects (medium). They can also be cited for merely making accidental and unintentional contact with another player's head. Low impact. That'll be a week. Hopefully this last scenario will hit these clubs and the fans that howled and raged for this change.

I can't remember when someone was last injured with an accidental head clash when being bumped. It just goes to show how reactive and so easy to please the rules committee are. These type of people make the worst kind of politicians, as they jump from hot topic to hot topic trying to please the baying mobs, when a bit of composure is what is needed. I thought the explanation by the MRP was clear - nobody tries to use their head when bumping another player, therefore any contact must be unintentional - but certain coaches and club presidents were 'confused' (poor dears).

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Probitas_]

Won't make a single difference to the way the Selwoods bend the rules. Useless change, and they only have themselves to blame for these ridiculous modifications.

 

[joop]

Ducking and not getting a free was a rule for how long? It's stupid they changed it in the first place.

 

[mic59]

Watch all the folks complain when Joel Selwood still gets free kicks for high contact next season for what he does isn't what is covered by the rule change

Couldn't believe it when I read the new laws. They're like a television advertisement, they seem great until you read what they really mean. Selwood was never guilty of leading with the head, he would lead with the body and then go weak at the legs for the head to drop. It's not a ducking action so it's not covered.

 

[Maddo11]

Were the high contact changes only changed for the season proper? Didn't seem to be any different at all in the NAB. Players still going to pick up the ball and turning towards opposition players to cop high contact. Players still throwing arms up to "break the tackle" and force the opposition high.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Were the high contact changes only changed for the season proper? Didn't seem to be any different at all in the NAB. Players still going to pick up the ball and turning towards opposition players to cop high contact. Players still throwing arms up to "break the tackle" and force the opposition high.

Really, I haven't seen any of the latter. Given the stick WC copped, wasn't one example I can remember in our two preseason games.

I have seen players from a couple of teams running into others and being awarded a free, but this seems to be an example of preseason umpiring rather than any concerted player strategy.

 

[Oneiros]

Couldn't believe it when I read the new laws. They're like a television advertisement, they seem great until you read what they really mean. Selwood was never guilty of leading with the head, he would lead with the body and then go weak at the legs for the head to drop. It's not a ducking action so it's not covered.

You need to understand the objectives; they don't give two hoots about dropping at the knees, and furthermore have no intention of trying to muddy the waters by having umpires make rulings on it. What they wanted to get rid of was leading with the head, because that's the one that puts a shock down your spine and is the real potential injury cause. Whacks about the head aren't great, but they refuse to allow a potential open-season on the head by messing with the rules on it. However it is the head-down charge that is both easy to identify and carries a real self-harm potential independent of the actions of other players, so it is easy to place the onus on the player committing the act.

Basically, it manageable to say players should not pretend to be a Pachycephalosaurus but not manageable to make players responsible for the manner in which they are tackled.

 

[mic59]

You need to understand the objectives; they don't give two hoots about dropping at the knees, and furthermore have no intention of trying to muddy the waters by having umpires make rulings on it. What they wanted to get rid of was leading with the head, because that's the one that puts a shock down your spine and is the real potential injury cause. Whacks about the head aren't great, but they refuse to allow a potential open-season on the head by messing with the rules on it. However it is the head-down charge that is both easy to identify and carries a real self-harm potential independent of the actions of other players, so it is easy to place the onus on the player committing the act.

Basically, it manageable to say players should not pretend to be a Pachycephalosaurus but not manageable to make players responsible for the manner in which they are tackled.

See your point, but the action to draw a free has always been relatively obvious to spectators so I am not sure why umpires have never been able to see it. And why they are not doing anything about it now. To continue the dinosaur theme, maybe players should also cease to be a Parasaurolophus.

 

[MagpieJo]

Been saying for years it's going to take a ducker seriously hurting themselves before something is done. It shouldn't be ignored, it should be penalized against, that's the only way to stop it. And YES it's bloody cheating. I've seen 1 or 2 of our players do it on occasion, (thankfully we don't have a renown ducker) and it makes me squirm.

 

[cleomenes]

The rule change deals with the duckers as they should be dealt with. It does nothing about the shruggers or the divers.
The rule change that has occurred surreptitiously is one that says there will be no ball ups. The degeneration of the game into a physical struggle to grind the ball forward in the manner of rugby is killing it as a spectacle.
The revoking of the holding the ball rule, so that players are encouraged to barge through is another sly change that is reducing the openness of the game. Soon it will be a game for gorillas, with evasive skills of no use.