Rules Chest area to be "sacrosanct" - and no fines

[The_Wookie]

THE CHEST area will be treated the same as the head and groin in the new NAB AFL Women's competition, but players will not face fines as penalties for on-field indiscretions.

The League is working to finalise all the rules and regulations for the new AFLW ahead its historic season opener on February 3.

Players facing scrutiny for on-field misdemeanors will face the same Match Review Panel and Tribunal process as the men's competition.

However, there are two major differences.

Because players are part-time and on smaller salaries than the men in their debut season, they'll instead receive reprimands that may accumulate towards suspensions if there are further offences.

The sensitivity of the chest area is also taken into account, and will be classed as 'high' or 'sacrosanct' just like the head and groin is with men's MRP matters.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-01-19/chest-area-to-be-sacrosanct-in-aflw-matches

 

[Randomizor]

So if Player A goes in to bump Player B who happens to turn towards Player A and gets hit in the chest as a result, Player A is in trouble??

 

[jatz14]

So if Player A goes in to bump Player B who happens to turn towards Player A and gets hit in the chest as a result, Player A is in trouble??

No. Getting someone in the groin isn't a free, let alone report able if it is in play. However, if you do something reportable, and its to the groin (or the head), it is treated more severely at the tribunal. That is the sense it is being used in. Punching someone in the boob (or head, or groin) will be viewed differently than punching them in the shoulder for instance. Front on bumps (which could hardly avoid the chest), are not banned.

 

[telsor]

Because players are part-time and on smaller salaries than the men in their debut season, they'll instead receive reprimands that may accumulate towards suspensions if there are further offences.

Chest makes sense...no drama there.

Not so sure about the quoted bit though...I'm OK with fines being relative to income, but if they do something that would usually warrant a suspension (e.g striking), they should cop the same suspension.

Suburban comps are amateur/low paid, and they get weeks off, so I don't see why the women can't.

 

[Randomizor]

No. Getting someone in the groin isn't a free, let alone report able if it is in play. However, if you do something reportable, and its to the groin (or the head), it is treated more severely at the tribunal. That is the sense it is being used in. Punching someone in the boob (or head, or groin) will be viewed differently than punching them in the shoulder for instance. Front on bumps (which could hardly avoid the chest), are not banned.

I guess I was looking at it more from the perspective of the area being as sacrosanct as the head as claimed in the article.

 

[NoobPie]

I guess I was looking at it more from the perspective of the area being as sacrosanct as the head as claimed in the article.

I initially read it like that but Jatz post makes sense - ie it relates to reportable offences not free kicks

After several years of idiocy, the AFL has been moving away from an over-riding principle of "the head is sacrosanct" in general play that has lead to the unintended but by no means unforeseeable, perverse consequence of players deliberately putting their head in danger to win free kicks

 

[telsor]

One thing this does bring up though...What will the do about jumper punches?

Do they go from barely worth looking at to being a serious infringement?

 

[NikkiNoo]

I guess I was looking at it more from the perspective of the area being as sacrosanct as the head as claimed in the article.

What do they do about tackles then? What about when you are trying to bring someone to the ground and they hit the chest? What about trying to punch the ball away, you are going to get contact to the chest. This is just so weird to me as a woman who plays footy. This to me is a rule that seems to be made by a male without talking to actual women players.

 

[NoobPie]

What do they do about tackles then? What about when you are trying to bring someone to the ground and they hit the chest? What about trying to punch the ball away, you are going to get contact to the chest. This is just so weird to me as a woman who plays footy. This to me is a rule that seems to be made by a male without talking to actual women players.

I think it just relates to reportable offences not for legitimate tackles and incidental contact

 

[NikkiNoo]

I think it just relates to reportable offences not for legitimate tackles and incidental contact

How are they going to deem something to be 'incidental contact'? We have already seen that the AFL has no idea about policing things properly, instead they make up more and more rules that just contradict the actual intent of the game.

The whole reasoning about it being a very sensitive area in terms of pain is also just plain ridiculous. It's up there with people who think that women marking balls on their chest will cause them to have breast cancer. Don't laugh I know that that is something that some men truly believe and it was one of their main reasons as to why women should not be allowed to play football.

 

[NoobPie]

How are they going to deem something to be 'incidental contact'? We have already seen that the AFL has no idea about policing things properly, instead they make up more and more rules that just contradict the actual intent of the game.

The whole reasoning about it being a very sensitive area in terms of pain is also just plain ridiculous. It's up there with people who think that women marking balls on their chest will cause them to have breast cancer. Don't laugh I know that that is something that some men truly believe and it was one of their main reasons as to why women should not be allowed to play football.

Fair enough Nikki

Quite possibly it is driven indirectly by the torts industry..

 

[NikkiNoo]

Fair enough Nikki

Quite possibly it is driven indirectly by the torts industry..

I was told about the rule last night while at training and our male coach, who was telling me about it, said 'that has to be a rule made by a man who has never spoken to any female footy player'.

 

[jatz14]

It has been really really badly communicated. I see it as just being the same as the genital area in men. It isn't an area that draws a free let alone a report, unless it's deemed a deliberate blow, then it's serious.

Same will apply here, only is someone is regarded as making a deliberate strike will it apply.

Seriously unlikely that it will ever be needed I would have thought.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Komrade_Tiger]

Personally i see it as the AFL covering themselves from any future actions/issues.

This way they can turn around and say that they've done all they can as it were when it comes to protecting players

 

[cptkirk]

I'm training a female footballer here in Melb and asked her about it - she said you have to get hit flat in the middle of the boobs for there to be any sort of pain and that it never happens

She also said straight away that it seems like a rule made by someone without boobs who has never played football as state above a few times

Like most new rules the AFL introduce their interpretation will be all over the place on this one and has the potential to be the laughing stock of the SAFLW season

 

[jatz14]

From
dlayden72

 

[Percel]

Smart move, hope no one makes a boob of themselves.