Clement’s Public Lobbying To Keep FB Push-in-the-back Immunity. Self Interest or Good for the Game?

Clement’s Public Lobbying To Keep FB Push-in-the-back Immunity. Self Interest or Good for the Game?

  • Self Interest

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Good for the game

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

makethat2

Team Captain
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Posts
449
Likes
274
Location
down the road
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Man utd
#26
Re:

Only certain players are against it you'll notice i.e. the ones that will be effected the most i.e. old FB's that lack leg speed (e.g. Clement), and have been pushing FF's in the back for years to compensate. The younger, faster FB's ain't concerned at all. A good rule. :)
If Clement was so Slow Parrot how does he keep with the leading FF to Push him??? You don't realise it isn't the leading contest that this rule will effect but when a FF push's back on to a FB thats when players may come undone. My question is why reward a player for playing in front if thats not where the ball is going to be? Reward the player with the talent to read the play:)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Tigeritis

Senior List
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Posts
296
Likes
66
Location
Bayside
AFL Club
Richmond
#28
Re:

You don't realise it isn't the leading contest that this rule will effect but when a FF push's back on to a FB thats when players may come undone.
It is the leading contest that this rule probably came about in the first place. Too many leading forwards get worked under the ball. At top pace it only takes a slight shove - albeit with good timing - to take the forward out of the contest and let the ball spill over the back.

If a FF is pushing back on a FB, all the FB has to do is stop and side step to even up the contest.
 

doppleganger

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Posts
16,055
Likes
7,194
Location
Putney
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Collingwood
#29
Re:

If a FF is pushing back on a FB, all the FB has to do is stop and side step to even up the contest.
by moving aside they are giving away the best position, they may have read the ball better then the forward, are in an ideal position to mark the ball, but cant do anything to protect the space......except move out the way or try to chest the player who is backing into them
 

Coin_Toss

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Posts
8,371
Likes
9
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
#30
Re: Clement’s Public Lobbying To Keep FB Push-in-the-back Immunity.Self Interest Good for the Game?

Clement's a smart cookie and he won't be saying it for his own benefit. He is on The AFL Players Association (AFLPA) I believe, in his duty he needs to express his opinions forward to the AFL boss, with present and past players. To be honest with you - I don't understand why he needs to keep bringing up the hands-in-the-back rule - he's gone overboard in this matter.
 

parrot

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 10, 2004
Posts
14,632
Likes
11
Location
..
Thread starter #31
Re:

If Clement was so Slow Parrot how does he keep with the leading FF to Push him??? ..
Clement is slow. FB's with leg speed can keep up with FF's on the lead, i.e. don't have to run behind and lunge for a back push to put the FF off balance. If the FB was quick enough he should be able to get in front of the leading FF. Old, slowies, like Clement, and Micheal struggle against fast leading FF's, and need to push their opponents in the back to compensate for their deficiency. :)
 

Tigeritis

Senior List
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Posts
296
Likes
66
Location
Bayside
AFL Club
Richmond
#32
Re:

by moving aside they are giving away the best position, they may have read the ball better then the forward, are in an ideal position to mark the ball, but cant do anything to protect the space......except move out the way or try to chest the player who is backing into them
I was referring to 2 stationary players.
If a forward is flying into the defenders space I would put the forearm up to protect the body and punch with the other.
Be interesting to see how it pans out. FB's just have to show more agility and a lot more smarts. So long Gaspar. :eek:
 

parrot

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 10, 2004
Posts
14,632
Likes
11
Location
..
Thread starter #33
Re: Clement’s Public Lobbying To Keep FB Push-in-the-back Immunity.

Here's a nice example of what this new rule is targeting. Fast leading forward Fev, with Mal caught behind because of lack of leg speed. Mal pushes left hand into back of Fev to get him of balance. FB's like Mal and Clement have modeled their entire games on this footy-law loop-hole. About time it was stopped. What's wrong with a FB just going with the FF on the lead, and trying to outrun him? The younger FB's have absolutely no problem with this law. :)

 

Coin_Toss

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Posts
8,371
Likes
9
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
#34
Re:

Clement is slow. FB's with leg speed can keep up with FF's on the lead, i.e. don't have to run behind and lunge for a back push to put the FF off balance. If the FB was quick enough he should be able to get in front of the leading FF. Old, slowies, like Clement, and Micheal struggle against fast leading FF's, and need to push their opponents in the back to compensate for their deficiency. :)
IF Clement is slow... How come he kept up with Mark Williams?

In all seriousness, he moves well and has clean foot skills under all sorts of pressure. His forte is not to get to the ball first, but to find a way to detract his opponent and no one does it better than him in the present day.
 

peternorth

Facts Machine
Joined
May 6, 2005
Posts
82,560
Likes
38,458
AFL Club
Richmond
Moderator #35
Re: Clement’s Public Lobbying To Keep FB Push-in-the-back Immunity.

Mate asked the same question. i said "the new rule is a joke and that..."

stopped there because i was gonna say the games becoming like netball, only to remember that my mate plays netball.
 

The Royal Sampler

Floreat Pica, Bitch!
Joined
Nov 26, 2006
Posts
25,052
Likes
15,477
Location
Hooray For Science, Woo!
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
VFL Magpies
#36
Re: Clement’s Public Lobbying To Keep FB Push-in-the-back Immunity.

Pushing in the back isn't a loophole in the laws of the game and never has been. Pushing in the back has never been allowed.

Hands in the back without pushing doesn't disadvantage the player in front, and therefore shouldn't be outlawed.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

peternorth

Facts Machine
Joined
May 6, 2005
Posts
82,560
Likes
38,458
AFL Club
Richmond
Moderator #37
Re: Clement’s Public Lobbying To Keep FB Push-in-the-back Immunity.

Pushing in the back isn't a loophole in the laws of the game and never has been. Pushing in the back has never been allowed.

Hands in the back without pushing doesn't disadvantage the player in front, and therefore shouldn't be outlawed.
agreed. a push has some intent. hands in the back without movement (hard to visualise i know) should be allowed.
 

makethat2

Team Captain
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Posts
449
Likes
274
Location
down the road
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Man utd
#38
Re:

It is the leading contest that this rule probably came about in the first place. Too many leading forwards get worked under the ball. At top pace it only takes a slight shove - albeit with good timing - to take the forward out of the contest and let the ball spill over the back.

If a FF is pushing back on a FB, all the FB has to do is stop and side step to even up the contest.
So judging by this call your saying next time judd burst's out of the pack he should slow down to even up the contest so taggers can catch him.
 

parrot

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 10, 2004
Posts
14,632
Likes
11
Location
..
Thread starter #39
Re: Clement’s Public Lobbying To Keep FB Push-in-the-back Immunity.

... hands in the back without movement (hard to visualise i know) should be allowed.
Could you please explain why FB's need to place ".. hands in the back without movement.." ??? There is only ONE reason why FB's put hands on their opponents back - and that is to push them off balance i..e push in the back. It comes down to this. Clement wants to be able to push his FF opponent in the back without getting penalized. The new rule stops him from doing that, and he and MM don't like it. Hence the bleating on Channel Eddie. There isn't any more to it. :)
 

The Grover

Premiership Player
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Posts
3,496
Likes
1,078
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Carlton
#40
Re: Clement’s Public Lobbying

Everyone whinging should just get over it. Why don't backman just punch the ball when caught behind instead of marking it.

Isn't this what we were all taught when we started playing the game.
 

FixterFan

Team Captain
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Posts
331
Likes
0
Location
NSW
AFL Club
Sydney
#42
Re:

It is the leading contest that this rule probably came about in the first place. Too many leading forwards get worked under the ball. At top pace it only takes a slight shove - albeit with good timing - to take the forward out of the contest and let the ball spill over the back.

If a FF is pushing back on a FB, all the FB has to do is stop and side step to even up the contest.
That's their fault for going full tilt at the ball to try to get the mark uncontested without thinking of balance and possible contact. The FF should go slower, say at 80% pace, and then rely on outbodying or outjumping the defender at the last moment for the mark.

Everyone whinging should just get over it. Why don't backman just punch the ball when caught behind instead of marking it.

Isn't this what we were all taught when we started playing the game.
Try to spoil a lowish incoming ball where you have to reach around a player from behind, without any incidental contact to the back of the player in front, and without chopping the arms. It's hard to do, and the umpire hasn't got a chance of seeing amongst the flurry of movement whether there's been any contact in the back or not.
 

jacko57

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 20, 2006
Posts
23,654
Likes
5,418
Location
melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
#43
Re: Clement’s Public Lobbying

I can just imagine SOS playing in today's game. He'd be just an average footballer.
I think it's unfair to suggest that SOS relied in pushing-in-the-back to out-position his opponents.

He was far more likely to employ the sleeper hold or the half-nelson. :D
 
Top Bottom