Deliberate out of bounds.

[HairyO]

Well the universal consensus of everybody including the AFL is the call was wrong and it was stupid to think he would put it out dilberatly in that situation.

Having media and AFL on your side doesnt really lend any weight to your argument.

Not saying its wrong, just that media and AFL are rarely right.

 

[HairyO]

There was one that baffled me this week - not sure what game

A bloke kicked/handpassed the ball towards the boundary - where his teammate grabbed the ball just as it was going out of bounds.

The officiating umpire then asked the boundary whether the ball had crossed before his teammate touched it. (that;s how close it was)

As the teammate had touched it just over the line he paid deliberate to the original kicker.

FFS - if a teammate is that close to the ball you aren't even sure if it has gone out - how can that be deliberate - he had a teammate in the area.

In our game against West Coast Hurn handballed to a teammate who was a metre over the line. No free kick.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

There was one in the Port/WC game where the Ump asked if the ball had been touched off the boot or not, the other ump confirmed it hadn't been touched and deliberate was paid. If you're going to pay it as intent, what difference does it make it someone got a fingertip to it?

Just another example of the absolute farce it has become.

Nah - don't think it was off the boot - rather it was the teammate crossing the boundary

 

[falcons2]

On the flip side to the whinging, about 30 seconds to go in the Hawthorn Melbourne game, the ball is 1 metre from the boundary about 60-70m from Melbourne's goal. Three Hawthorn players had the chance to fumble, dribble, knock whatever the ball out of bounds but they didn't. Melbourne win the ball and have one last attempt inside 50. Why didn't they knock it out? I'm guessing fear of the deliberate penalty. So a win for the rule.
Imagine Saturday night if it had been one Bulldog defender with four Tigers around him. Would he have fumbled out of play?

 

[fleabitten]

There was one that baffled me this week - not sure what game

A bloke kicked/handpassed the ball towards the boundary - where his teammate grabbed the ball just as it was going out of bounds.

The officiating umpire then asked the boundary whether the ball had crossed before his teammate touched it. (that;s how close it was)

As the teammate had touched it just over the line he paid deliberate to the original kicker.

FFS - if a teammate is that close to the ball you aren't even sure if it has gone out - how can that be deliberate - he had a teammate in the area.

That was also against Richmond. And there was one against Martin when he hacked the ball out of the centre after a bounce and it ended up crossing the boundary about 10m forward of the wing. Like that was his objective. Three stinkers in the one game. There was also one missed against us that was more obvious than the three that were paid.

 

[Consolaçao]

The football world is about as 'up in arms' as it gets, yet this steadfast refusal to accept any form of criticism. And when one of their number is criticised, they close ranks and protect each other like members of any despotic regime.
There really needs to be some sort of check on their power... ideally these ego-driven bogans in suits would be answerable to a board whose members are elected by stakeholders that actually give a f*** about the game. (i.e fans, players, coaches).

 

[Elite Master]

Well none of that is ever going to happen. The only way forward is to rid the game of all subjective interpretations and go back to the rules played in the 80s when football was about skill and courage as opposed to this emphasis on speed and confusion.

I guess you had to have courage in the 80's with all the cheap shots.

The adjudication was much better in last nights game. It's been like that in previous weeks before but then goes back to being unreasonable. If the interpenetration is consistent like last night than the ruling will be fine.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I guess you had to have courage in the 80's with all the cheap shots.

The adjudication was much better in last nights game. It's been like that in previous weeks before but then goes back to being unreasonable. If the interpenetration is consistent like last night than the ruling will be fine.

The cheap shots have been out of the game for sometime now, how would having the rules as close to black and white as they were in the 80's and payed as they are written be a bad thing.

 

[compact72]

Changed this week (for the better).

TBH umpiring has been very good this week. Kudos

 

[JoondalupJ]

I get this rules existence for the blatant ones.

No issue there.

However, the merit and very fabric of the game is about going for the ball. Its what makes the hard headed ball winners the legends they are. Fyfe, Hodge, Selwood, PFD, Lewis, Sloane, Dusty et al.

What the DOOB has done has its now gotten players to the point where they are backing off going for the ball near the boundary on the OFF chance the ump decides its DOOB - and there is clearly no set rule as to what that is.

IMO, when subjective officiating starts to effect the very backbone of the what the game is about, those in charge need to back off and let the game run.

They have intervened to protect the head. No issue with that. They have intervened to change the fatigue levels. Ok whatever.

This is now gotten absurb where the men in green, or their version of events as to what they think a players intent was, is now governing how players play the ball near the boundary.

It needs to stop. Worst rule going around.

Go Catters

Absolutely. On Friday evening I posted on the WCE v Dogs gameday threaad before it started. Asking every one to have a look this week at the DOOB s' at the really petty 50 metre penalties doled out , too much giving the umps miles too much say in the game.
I too am really surprised at the bad calls , and the calls where we know in ourselves that the umpire has misinterpreted, especially DOOB, no one yet has commented , but strangely I didn't see a deliberate out of bounds awarded on Friday night!?
Maybe one I missed I don't know!
But it begs the question with this most useless rule, we have ever had, as to just what on earth the rules committee expect from umpires, and how and what they actually say to each other when sitting in AFL headquarters and fiddling with rules.
Open the game up , as said by the commentators, well I think that is bulldust totally.
As you said blatant deliberate anythings!! Should be penalised but mind reading and split second guess work is ruining the game.
So are some frivolous 50 metre penalties that are doled out.
One last whinge, I think the standard of teams now we have 2 added ones, is down, I have never seen so many hand passes to a team mate in dire straights before he gets the hand pass.
( watch Dustin Martin handed a hospital ball in the last quarter today!)
Also misdirected kicks inside fifty and turn overs galore. Like the Hawks and Brisbane yesterday some scrappy matches and so many ball ups , it is looking horrid AFL.
I'd like a count of ball ups during a game.
But do not count initial game ball up, or quarter starting ball ups, or after goal ball ups, just the trillions that are there all day long, from scrum/pack/wrestlemania! That is now Australian football, well AFL football.

 

[LordLucifer]

Remove the "deliberate out of bounds rule".

Remove the "deliberate rushed behind rule".

Reduce the 50m penalty to 25m.

Prevent players from playing on from a kick-in.

Prevent players from kicking-in before the goal umpire has waved the flags.

Remove the '"no third man up" rule.

Reduce the bench from 4 to 2.

Remove the "advantage" rule.


The game will evolve on its own without these silly rules and for the better too.

 

[HairyO]

4 players kicked the ball off the ground to space where it ended up rolling over the boundary line and none were "deliberately" out.

2 free kicks. 2 throw ins.

Wonderful consistency across the weekend.

 

[HairyO]

Remove the "deliberate out of bounds rule".

Remove the "deliberate rushed behind rule".

Reduce the 50m penalty to 25m.

Prevent players from playing on from a kick-in.

Prevent players from kicking-in before the goal umpire has waved the flags.

Remove the '"no third man up" rule.

Reduce the bench from 4 to 2.

Remove the "advantage" rule.


The game will evolve on its own without these silly rules and for the better too.

Go back to 2 field umpires and we are back in the 1980s.

 

[LordLucifer]

Go back to 2 field umpires and we are back in the 1980s.

I wouldn't be against that either.

 

[Elite Master]

The cheap shots have been out of the game for sometime now, how would having the rules as close to black and white as they were in the 80's and payed as they are written be a bad thing.

The ruling is fine the way it is when the umpires use common sense which they have been of recent times.

 

[Scroater]

Except when a player dives to stop the ball going past him and fists the ball over the boundary line with nobody within 5 metres of him and nobody within 15-20 metres of the ball going out and the umpire says "It's okay, It's in the marking contest." Happened in Hawks v Coll and Umpire number 10 committed that little beauty.

 

[D-N-R]

Except when a player dives to stop the ball going past him and fists the ball over the boundary line with nobody within 5 metres of him and nobody within 15-20 metres of the ball going out and the umpire says "It's okay, It's in the marking contest." Happened in Hawks v Coll and Umpire number 10 committed that little beauty.

The umpire was 100% correct, though.

 

[Scroater]

The umpire was 100% correct, though.

But he didn't pay it deliberate. It was deliberate every day of the week.


Did I see a Melbourne player get done for deliberate in the last quarter when he handballed it and it came of a North Melbourne arm? Had the TV turned down and just saw that North had the ball.

 

[D-N-R]

But he didn't pay it deliberate. It was deliberate every day of the week.


Did I see a Melbourne player get done for deliberate in the last quarter when he handballed it and it came of a North Melbourne arm? Had the TV turned down and just saw that North had the ball.

Putting the ball out from a marking contest is never paid deliberate. Ever. Whether there is one player in the 'contest' or two, the umpires allow players to spoil the ball directly over the line. The umpire was correct.

RE; the North game, the umpire thought the Melbourne player had handballed it directly over the line, when it was spoiled across by a North player. It shouldn't have been a free and the umpire or the boundary umpire should have noticed.

 

[falcons2]

Putting the ball out from a marking contest is never paid deliberate. Ever. Whether there is one player in the 'contest' or two, the umpires allow players to spoil the ball directly over the line. The umpire was correct.

You bring up an interesting point. What if a player was on their own, had the ball kicked to them and chose to punch it out? Could they be penalised? Or a miss kick goes to a defender, they are off balance so just punch it out. What then?

 

[D-N-R]

You bring up an interesting point. What if a player was on their own, had the ball kicked to them and chose to punch it out? Could they be penalised? Or a miss kick goes to a defender, they are off balance so just punch it out. What then?

I'm not sure why a player would punch out a ball rather than take a mark when the ball is kicked to him, but theoretically he could. A player who is receiving a ball from a team mate all alone is better off retaining possession than forcing a 50-50 throw in, so it would be unusual. Maybe in your second scenario when the boundary line is a better option than turning it over it might happen, and maybe has.

If the TV commentators and fans keep whinging about it, they will change the interpretation. Then we will end up with situations like the deliberate rushed behinds, where attacking players pull out of contests so the defender makes the mistake of putting it over the line whilst not under pressure, or thinking they are under pressure and going for the safe option and giving away a free.

What astounds me is that the Hawks player (Poppy?) was asking the umpire for a free, when he should know that it was a marking contest.

 

[rippersnipper]

The one against Melbourne in the last was a shocker. Whilst the ump may not have seen the deflection, the boundary umpire should have and secondly, there was a melbourne player a couple of meters down the line who I'm sure hibberd? was trying to handball to.

 

[MUYB]

The one against Melbourne in the last was a shocker. Whilst the ump may not have seen the deflection, the boundary umpire should have and secondly, there was a melbourne player a couple of meters down the line who I'm sure hibberd? was trying to handball to.

Honestly one of the worst I've seen. As you said, the boundary umpire should have been able to tell the blindsided field umpire that the handball was smothered.

 

[Big Wilbur]

Loving the more lenient adjudication on deliberate calls the last couple of weeks. Som e errors but more than acceptable overall.

So much for the AFL's declaration that they were happy with the interpretation prior to the last fortnight. The change has been noticeable...and welcome.

 

[warped79]

Essendon player just had a pot shot at goal from the centre with a big tail wind, ball just missed bouncing through for a point and went out - umpire paid deliberate. Commentator Campbell 'sniper' Brown is totally unbiased and thinks its a fair call.. what do you all think?