Football Related Random Thread

[Chief]

Continued in Part 2

Football Related Random Thread - PART 2

Introducing, The Random Thread: In an effort to keep threads from being derailed (unintentionally or otherwise), occasionally mods will move posts from other threads to this 'catch-all' thread when they can't find a more appropriate home for them. Feel free to continue the discussion but...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Dalions]

You could move laterally and backwards all you want, you just couldn't move towards the player over the mark.

Has it ever been used the way it is these days though.
Like the bloke manning the mark moving 5 or 6 metres inboard to stop that 45 kick and force them down the line.

 

[Section 5]

Great for the game my arse.

Player's have been moving on the mark since the inception of the game and attempting to put their opponent off and now in 2021, these dumb arses at the AFL and Steve Hocking come up with this hair-brained idea to now stop it so the team with the ball can play on quicker. What's next, a player on the mark has to sit down.

Maybe wait for a few more games before making up your mind on how this rule affects the game overall

I have only watched one game Lions v Suns. Only one camera so not ideal.
My take on one game be it a scratch match.
This rule appears to open up the game more.
Players from both sides did choose to go infield a little more than usual. Not necessarily the center but inside rather than down the boundary line.
Players have a little more latitude to look for a leading forward rather than drop ball 10 meters out from goal
Defenders may choose to go inside more. Many won't as they will play safe. But a Rich & Birchall type player will choose to do so more than usual
Marks or frees taken from the middle of the ground will open up more options for leading players. This is the area i see more scores coming from.

The media has solely taken up the negative by showing a possible mistake by a couple of umpires
The interpretation of a video from the media can get you thinking the way they want the narrative to go
As i have mentioned in other posts this video you posted is likely an umpire error (he will be spoken to) or maybe it was an abuse 50 meter penalty?.
The Daniher one doing the rounds i have also shown to be a correct call by the umpire. After watching the replay showing a different angle it is even more obvious that the umpire call was play on. The fact that no Suns player was within 30 meters either side of Daniher gave him the easy decision to move around in an arc kicking style

Too much media emphasis has been placed on "shooting for goal & the small amount of 50 meter penalties" during trial games

Finally how hard is it for a player to just stand the mark and put his arms up in the air if they wish to avoid a 50 meter penalty
The new rule was introduced to open up play not to impose heaps of 50 meter penalties.

It is early days on this rule and we will have a better idea during the community series and rounds 1-3
So far i like it.

 

[Dylan12]

You could move laterally and backwards all you want, you just couldn't move towards the player over the mark.

That Freo player moved away from the mark in the opposite direction and was penalised and that warrants 50m; c'mon that is just ridiculous and of course will increase scoring (which is dumbass Hocking's objective) when guys will have shots from the goal line.

 

[Dylan12]

Finally how hard is it for a player to just stand the mark and put his arms up in the air if they wish to avoid a 50 meter penalty
The new rule was introduced to open up play not to impose heaps of 50 meter penalties.

It is early days on this rule and we will have a better idea during the community series and rounds 1-3
So far i like it.

BS. An umpire has paid a 50m for a guy moving away from the player taking a shot that is almost uninterested in the guy taking the shot to what detriment of the guy taking the shot. So now guys can't try to distract the guy having a shot for a goal either because he has to be motionless. What's the point of having someone stand on the mark.

We're not playing Simon ****ing says with guys on the mark being completely still. What a joke and people are advocating for this shite.

 

[briztoon]

The only thing with football that has changed is VAR and that has been a debacle if you ask me.

That’s incorrect.

I used to follow the EPL closely in the 90’s, and there were always minor rule changes, both from FIFA and the EPL, every off season.

One of the biggest rule changes at the time was disallowing a back pass by foot to the goal keeper.

I grew up in the 80’s when players were allowed to pass the ball back to the keeper by foot.

The change to this rule was very contentious at the time.

There have been multiple changes to the off side rule as well, with a recent example being a player is now allowed off side if they don’t interfere with play.

 

[briztoon]

I'll reserve judgment on the new on the mark rule until I see it in action in the regular H&A season a few times, what I will say is that I think we tinker with the rules too much, I can not think of another sport where there is so much tinkering with the rules, it seems to happen every off season in the AFL.

The other sport that I have some interest in is soccer and they very rarely adjust the rules of the game.

The NBA.

The NBA has changed so many rules over the last 20 years to open the game up, and create more scoring.

In the 90’s the game became so defensive orientated because of the rules.

From the late 90’s the NBA began changing rules every offseason to open the game up, take away rules that benefited defenders and favour attacking play.

The game is so different today, compared to then. To the point that many of today’s players wouldn’t have been able to play in the 90’s.

Today, scouts look for a totally different skill sets in players than what they looked for in the 90’s.

 

[POBT]

I would say that highlighting one or two pieces of footage of decisions is not exactly great analysis. I could do the same with holding the ball, deliberate out of bounds and any number of other rules. Let's get a decent body of evidence first before we start throwing stones.

My viewing of the scratch matches is that the rule around manning the mark was barely noticeable most of the time and, when I did notice it, it was mostly because I realised the player had been able to move the ball quicker. There were obviously a few interpretations that cause some concern but they were hardly endemic across the games. And it is worth noting that the umpires are in their pre-season too.

My plea is for people to keep an open mind. The intent behind the rule changes is to make the game better for us as viewers and fans. As I said above, if you don't like the way the game has been played in recent years, you should be hoping for this to work and not bagging the very notion without any real evidence to support your criticisms.

 

[dlanod]

That Freo player moved away from the mark in the opposite direction and was penalised and that warrants 50m; c'mon that is just ridiculous and of course will increase scoring (which is dumbass Hocking's objective) when guys will have shots from the goal line.

The conversation between Dlions and myself was about how the rules used to be.

 

[Dylan12]

That’s incorrect.

I used to follow the EPL closely in the 90’s, and there were always minor rule changes, both from FIFA and the EPL, every off season.

One of the biggest rule changes at the time was disallowing a back pass by foot to the goal keeper. Players have always been able to back pass by foot to a GK, the GK just can't pick it up.

I grew up in the 80’s when players were allowed to pass the ball back to the keeper by foot.

The change to this rule was very contentious at the time.

There have been multiple changes to the off side rule as well, with a recent example being a player is now allowed off side if they don’t interfere with play. Or obstruct the GK

You've highlighted very minor things in Football, but AFL on the other hand is always an endless list of rule changes year after year, often to the detriment of the game, all because the AFL gets all upset that those big bad coaches keep finding ways to get around the AFL's rules. Talk about an inferiority complex, but the sooner Hocking is gone the better.

 

[Cubs2Lions]

 

[briztoon]

You've highlighted very minor things in Football, but AFL on the other hand is always an endless list of rule changes year after year, often to the detriment of the game, all because the AFL gets all upset that those big bad coaches keep finding ways to get around the AFL's rules. Talk about an inferiority complex, but the sooner Hocking is gone the better.

Minor!

The off side rule is probably the biggest rule in soccer, and the back pass by foot was pretty significant.

Really easy to back pass to keeper from 30 out by foot, and reset your defence and attack.

It was also a very easy bail out option when under pressure.

Removing that option changed the game significantly.

Either rule is easily comparable to the impact on the game that standing the mark might have.

Both are/were very major changes that impacted the game greatly.

 

[FLVanLandingham]

I can see the benefits, but the players just look so silly. Sprinting up to the mark and then just idly standing there. Only there to stop the low dart kicks and provide some minimal pressure on a play-on call. Seems better if the don't even man the mark, have players close by to pressure either side if they decide to play on. That of course would be stupid, but seeing the players be mannequins takes away from the athletic spectacle in some manner.

 

[M Malice]

I know they can't move laterally or backwards from the mark more than 1 meter..... but what about vertically.

Sign him up as a rookie.

 

[Section 5]

BS. An umpire has paid a 50m for a guy moving away from the player taking a shot that is almost uninterested in the guy taking the shot to what detriment of the guy taking the shot. So now guys can't try to distract the guy having a shot for a goal either because he has to be motionless. What's the point of having someone stand on the mark.

We're not playing Simon ****ing says with guys on the mark being completely still. What a joke and people are advocating for this sh*te.

Why are you so fixated on one short video clip that has no audio. The 50 may have been paid under the new rule, probably was.
But just because some guy/gal decided to make a big circle around a Freeo player does not make it so. People did the same with the Daniher goal but they were wrong in the end
I am not sure when the 10 meter lateral movement off the mark came into play (yes it is only 10 meters)
But as the rule stands from last year you could not move backwards from the mark.
The mark is where you are instructed to stand
I will try and do a screenshot of the old rule and the new rule so people can look at the difference.

 

[dlanod]

I can see the benefits, but the players just look so silly. Sprinting up to the mark and then just idly standing there. Only there to stop the low dart kicks and provide some minimal pressure on a play-on call. Seems better if the don't even man the mark, have players close by to pressure either side if they decide to play on. That of course would be stupid, but seeing the players be mannequins takes away from the athletic spectacle in some manner.

I'd lean towards the "don't man the mark, drop back and congest the space" tactic to be honest.

 

[Maroon Monsoon]

I'd lean towards the "don't man the mark, drop back and congest the space" tactic to be honest.

Youd need to be well drilled to stop the man with the ball running into space and dragging defenders with him. Might see teams trying it later in the season when games are well in hand?

 

[Dalions]

I'd lean towards the "don't man the mark, drop back and congest the space" tactic to be honest.

The problem that I see with that is that it’s not very often in today’s games that a player will take a mark in miles of space, there is usually someone right there with them and running at the mark so you can’t just disappear and the umps will just call stand before you have time to stop and then turn and run away from the mark.

 

[Lionheart182]

I'll reserve judgment on the new on the mark rule until I see it in action in the regular H&A season a few times, what I will say is that I think we tinker with the rules too much, I can not think of another sport where there is so much tinkering with the rules, it seems to happen every off season in the AFL.

The other sport that I have some interest in is soccer and they very rarely adjust the rules of the game.

NFL have had to adjust the meaning of what constitutes a catch over the past few seasons...with pretty big bearing on games!

 

[Lionheart182]

Maybe wait for a few more games before making up your mind on how this rule affects the game overall

I'd prefer we crack each others heads open and feast on the goo inside.

 

[Section 5]

20.1 STANDING THE MARK

......................................................................
Above is the old rule from 2020 taken from the AFL Umpires Association
20.1.1 (b) talks about the lateral movement. As you can see below it had been taken out for 2021
Nowhere does it say you can come from behind the mark. The AFL & Umpires have let that slide over the years so us plebs assume it was allowed

Under this old rule we often saw players from the kicking team stand very close and block the man on the mark when the kicker was called to play on
...........................


Below is the new AFL rule for 2021
Their is in fact 2 changes to the old rule
The deletion of lateral movement altogether
Plus something that has rarely been discussed
You will note the additional protected area behind the mark. This eliminates blocking as i mentioned above along with multiple men on the mark
It should also clarify some questions posted on other media about multiple players on mark when someone is kicking for a winning goal after the siren
As long as say 8 players position themselves more than 5 meters behind the man on the mark they will be okay
If they infringe into protected area it will be a 50 meter penalty.

The man on the mark should be taken literally.
It clearly states "stand on the mark or otherwise be directed by a field umpire"

People/media can go on all they like about how it was interrupted

Or we could move on to the HTB rule that would be fun

 

[Section 5]

I'd prefer we crack each others heads open and feast on the goo inside.

Why

 

[BuntonRules]

That Freo player moved away from the mark in the opposite direction and was penalised and that warrants 50m; c'mon that is just ridiculous and of course will increase scoring (which is dumbass Hocking's objective) when guys will have shots from the goal line.

I reckon the umpire decided it is too strict for use in a game - probably after they discussed it at training - so he paid it to the technical extreme to highlight this fact. Outcome - media frenzy and a reasonable interpretation forthcoming before the real season.

Might be blind, biased and on the take, these umps - but they are not stupid.

 

[Dalions]

 

[Dalions]

 

[Dalions]