Hitting the post

[napsyd]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hitting the post

Originally posted by hotpie


It would require luck, not skill. The defenders are invariably more likely to be out of position (defending the goal line, not crumbing the rebound 5 meters out) so the poor kick for goal will often be rewarded with seven points.

Stupid, stupid idea.

The defensive tactic would require a change in the same way as the offensive tactic.

I don't agree with you that it is all luck. A goal that dribbles through, bouncing this way and that, is just as lucky.

 

[hotpie]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hitting the post

Originally posted by Bob_vic


Not after the siren, there isn't. That's why having play on is unworkable.

Imagine, siren goes, scores are level, the ball is kicked, ball his post, rebounds back into play, no score. The player may as well have aimed wider for a definite behind, instead of going for goal!

Bob

Spot on.

 

[Mr Q]

Originally posted by markstaners

Well mate i am a goal umpire and you cant just stand against the post looking up to see what side most of the ball goes on. This rule would add to much confusion and is just stupid, nice intent but it just isn't plausable, it would lead to more decisions being wrong etc, i guarntee you consistancy cant be guarnted, thus the rule cant possible be adapted.

So how do you decide if its a goal or a behind if its close to the posts now? Use the same initiative.

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by Mr Q


So how do you decide if its a goal or a behind if its close to the posts now? Use the same initiative.

Its hard enough for them to judge whether the ball would hit the post, let alone judge which way it would deflect. Just because they wear white jackets doesn't make them physics professors.

 

[Mr Q]

Originally posted by hotpie


Its hard enough for them to judge whether the ball would hit the post, let alone judge which way it would deflect. Just because they wear white jackets doesn't make them physics professors.

If you actually read what I said, then you would understand that I said in the case of the ball going over the top of the goalposts, then you could still call a behind. In case you hadn't noticed, this thread is about hitting the post not sailing 10m over it.

 

[Philj]

This is getting good - what happens if the ball hits the goal post and pinballs against players as it falls to teh ground. How many points are awarded? Who does teh counting? Even better get a loose player in teh square and keep kicking it into the post until the opposition run to you.


Does this go on all summer?

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by Mr Q


If you actually read what I said, then you would understand that I said in the case of the ball going over the top of the goalposts, then you could still call a behind. In case you hadn't noticed, this thread is about hitting the post not sailing 10m over it.

He's not here to read. He's here to insult.

 

[markstaners]

Originally posted by Mr Q


So how do you decide if its a goal or a behind if its close to the posts now? Use the same initiative.

Sort of hard to explain but all of the ball must be on the inner side for a goal, if any part of the ball goes over the post it's a point, you have to get under the flight off the ball to judge that means standing a few metres behind the line. hope that ans your question.



another point i want to make say a defender does the team thing in trying to bash the ball past for a touch the ball hits the post and the opposition get it. Then imagine if it was in a GF and that ended up winning the match the rule is fine as it is why in Gods name does it need to be changed.

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by napsyd


He's not here to read. He's here to insult.

I insulted you personally once. Get over it.

I have also mocked the idea several times but also provided plenty of reasons why it won't work, won't add anything to the game, and isn't neccessary.

 

[Mr Q]

Originally posted by markstaners
Sort of hard to explain but all of the ball must be on the inner side for a goal, if any part of the ball goes over the post it's a point, you have to get under the flight off the ball to judge that means standing a few metres behind the line. hope that ans your question.

Thanks. Understand perfectly. I would say if the ball doesn't hit the post itself, pay the score/OOB exactly as it is done now.

Originally posted by markstaners
another point i want to make say a defender does the team thing in trying to bash the ball past for a touch the ball hits the post and the opposition get it. Then imagine if it was in a GF and that ended up winning the match the rule is fine as it is why in Gods name does it need to be changed.

It doesn't need to be changed, but it is an interesting discussion idea. I think it would be good for the game. The GF case you bring up is IMO not important. Defenders would just need to be aware of the post when attempting to punch the ball through. Remember, the rule affects both sides the same.

(At this point I must admit that I have been advocating this change to the rules for years)

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by markstaners


another point i want to make say a defender does the team thing in trying to bash the ball past for a touch the ball hits the post and the opposition get it. Then imagine if it was in a GF and that ended up winning the match the rule is fine as it is why in Gods name does it need to be changed.

Agreed.

Rules are designed generally so that the player doing the right thing is not unfairly punished. A defender should not be in a catch 22 situation simply because of a dumb rule.

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by napsyd
I'm of the opinion that our game would be a little more exciting if when the ball hits the goal posts and is deflected back into play it is considered play on.

Just wondering what others thing of that?

Then imagine if it was in a GF and that ended up winning the match the rule is fine as it is why in Gods name does it need to be changed.

Does it sound like anyone was advocating massive change, in Gods or anyone elses name?

 

[hotpie]

Yes.

 

[napsyd]

 

[napsyd]

Hmmm. I thought those post-ers in the International Rules game really added something, didn't you hotpie?

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by napsyd
Hmmm. I thought those post-ers in the International Rules game really added something, didn't you hotpie?

Antipated response from hotpie:

No.

Optional additional comment:

You idiot.