Remove this Banner Ad

Moved Thread Incorrect Disposal Interpretation

Is the adjudication of tackle related free kicks too lenient in favour of the ball carrier?

  • Yes

    Votes: 61 88.4%

  • No

    Votes: 8 11.6%
  • Total voters
    69

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

L

lordbob

All Australian
Veteran
Aug 21, 2009
717
933
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Is the current holding the ball/incorrect disposal interpretation in the AFL too lenient in favour of the ball carrier?

As spoken about in Al Clarksons post match interview, he pointed out that certain areas of the game are over adjudicated eg marking contests / ruck contests with fairly minor things resulting in free kicks, however when one is being tackled they, the ball carrier is given a lot of leeway both with time allowed (is the time to do a 720 degree spin too much time?) , method of actual disposal after being tackled and time allowed before prior opportunity is has occurred.

Clarko's Post Game Presser

Thoughts?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

lordbob said:
Is the current holding the ball/incorrect disposal interpretation in the AFL too lenient in favour of the ball carrier?

As spoken about in Al Clarksons post match interview, he pointed out that certain areas of the game are over adjudicated eg marking contests / ruck contests with fairly minor things resulting in free kicks, however when one is being tackled they, the ball carrier is given a lot of leeway both with time allowed (is the time to do a 720 degree spin too much time?) , method of actual disposal after being tackled and time allowed before prior opportunity is has occurred.

Clarko's Post Game Presser

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Been like that for years, not sure whatever happened to dropping the ball. Players can grab the ball, run and get tackled perfectly and it’s play on, yet a player gets tackled on the ground, has another 2 players jump on top of him and it’s holding the ball. It’s terrible but I don’t blame the umpires it’s the rules they are adjudicating to.
 
If they tightened up the interpretation, the likely result would be players too scared to take possession of the ball in close. Which would lead to more scrums (and kicking the ball off the ground out of packs, which we're already seeing a lot of this season; reckon I've seen more 'kicking in danger' calls this year than any other).

The rule as it stands rewards the player going for the ball and trying to create the play by clearing it from congestion by largely giving him the benefit of the doubt. Most rules favour the bloke in front/ with the ball/ making the play.

If they bring in a 'spin the player and its ball' rule, then you'll see an increase in dangerous tackles as well. With players naturally already looking to pin arms in tackles, if there is then incentive to also sling the guy 360, a lot of blokes are gonna get hurt bad.

If they were going to tidy it up at all, a rule where if the ball is dislodged in the tackle, its HTB. As it stands at the moment (officially) if the ball is knocked clear in the tackle, its not HTB (as there was no 'incorrect disposal'). This rule is not applied consistently however, with some being paid and some not (due to the difficulty in adjudicating it).

I could get with a new interpretation of 'If the ball gets knocked out in a tackle, it's Holding the Ball, even though there was no incorrect disposal of the ball by the ball carrier.'
 
Yes yes yes and yesssssss!

Start rewarding the tackle for incorrect disposal, let players be more physical and stop paying tiggy touch wood frees in marking contest and rucks.

I’m sick and tired of screaming against 50/50 decisions that result in shots on goal in tight games, while at the same time screaming against play on calls when players quite literally drop or throw the ball in a tackle, make incorrect disposal a thing again.
 
Get tackled, throw the ball out and it's fine these days. Premierships have been won recently using such tactics. It's atrocious.

How often does a bloke get tackled, drop the ball cold and the umps yell "play on he tried", then the next player grabs it, tackled again and just throws it forward, "no prior".

Two minutes later there's a stacks on with fifteen blokes and the poor guy at the bottom gets pinned for not getting the ball out.
 
Scotland said:
Current interpretation is shocking. Players have been dropping the ball in tackles for about 5 years and getting away with it.
Click to expand...
It a problem entirely of the AFL’s making. Incorrect disposal is officiated differently to every other level of football because they are so desperate to manipulate the speed of the game.

No doubt we will hear a heap of whacky solutions this week but the most simple would be to umpire in a common sense manner. Which is the same way that incorrect disposal is umpired from under 12’s up.
 
I've also noticed a lot of free kicks paid lately for lingering tackles. These free kicks generally come about because the player with possession just drops the ball and then flails his arms around.

Peter Matera used to do this 25 years ago but was clever enough to paddle the ball in front of him and not actually take possession. Now you just pick it up, drop it, then claim a free.
 
It Just Is said:
It a problem entirely of the AFL’s making. Incorrect disposal is officiated differently to every other level of football because they are so desperate to manipulate the speed of the game.

No doubt we will hear a heap of whacky solutions this week but the most simple would be to umpire in a common sense manner. Which is the same way that incorrect disposal is umpired from under 12’s up.
Click to expand...

The pendulum will swing and we'll have another period of holding the ball being paid 20 times a game.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Malifice said:
If they tightened up the interpretation, the likely result would be players too scared to take possession of the ball in close. Which would lead to more scrums (and kicking the ball off the ground out of packs, which we're already seeing a lot of this season; reckon I've seen more 'kicking in danger' calls this year than any other).

The rule as it stands rewards the player going for the ball and trying to create the play by clearing it from congestion by largely giving him the benefit of the doubt. Most rules favour the bloke in front/ with the ball/ making the play.

If they bring in a 'spin the player and its ball' rule, then you'll see an increase in dangerous tackles as well. With players naturally already looking to pin arms in tackles, if there is then incentive to also sling the guy 360, a lot of blokes are gonna get hurt bad.

If they were going to tidy it up at all, a rule where if the ball is dislodged in the tackle, its HTB. As it stands at the moment (officially) if the ball is knocked clear in the tackle, its not HTB (as there was no 'incorrect disposal'). This rule is not applied consistently however, with some being paid and some not (due to the difficulty in adjudicating it).

I could get with a new interpretation of 'If the ball gets knocked out in a tackle, it's Holding the Ball, even though there was no incorrect disposal of the ball by the ball carrier.'
Click to expand...


Your logic is the reason its the way it is and it is surely been proven wrong by now.

The player "making the play" should not get caught with the ball.

I agree with Clarko. Just pay holding the ball whenever a player has had long enough to immediately hand ball it.

The current interpretation leads to way too many other wise "illegal" disposals and increases congestion.

I would also have a 2 or 3 second count, once you are tackled to get rid of it or break the tackle....

...also, if you dive on the ball, blow the whistle straight away rather than let a rugby ruck form
 
NoobPie said:
The player "making the play" should not get caught with the ball.
Click to expand...

So... literally every inside midfielder in the AFL becomes obsolete overnight?

Blokes like Cripps are regularly standing up in congestion, holding the ball, with one or two blokes hanging off them. If you implement a rule whereby if you're grabbed with the ball (no need for incorrect disposal)its HTB, taggers are going to have a field day (wrap up the play maker the instant he gets the ball, and its your kick unless he gets rid of it), and the game will devolve into a game of soccer, where players will be too scared to take possession in congestion lest they get done for HTB.
 
NoobPie said:
...also, if you dive on the ball, blow the whistle straight away rather than let a rugby ruck form
Click to expand...
And throw the ball up straight away as well so more players don't get drawn in to the stoppage

Also when an umpire calls for a ball up probably half the time the player that has the ball the tackler is either lying on back or has an arm around his neck. Pay free kicks for illegal tackles as well
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Great8 said:
If it’s not a legitimate hand ball or kick pay the free, pretty simple
Click to expand...

Perfect point but they seem to not know what a legitimate handball is. I am sure the old days the rules meant the hand holding the ball was not to move when handballing. This stopped those ridiculous over the head throws that the punching hand gets no where near.

Time to bring that back.
 
Malifice said:
So... literally every inside midfielder in the AFL becomes obsolete overnight?

Blokes like Cripps are regularly standing up in congestion, holding the ball, with one or two blokes hanging off them. If you implement a rule whereby if you're grabbed with the ball (no need for incorrect disposal)its HTB, taggers are going to have a field day (wrap up the play maker the instant he gets the ball, and its your kick unless he gets rid of it), and the game will devolve into a game of soccer, where players will be too scared to take possession in congestion lest they get done for HTB.
Click to expand...

No. That's not what would happen at all.
 
Malifice said:
So... literally every inside midfielder in the AFL becomes obsolete overnight?

Blokes like Cripps are regularly standing up in congestion, holding the ball, with one or two blokes hanging off them. If you implement a rule whereby if you're grabbed with the ball (no need for incorrect disposal)its HTB, taggers are going to have a field day (wrap up the play maker the instant he gets the ball, and its your kick unless he gets rid of it), and the game will devolve into a game of soccer, where players will be too scared to take possession in congestion lest they get done for HTB.
Click to expand...
There is still prior opportunity and stoppages?
 
Incorrect disposal is one of my pet peeves with the rules, it's gone completely out the window and you can get away with quite a bit.

Richmond became absolute pros at just dropping the ball when tackled and not giving away a free, it worked really well with their swarming pressure gameplan to. I remember getting so pissed off during a game against them when they got away with it heaps.

Not trying to have a dig at the tigers, fair play given the current rules and it's not only them that gets away with it (they just became really good at it imo). I just hate the current interpretation.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Moved Thread Incorrect Disposal Interpretation


Write your reply...

Similar threads

kreuze_missile
"If you make an attempt to dispose of the ball when tackled, even if it's an incorrect attempt, it's play on"
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
gbatman
gbatman

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top