- Jul 26, 2020
- 13,953
- 38,429
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Just employ some umpires with a bit of common sense.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Rules Insufficient intent is out of control
- Thread starter Drummond
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Just pay like sanfl - if someone kicks or handballs without it being touched, it's a free to opposition.
Spoiled, smothered, shepherded etc over the line is a throw in.
But my pet hate is when someone is tackled or steps over the line - If they had prior, then it should always be HTB - not a throw in
Spoiled, smothered, shepherded etc over the line is a throw in.
But my pet hate is when someone is tackled or steps over the line - If they had prior, then it should always be HTB - not a throw in
- Jul 13, 2015
- 41,846
- 48,500
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
They are slowly heading in this direction. Unless you go out of your way to keep the ball in they are calling it insufficient intent.
The Nostradamus
Flagroos
- Nov 14, 2010
- 52,660
- 63,969
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
The one paid against us today where it was partially smothered was comical
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Feb 21, 2006
- 22,263
- 21,843
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Turtles NYJets Celtics Fake Sports
It was clearly rule of the week this week, some bizarre ones paid in Syd/Carl and Coll/Adel with players kicking into forward 50 which never get paid.
I think they should bring in last touch rule for between the 50s and only deliberate (not insufficient intent) inside the 50s. Last touch should be from kick only as otherwise too hard to officiate (eg coming off a pack).
I think they should bring in last touch rule for between the 50s and only deliberate (not insufficient intent) inside the 50s. Last touch should be from kick only as otherwise too hard to officiate (eg coming off a pack).
- Feb 21, 2006
- 22,263
- 21,843
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Turtles NYJets Celtics Fake Sports
Players these days actively looking for the line but it's not deliberate. It's actually pretty farcical the way it's evolved but what do you expect from the geniuses at the AFL
- Jun 12, 2018
- 5,863
- 11,098
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Yep doesn’t matter whether it’s last touch or current rules when umpires are incompetent.
I don't have an issue with the AFL wanting to players to make a sufficient attempt to keep the ball alive, rather than only pinging them for deliberately taking the ball out of play.
I'm not ideologically opposed to that.
The problem is that the current rule doesn't do that!!even though it's called 'Insufficient Intent', that is not what is being policed.
They're constantly letting players intentionally walk the ball over boundary. Not insufficient intent to keep it in - literal, genuine deliberate acts of taking the ball out of play.
Yet incidental and accidental ones get pinged.
It's just idiotic.
No they're not.
It happens half a dozen times very game. Guys intentionally take the ball over the line, and don't get penalised.
It makes sense.
Weirdly, ironically, they pinged Wanganeen-Milera for it yesterday - but he was actually trying to keep the ball alive! The first time I've ever seen them ping someone for it - and he was genuinely trying to keep the ball in!
Never change AFL.
The Nostradamus
Flagroos
- Nov 14, 2010
- 52,660
- 63,969
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
It will get to the point of just being last touch out of bounds like aflw so there is no grey area
Rabish Binney
Left out overnight
100% this.
Rabish Binney
Left out overnight
And this is where the Umpires need to use common sense. Everybody could see what W-M was trying to do.
They are pinging players just becuase they can.
Obviously there's a lot of personal preference in this, but I don't like the idea of any rule which discourages players taking possession.
Apart from from some absolute howlers (there may have been three in the Sydney-Carlton game) generally insufficient intent is better than the old deliberate. But both have the problem of trying to guess a player's intention and therefore have issues.
Last control (which includes tapping the ball as opposed to fumbling) might work. Still an annoying judgment call.
But the main thing is if you had prior opportunity and get tackled over the line, that should be holding the ball.
I'm all for rewarding the playmaker and giving time on holding the ball to properly dispose of it. But once you decide not to play the ball, have had a chance to use it, and either walk or allow your self to be taken over the line you're no longer making the play.
- Dec 22, 2006
- 10,503
- 13,011
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Tottenham Hotspur
I dont understand why they are so protective of the goal line, the same principals to insufficient attempt should be applied to rushed behinds.
This is how the AFL introduce new rules, they slowly get the sheep tuned to what they want to bring in and then it's here to stay.
Last touch will be in soon and another fabric of our game will be gone.
If only the AFL didn't own the media the game would of stood a chance, but as the media and the AFL are one in the same the AFL have no opposition to anything and can do what they want with the game. as they have for the last 20 years.
The media and the fans were once on the same team, no administrator could touch the game once, now the rules are just toys for the suits at head office.
Last touch will be in soon and another fabric of our game will be gone.
If only the AFL didn't own the media the game would of stood a chance, but as the media and the AFL are one in the same the AFL have no opposition to anything and can do what they want with the game. as they have for the last 20 years.
The media and the fans were once on the same team, no administrator could touch the game once, now the rules are just toys for the suits at head office.
The odd thing was that a quarter or so later, a West Coast player DID actually intentionally walk the ball over the line in the same spot where W-M was pinged - and the umpire let it go.
Was very strange.
None of these things bothered a fan for over 100 years. Why is it bothering anyone if there is a boundary throw in?
The Feeder Club
Club Legend
- Sep 8, 2023
- 2,558
- 6,944
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
If, as seems possible, it does go to a last touch rule, what are people's thoughts on bringing the ball back into play by handball only? Like soccer throw in. The key would have to be allowing it back in immediately, not after a 30 second chinwag between field and boundary umpires setting the mark.
It would mitigate the harshness of losing possession for the textbook defensive punch out of bounds. But it might incentivise kicking to the boundary from your D50 if you know it can only be brought back in by hand.
As a fan I think a defensive player should be able to kick the ball 50m down the line to get the ball out of the danger area with the hope it goes across the line for a throw in. This si the AFL basically saying defence is not allowed.
I hate the rule.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
The Feeder Club
Club Legend
- Sep 8, 2023
- 2,558
- 6,944
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Sure but if the rule is changed to take the subjectivity out of it, would you prefer that the opposition can only handball it back in, if it does go out of play?
The biggest current problem is the rule cannot be umpired. A last touch rule can be umpired.
Time wasting DID bother fans. That's why Out On The Full was introduced.
Then teams worked out that you could still waste time without kicking it out on the full.
This DID bother fans. That's why the Deliberate rule was introduced.
Whether fans were bothered enough about a guy kicking 50m along the boundary and it incidentally going out of bounds to warrant the stupid 'Insufficient Intent' rule - I'm not so sure.
Seems another case of a solution without a problem.
Last edited:
Yes a handball would be better than a kick but that would never happen.
If time wasting is an issue then stop the clock when someone is shooting at goal, biggest time waste in the game giving 30 seconds of time waste to have a shot.
The deliberate rule was fine, this rule is not.
I think we're in agreement on this topic.
Yup exactly. Either have it the old way, or a last touch rule, both are fine.
It's this current way, which requires literal mind reading, that is the problem. Worst rule in the competition.
