more rules I don't understand....

[ptw]

can someone explain the following:

1. I understand the "deliberate out of bounds" rule. However, why is it not deliberate when a ruckman smacks the ball back out of play after a throw in ?

2. Why is there a set time period for kicking the ball back into play after a behind and not when kicking for goal ? When kicking in afetr a behind...when does the clock start ? If it starts when the ball is actually kicked into play then they are not actually wasting time...as opposed to a full forward kicking for goal where the clock keeps running.

?????

ptw

 

[Darky]

Agree about the rucks at throw ins.

 

[Carl]

Yeah the kicking for goal rule has always been a mystery with me.Pulling your socks up,adjusting your crutch,throwing grass in the air.If this isn't time wasting then what the hell is?
Also what is the differance between kicking and triping with your leg?Oh the differance is about a 4 week break.Bloody ridiculous.
Also why is it when you hit a bloke in the face with your fist you only get 1 week?Surely that would be one of the worst offences.
Also why do you get suspended for racial abuse?While you tell the ump where to go and it's a fine at most.But you can call him a white c--t and that is alright.
Well one day i might understand what the umps do one day,they just seem to frustrate the fans and have there heads up each others arses.

 

[hilly]

ptw,

the umpire has to be CERTAIN that the sole intention of the ruckman is to knock the ball out of bounds. whilst it may seem to be the sole intention from time to time, it is something that has never been penalised. i think the rule should remain as it is today

time-on is called when a played is lining up for goal. after a behind the clock starts once the ball has touched the boot of the player kicking in.

i hope that helps

 

[TheGlove]

I don't think any of us will understand the Umpires. They have enough trouble understanding themselves. Even they don't know what they are going to call and when. They just blow their little whistle and hope for the best.

TheGlove

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Yeah, you are not allowed to take too long to kick the ball in after a behind, but you can't be too quick either. It is trivial.

I think in the interest of free flowing football, there shouls be a limit to how many backward passes you can make in a phase of play. This would avoid all the keepings-off plays that can ruin the ending of a match.

 

[hilly]

carl,

kicking is, in most cases, far more serious than tripping

i agree that striking to the face should incur a greater penalty

any abuse of the umpire should warrant a minor on-field penalty. i think calling an umpire a white c**t would be a bit more serious

 

[Mudholian]

Good question but you have to look at the basic priciple of the game - those that are first to the ball get the advantage. So if the ruckman wins the contest, good on him, if a forward takes a mark, he earns the kick. The full back on the other hand is just returning the ball into play after conceding a score.
MH

 

[hilly]

good point mudholian

 

[ptw]

I agree mudholian...but the same principle does not apply in general play. If I am in the back pocket and I win the contest to the ball, pick it up and hand ball it straight out of bounds then I am penalised. If a ruckman wins the contest and smacks it straight out of bounds he is generally not.

I am not sure but I do not see how time on can be called when a player is kicking for goal...as at least a few times a year the siron sounds whilst the player is lining up. Sometimes even as he is running in. hmmmmmm.


I like your idea ODN....the game is all about attacking...moving forward...might lead to more flooding of the backline though.

ptw