Opinion Non-Crows AFL 10

[kirky]

Had to laugh that the very first example they showed of what should now be holding the ball involved none other than Lachlan Sholl

But Sholl was paid as htb, admittedly it should have been paid sooner.

 

[kirky]

Finally a good decision and they didn’t just implement the change without warning, now watch us cop a shafting

Expect all non-Vic clubs get reamed this weekend because only non-Vic teams were in that example. Vic teams correctly dispose of the football.

 

[kirky]

The six teams with the bye this week will be cheering that they have an extra week of non-match training as well as analysing the umpiring during the games this week to prepare.

6 teams on a bye??

 

[Slime Roy]

Had to laugh that the very first example they showed of what should now be holding the ball involved none other than Lachlan Sholl

They

Had to laugh that the very first example they showed of what should now be holding the ball involved none other than Lachlan Sholl

Yeah, the examples they used on AFL360 last night looked more like a compilation of "The McHenry Rule"

 

[DJ75]

Neale doesn't have to dispose of it legally, he had to ATTEMPT to. Just holds the ball expecting a ball up. By the rule he should have tried to kick it as a minimum.

so drop the ball, swing a leg and it's ok? Even if you don't make contact?

 

[MarcusP2]

so drop the ball, swing a leg and it's ok? Even if you don't make contact?

If no prior, by the rule yes.

 

[DJ75]

Pinning one arm to prevent a handball but still allowing a kick, then either preventing the kick or forcing a drop/illegal disposal, is a textbook tackle and should be holding the ball every single time

IF they had prior opportunity.

 

[DJ75]

If no prior, by the rule yes.

Why on Earth have the AFL screwed up the rules so badly?

 

[Scorpus]

IF they had prior opportunity.

No. Having an arm free to drop the ball and kick is prior opportunity

 

[MarcusP2]

Why on Earth have the AFL screwed up the rules so badly?

The rule has been the same for decades. This is the 'genuine attempt' part of it.

 

[spenze]

I wonder if there will be a tightening of the interpretation of holding the ball rule at Kirkys swinger party Friday night at his mansion

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

They

Yeah, the examples they used on AFL360 last night looked more like a compilation of "The McHenry Rule"

Is the McHenry Rule the one that clarifies whether running >15m with the ball counts if you make a complete circle and end up back where you started?

 

[Faaarrk]

The rule doesn't say it has to be a safe handball to a teammates advantage.

That wasn’t what I was getting at. If you have the ball you try to dish it off to advantage and if you can’t then get rid of it. Having to immediately get rid of it is a bit silly. They need a couple of seconds to control the ball then dispose of it. The ball doesn’t always land in your hands perfectly.

 

[MarcusP2]

That wasn’t what I was getting at. If you have the ball you try to dish it off to advantage and if you can’t then get rid of it. Having to immediately get rid of it is a bit silly. They need a couple of seconds to control the ball then dispose of it. The ball doesn’t always land in your hands perfectly.

I think you'll find 'a couple of seconds' will fall within the bounds of 'reasonable'.

It never did if you have prior which calls for 'immediately'.

 

[Faaarrk]

You watched a handball drill these guys do. Very quick.

As I said, it puts the responsibility on the guy giving them the ball to look for a better option.


Maybe a bit more leniency if it was a loose ball pick up.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

No quicker than 30 years ago by a few guys. Now there’s more on the team that do it which may appear that way.
Players like Diesel, Voss, jarman etc. have always been lightning.
Yes the onus needs to be put back on the teammate putting them under that pressure.

 

[Carn The Texan]

Apparently Jay Clark, from The Hun, says that Dawson left Sydney because of the cost of living:

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/s...s/news-story/4adb550a6c4923202496313df9fb3911

Utter bullshit of course... but what else do you expect?

Ah yes, the same Swans and GWS languishing at the bottom of the ladder

 

[Faaarrk]

I think you'll find 'a couple of seconds' will fall within the bounds of 'reasonable'.

It never did if you have prior which calls for 'immediately'.

So someone gets the ball and is tackled immediately while being driven to the ground, off- balanced, has to somehow handball it or else be caught holding the ball? He will end up throwing it in the attempt. There has to be some time period allowed.
If they raise their arms to prevent them being pinned or try to evade immediately then fair enough that constitutes as prior.

 

[MarcusP2]

So someone gets the ball and is tackled immediately while being driven to the ground, off- balanced, has to somehow handball it or else be caught holding the ball? He will end up throwing it in the attempt. There has to be some time period allowed.
If they raise their arms to prevent them being pinned or try to evade immediately then fair enough that constitutes as prior.

If someone gets the ball, and is immediately tackled, he has to attempt to handball or kick it within a 'reasonable time'. If it falls out of his hand or he misses his kick, it's not HTB.

All the AFL is saying is 'reasonable time' is a couple of seconds, not 5-10.

 

[Vader]

If someone gets the ball, and is immediately tackled, he has to attempt to handball or kick it within a 'reasonable time'. If it falls out of his hand or he misses his kick, it's not HTB.

All the AFL is saying is 'reasonable time' is a couple of seconds, not 5-10.

If he misses the kick, then it's "Incorrect Disposal", and a free to the tackler.

 

[footy4ever]

OK Fine. Now bring back the hands in the back rule. Instead of sometimes paying a two handed shove in the back and letting others get away with exactly the same action, it becomes black and white. You used your ****ing hands or you didn't. You placed a hand on the back or you ****ing didn't.


Then...**** off the stand abomination.

 

[Faaarrk]

If someone gets the ball, and is immediately tackled, he has to attempt to handball or kick it within a 'reasonable time'. If it falls out of his hand or he misses his kick, it's not HTB.

All the AFL is saying is 'reasonable time' is a couple of seconds, not 5-10.

That’s fair. Certainly better and safer than what we have now.

 

[footy4ever]

Also if you're spun 360 then you should be pinged. I saw a double 360 go un-whistled on the weekend.

 

[jackster83]

My main greivance is the lack of consistency and how certain players are given preferential treatment.

Brownlow fancies like Butters, N.Daicos, Zac Merritt, Cripps, etc get umpired completely differently to everyone else. Dropping the ball? Nah, that's fine...play on.

It's the same with the MRO, so I'm guessing it's a directive from the Kremlin (AFL House).

 

[jenny61_99]

Still unconvinced with Essendon - am sure they will fold like a pack of cards, the question is when.

A % of 104 with an 8-2-1 record says it all.

Even Port who have played mostly bottom half teams I'm not convinced about.

 

[MarcusP2]

If he misses the kick, then it's "Incorrect Disposal", and a free to the tackler.

Are you Dermie? He was going on about something similar on the weekend.
Find that in the rules.