Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Paul Curtis

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

ferball said:
It happens 20 times a game!!!

The AFL put out a tweet celebrating another playing doing it at the very time they were suspending Curtis.
Click to expand...
I normally notice a couple a game that are very obvious & dangerous ‘in the back’ frees not paid.
The umps in sa are a lot stricter on it. It’s one of the basic tenants of football, you are in front making the play so deserve some level of protection. but the vic umps seem to have forgotten about the rule. To the point where I think it’s dangerous.
 
Lots of talk about how clubs and players will need to teach new/amended tackling techniques and I can understand that. I also think there is a job for the AFL to do here around holding the ball. It feels like recent changes to the rule encourage players to take on the tackle and resist it for longer.

For example - the league is asking players to release an arm and that’s okay. But they are also allowing players to attempt to dispose of the ball (as opposed to legitimately disposing of it) and this then avoids a holding the ball call. If you are going to ask players to release an arm (or only pin one when they tackle) then you need to change the way a good tackle is recognised by penalising a one-handed drop that doesn’t connect with a kick as holding the ball (allowing for prior opportunity). Otherwise we are asking tacklers to perform a less ideal action while at the same time easing requirements on the player being tackled.

Regards

S. Pete
 
Stumpy Pete said:
penalising a one-handed drop that doesn’t connect with a kick as holding the ball (allowing for prior opportunity)
Click to expand...
This is already penalised as holding the ball if the player has prior opporunity. If a player has prior opportunity they need to legally dispose of the ball immediately.

Its only when they have no prior opportunity that they just have to make an attempt.
 
Stumpy Pete said:
Lots of talk about how clubs and players will need to teach new/amended tackling techniques and I can understand that. I also think there is a job for the AFL to do here around holding the ball. It feels like recent changes to the rule encourage players to take on the tackle and resist it for longer.

For example - the league is asking players to release an arm and that’s okay. But they are also allowing players to attempt to dispose of the ball (as opposed to legitimately disposing of it) and this then avoids a holding the ball call. If you are going to ask players to release an arm (or only pin one when they tackle) then you need to change the way a good tackle is recognised by penalising a one-handed drop that doesn’t connect with a kick as holding the ball (allowing for prior opportunity). Otherwise we are asking tacklers to perform a less ideal action while at the same time easing requirements on the player being tackled.

Regards

S. Pete
Click to expand...
No
*******
Just the basics that juniors get taught at under 9s
shit for brains

So many chicken littles on here
Oh I don’t understand the rules and act like a brain dead shite, a chicken little running around telling others the sky will fall in because?????
The umpires enforce the rules
You dumbass
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

sexyhunk said:
not sure if anyone brought it up, what happen one day someone copped a falcon from a torp and gets concussion? do they then ban the player who kicked it cause the other player got concussed and then also ban the torp.
Click to expand...
No
No one has mentioned this ridiculous hypothetical scenario because it is completely stupid & obviously comes from a seriously deluded brain
You are suggesting players should avoid kicking torps???
Because of concussions????
You have shit for brains
 
Duckimus Prime said:
This is already penalised as holding the ball if the player has prior opporunity. If a player has prior opportunity they need to legally dispose of the ball immediately.

Its only when they have no prior opportunity that they just have to make an attempt.
Click to expand...
Hilarious that you think you know the htb rules... I don't know anyone who does atm.
 
archereleven said:
Hilarious that you think you know the htb rules... I don't know anyone who does atm.
Click to expand...
To be fair to Duckimus Prime he is right in terms of what the rules say but I would support the sentiment of your post that the varying interpretation and application of the HTB rules makes it difficult to tell.

For what it is worth I thought they were much more consistent and in keeping with the HTB rules last night.

Regards

S. Pete
 
Stumpy Pete said:
To be fair to Duckimus Prime he is right in terms of what the rules say but I would support the sentiment of your post that the varying interpretation and application of the HTB rules makes it difficult to tell.

For what it is worth I thought they were much more consistent and in keeping with the HTB rules last night.

Regards

S. Pete
Click to expand...
Did you see the nth v ess game?

I especially liked the Konstanty tackle i50 where the essendon player got slung, the ball flew out of his hands and Konstanty was pinged for 'didn't have possession'

The game is ****ed and interpretation and 'intent' is what is killing it.
 
chickenonachain said:
Maybe with a few coaches and a lot of media calling the suspension rediculous the numbskulls running the game might, I repeat might,do something about it
Click to expand...
Only with Naicos, Cripps, Danger et al will the rules be hurriedly changed.

I just hope it Butters, to see if the Poorta w***ers in here are still singing the same tune 🎵🎵🎵
 
Who gets the three weeks?

Clark or Schultz for the self inflicted Sid?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Paul Curtis

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top