Noticed this in the Port vs Richmond game last night, where two Port players in a row feigned that they would be going for a shot at goal (thus eating up the full 30 seconds each) before passing it off at the last moment. This was with about 3 minutes left to go, so these actions essentially killed off any possibility of Richmond winning the game. I'm not blaming the players here - in fact, it was a clever way of bending the rules to their advantage - but surely there should be something done about players just eating up 30 seconds from the clock when they have no intention of going for goal. I mean Ben Brown just did the same thing just then (going on one of his ridiculous 70 metre run-ups before dinking a pass into the pocket) when the Kangaroos were 4 goals down in the third quarter. I'd really love to see time on called every time a player goes back to take a kick at goal (probably 3-4 minutes of every quarter are wasted just watching a player twirling the ball in his hands) but I understand that won't happen, so could we maybe force players who take the 30 second to actually have a shot at goal? Or does it not matter so much? Does anything in this world actually matter?
Players Exploiting the 30 Second Clock to Waste Time
- Thread starter JP2
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Before I talk about it - all power to the teams who do it. You do the work to get yourself in front in the last minute and have the ball in your forward line, you have every right to do what the rules allow you to do.
I don't think its a good thing for the game though. It means the last 2min of an otherwise absorbing contest can turn to garbage. At least with chipping around the midfield there's still a bit happening - you can only hold it for a few seconds before being moved on.
I'd like to see the shot clock applied to the team rather than the player. If a player marks it and indicates they are having a shot, they get their 30sec, but if they take 15sec and pass it the next bloke only has 15sec. Once the time gets below 5-10sec, any further marks are treated like regular marks around the ground.
That would also stop the farce that is umpires deciding whether a shot is realistic or not.
I don't think its a good thing for the game though. It means the last 2min of an otherwise absorbing contest can turn to garbage. At least with chipping around the midfield there's still a bit happening - you can only hold it for a few seconds before being moved on.
I'd like to see the shot clock applied to the team rather than the player. If a player marks it and indicates they are having a shot, they get their 30sec, but if they take 15sec and pass it the next bloke only has 15sec. Once the time gets below 5-10sec, any further marks are treated like regular marks around the ground.
That would also stop the farce that is umpires deciding whether a shot is realistic or not.
quotemokc
Brownlow Medallist
I made a thread a few weeks ago saying a similar thing where if you take tons of time and don't actually take a shot you should be penalised.
Of course I was howled down as it would be yet another rule change.
Of course I was howled down as it would be yet another rule change.
I was at the game last night, neitherplayer tried try to hide the fact that they were going to milk the clock, it was interesting to watch. How Motlop was able to pass to an unmarked man after the clock elapsed and he had to play on is beyond me.
Maybe it puts a rocket up the coach whose team is down by 2 goals with 3 or 4 minutes to go to switch to man on man all over the ground earlier then they seem to be doing and open the game for frenzied action at the death.
Maybe it puts a rocket up the coach whose team is down by 2 goals with 3 or 4 minutes to go to switch to man on man all over the ground earlier then they seem to be doing and open the game for frenzied action at the death.
- Oct 9, 2014
- 12,116
- 21,278
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Man up if you don't want to let them do this
Bluelegs
Celebrating what we're good at
AFL never should have implemented the clock. Was never an issue beforehand.
Would just stop the clock until the ball hits the player’s boot
In the last 5 minutes they should stop the clock for everything..
Ochre
Stop the Steal!
If Richmond don't want them wasting the time don't let them get a mark/free in scoring range.
Just an idea.
Just an idea.
Its a smart tactic. I dont think its become a huge issue, but it has the potential to be exploited one day. 2 minutes to go, if you can do a couple of short kicks around the 50, you can ice the game.
- Jul 15, 2014
- 21,834
- 42,046
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Chelsea, LA Lakers, Western United
It doesn't really bother me to be honest. They were given that time for a reason so if a player wants to use the full clock for strategic purposes then so be it.
- May 1, 2002
- 11,194
- 17,846
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Most players aren’t wasting time. On rare occasions you might see it but not often.
Mostly players are trying to catch their breath to kick the ball properly. They are so damned exhausted from running the complete field in one passage of play, they have little energy to kick at goal. Hence the bigger inaccuracy currently seen.
Mostly players are trying to catch their breath to kick the ball properly. They are so damned exhausted from running the complete field in one passage of play, they have little energy to kick at goal. Hence the bigger inaccuracy currently seen.
- Sep 12, 2013
- 5,219
- 5,356
- AFL Club
- Sydney
It was implemented because players were taking close to a minute in some cases.
- Apr 30, 2015
- 13,618
- 24,444
- AFL Club
- West Coast
No issue here. Milk the clock if the rules allow. That's the benefit of leading late in the game.
If the player elects to take a shot and the umpire signals for 30 seconds, he must make a legitimate attempt to score. Fixed. Players have enough time when marking or paid the free to decide whether they want to pass off, without going back and lining up then looking for a give.
- Apr 30, 2015
- 13,618
- 24,444
- AFL Club
- West Coast
But you shouldn't prevent a player from laying it off if he suddenly sees a better option.
No? I'd argue a player has enough time to make that call between winning the ball and indicating for a shot.
You can't have your cake and eat it too; either players continue to abuse the shot clock (if that's a huge issue for you), or you remove their right to pass off when taking the 30s. Why do players even have to indicate for a 30s set shot when they can do whatever they want with it regardless? Redundant system.
- Nov 6, 2011
- 3,365
- 9,021
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I don’t disagree that it’s a bad look, but penalising it would be far too grey to police.
For instance if a player takes a mark just on fifty, uses his thirty seconds, and then kicks it to the top of the goal square and is penalised, he has every right to claim it was a shot at goal that just dropped short and the umpire has no leg to stand on if he tries to dispute that.
There’s also the factor that player should be absolutely entitled to use a better option if it suddenly becomes available. If a player was lining up from the boundary and has almost used his thirty seconds when a clear option in the corridor presents itself then it would be almost criminal to disallow him from using it.
As I said, far too difficult to police.
If the kick is to the top of the square, at least that's a contest and should be deemed legitimate. The ball could well ricochet off and there's your score.
Players are entitled to use their standard mark time to find an option and dispose of the ball. If you choose to go back, you're taking a shot. All it is is sneaky play, akin to stealing bases in baseball.
But like I said in a previous post, if the shot clock time wasting isn't a huge issue for you, who cares?
- Apr 30, 2015
- 13,618
- 24,444
- AFL Club
- West Coast
The shot clock came in because players (ie. Matthew Lloyd) were taking 1-2 minutes when lining up. So the same thing used to happen but was more exploitable.
Now that there is a 30 second limit, the ability to time waste is actually reduced.
Understand that, but I mean that a player will likely take 30s no matter what. As it stands 30s is allowed to take a shot, but also to find another option. Why then is there a 15s rule if you don't want to take the shot, in the forward 50, at all?
Similar threads
- Locked
