Port and 'deliberate'.

[Lavender Bushranger]

Been watching Port with interest recently, and can't help but notice their tendency to walk the ball over the boundary line.

No intent to keep it in. Whatsoever.

It's as deliberate as you can get. Even if it's not deliberate (which it blatantly is), it's at the very, very best - no intent to keep it in play.


This isn't about Port, as it's obviously a strategy they use to control territory - but is this something the umpires are just missing? Or have Port just found a loophole in one of the AFL's most stupid rules?


Why do you get pinged for kicking the ball 60m down the line and it eventually dribbles out of bounds - but you can walk it over the line intentionally?

What is the point if this rule?

 

[manureid]

Threadworthy

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Threadworthy

As a Port fan, you're obviously aware of this tactic.

 

[pjcrows]

This isn't about Port

Yeah it is. It's even in the title.

 

[It Just Is]

Noticed it far more today than ever before. It’s very hard to tell from the camera angles whether the player grabs the ball before, on, or over the line but there seems to be something in this.

That said, I’m not sure there is any great advantage to be gained.

 

[sobrave]

Been watching Port with interest recently, and can't help but notice their tendency to walk the ball over the boundary line.

No intent to keep it in. Whatsoever.

It's as deliberate as you can get. Even if it's not deliberate (which it blatantly is), it's at the very, very best - no intent to keep it in play.


This isn't about Port, as it's obviously a strategy they use to control territory - but is this something the umpires are just missing? Or have Port just found a loophole in one of the AFL's most stupid rules?


Why do you get pinged for kicking the ball 60m down the line and it eventually dribbles out of bounds - but you can walk it over the line intentionally?

What is the point if this rule?

Never noticed us doing it before, but it happened 3 times today. Assume it's just because the game was flat. Don't like it, and surprised an ump didn't call it... But the whole game was a bit of a non event so maybe umps didn't care either?

 

[power09]

I just assumed all teams did that


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Never noticed us doing it before, but it happened 3 times today. Assume it's just because the game was flat. Don't like it, and surprised an ump didn't call it... But the whole game was a bit of a non event so maybe umps didn't care either?

I don't mind it.

It clearly works.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Yeah it is. It's even in the title.

It isn't a criticism of Port, is what I obviously meant.

 

[master bate]

Adelaide Oval is quite narrow, probably leads to more boundary throw ins.

Port are a good side and well coached, would hardly be surprised they know umps are reluctant to pay deliberate to a player being tackled over the line. Especially at home where the crowd isn't calling for it.

If anyone wants a laugh watch Geelong v West Coast, 18:48 on the clock in the first quarter. Parfitt receives the ball 10m in from the boundary, doesn't want to kick or handball and edges towards the boundary until he gets tackled out. The most deliberate/holding the ball you'll see all weekend but not paid.

Meanwhile players desperate on the last line of defence or kicking it 50m get pinged - sometimes correctly but they are a bit stiff!

 

[Sentinel]

Time for a Royal Commission

 

[HairyO]

Time for a Royal Commission

Only if they get away with it for a minimum 6 years. Particularly in Finals.

 

[CrowInFiji]

All teams do it. That, along with not giving the ball back immediately, is a gripe one might have with the game but would be incredibly difficult to adjudicate. At the moment it needs to be incredibly obvious (read: picking the ball up over 5 mtrs from the line and walking it over) to be picked up if it even is.

We probably don't want the game to turn into a sumo wrestling contest where players push each other hoping one walks it out and umpires, whom currently cannot determine between a legal spoil and front on contact, would have to then adjudicate basic momentum.

Nightmare.

 

[philthy05]

I mean it’s only been a thing all players at all clubs have done at all times for longer than some have been watching football but “Port and deliberate”

You’re seeing something cause you’re looking for it. There’s a name for that.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I mean it’s only been a thing all players at all clubs have done at all times for longer than some have been watching football but “Port and deliberate”

You’re seeing something cause you’re looking for it. There’s a name for that.

Not sure why you're defensive.

Teams have strategies, they all do. This is clearly something Port do. I'm surprised that as a supporter, you're unaware of what your own team is doing?

There's nothing wrong with it, and it's cleary not illegal - whether it should be or not is another question.

It is curious though. They obviously set up around boundary throw ins, and must train this.

I wonder what their stats out of boundary throw ins are?

 

[philthy05]

Not sure why you're defensive.

Teams have strategies, they all do. This is clearly something Port do. I'm surprised that as a supporter, you're unaware of what your own team is doing?

There's nothing wrong with it, and it's cleary not illegal - whether it should be or not is another question.

It is curious though. They obviously set up around boundary throw ins, and must train this.

I wonder what their stats out of boundary throw ins are?

Port don’t do it any more or less than any other team.

As I said, you’re seeing something cause you’re looking for it.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Port don’t do it any more or less than any other team.

As I said, you’re seeing something cause you’re looking for it.

No, I noticed it because it's been happening.

Then I started looking for it - and confirmed it happens.

 

[bomberclifford]

You havent been watching football very long have you, Lavender Bushranger

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Id rather see the ball carried over the line resulting in one boundary throw in to space than repeated ball up stoppages next to the boundary line that end up being tapped out of play and become a throw in anyway.

If anything penalise the ruckman who deliberately puts it out of bounds from a ruck contest in the same fashion as a ruck contest in the goal square that can no longer be rushed behind.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Id rather see the ball carried over the line resulting in one boundary throw in to space than repeated ball up stoppages next to the boundary line that end up being tapped out of play and become a throw in anyway.

If anything penalise the ruckman who deliberately puts it out of bounds from a ruck contest in the same fashion as a ruck contest in the goal square that can no longer be rushed behind.

I think the Deliberate rule is rubbish personally.

It's the most ridiculous rule in world sport.


This is more about Port using boundary stoppages as a tactic.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

I think the Deliberate rule is rubbish personally.

It's the most ridiculous rule in world sport.


This is more about Port using boundary stoppages as a tactic.

Agreed, but the alternative is last touch and that removes the grey that the AFL use to change outcomes so wont happen.

If its well disguised and results in a ruck contest 20m from the line rather than a ball up next to it after a tackle etc. its a better result in the long run for the reasons i gave.

 

[philthy05]

I think the Deliberate rule is rubbish personally.

It's the most ridiculous rule in world sport.


This is more about Port using boundary stoppages as a tactic.

do you have any stats to back up your assertion or just gonna keep on insisting that port deliberately walk the ball over more than anyone else without anything to back it up?

if you actually watched port you would know we use the corridor to move the ball and force our opponents to go wide when they try to move it.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

if you actually watched port you would know we use the corridor to move the ball and force our opponents to go wide when they try to move it.

Exactly, which is why we prefer the ball to return to play 20m in from a throw in on centre wing than where a non prior tackle results in a ball up next to the line.
It also plays into the AFL's ideal of less repeat stoppages and the ball in the corridor where quick play is likely.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

do you have any stats to back up your assertion or just gonna keep on insisting that port deliberately walk the ball over more than anyone else without anything to back it up?

if you actually watched port you would know we use the corridor to move the ball and force our opponents to go wide when they try to move it.

Interesting. And once they're forced wide, what happens?

 

[philthy05]

Interesting. And once they're forced wide, what happens?

So the answer is no you don’t have any stats to back up your claims?