rules

[mongrel punt]

Which rules do people get most frustrated with? I've always thought that aussie rules could have a look at a rule used in netball (GO PHEONIX). After a free is given to a player is some circumstances, the player may pass only. There are just too many easy goals from poor umpiring decisions.

Goldspink U stink!!!!

 

[Eagleheart]

The rule that sucks is when the player has taken a mark in the goal square and the umpire feels that the player should take his kick from in the front row,that pisses me off ,the player has made the effort to take a great mark only to be given a hard shot at goal.

 

[AlfAndrews]

I can't stand 50-metre penalties. It used to be 15-metres, but that was too short because there were too many "professional" free-kicks. But they went much too far when they increased it to 50-metres. They should have made it 25 or 30 metres. Perhaps you could have the 50-metres for serious infringements. These days you can get pinged 50-metres just for arguing with the umpire. It's crap.

I hate any rules that make it easier to score goals. I think the weakness in our game is that it's too easy to score. I'm a great believer in the defender getting the benefit of the doubt. Make full-forwards earn their kicks. Soft free kicks in front of goal are very, very boring. For example, it completely shits me when two players are holding on to each other and the white maggot finds a free kick ... and 9 times out of 10 it'll be the show-pony full-forward who'll get the bloody free.

Another rule that should be scrapped is the so-called "deliberate" out-of-bounds. The problem with this rule is that it requires the white maggot to be a mind-reader. It should be that you penalise the last player to touch the ball regardless of whether the action was deliberate or not. That way the umpire only has to judge it on what he sees, rather than on what he THINKS the player's intentions were.

------------------
**floreat pica**

 

[CJH]

The deliberate out of bounds rule is a joke. Change the rule to be like any other sport where the last team to touch it loses the ball and the opposition team gets the advantage of a limited posession from out of bounds.

Soccer has a throw in, Rugby League has a scrum, Rugby Union has a Line Out, Basketball has posession from behind the line. None of these sports suffer from the embarrassment of this stupid and inconsistently applied rule.

Australian Rules could implement a handball from behind the line.

Also I would like to see a rule where teams are not allowed to wear colours that clash. This rule is also implemented in many other codes and makes perfect sense.

For example id Richmond plays Essendon then Essendon would have to find a strip that was say predominantly white. And vice versa for the return match.

Besides making watching the game easier, and not having your players pass to the opposition, it would also provide a good opportunity for clubs to make a bit more money on the marketing of these alternative strips.

I know some clubs already have this - and good on them - I would just like to see it as a rule across all clubs.

And while we are at it, give the umpires the choice of colours so as not to clash with either team. I've been at games where North are wearing there All White strip and seen the boundary umpires gather a few handball receive stats!!!

In rugby league, they have the refs appear in all sorts of colours - fluro orange, fluro green, yellow, white, black and white, red and black - and they never clash with either team.

What are some suggestions for our umpires? Hot Fluro Pink??

 

[sandie]

cjh
we have been over this changing strip things many times. Why should bombers wear a strip that is predominately white, there is no white anywhere in our team colours, we would look like st kilda. If you want a different strip, then as has been suggested here many times, we could have a red jumper with a black sash.

------------------
Mantis

 

[AlfAndrews]

CJH

That's a good point about the alternative strips.

At the moment most clubs have a home strip and an away strip, but there are still plenty of problems telling teams apart. That's because the alternative strips have been designed purely as a money-making scam, and not as a genuine attempt to improve the spectacle for fans, players and umpires.

In some cases the alternative strip has made it even harder to tell the teams apart. The Orange Kangaroos V Collingwood was a classic example.

Some of the worst colour clashes are:

Port V Collingwood
Melbourne V Essendon
Freo V Melbourne
Adelaide V Brisbane
Adelaide V Melbourne
Richmond V Essendon
Geelong V Collingwood
Kangaroos V Geelong

I'm sure other people can think of more.

In cases such as this it should be up to the visiting side to wear a strip that is in complete contrast to that of the other team. And if this means wearing completely different colours, then so be it.

In the case of Richmond V Essendon, Sandie's suggestion of a red jumper with black sash would work OK. But it might not work in cases where Essendon's opponent has a lot of red in their colours. Flexibility is important.

I'm sure some traditionalists will find this horrific. Well, I'm a traditionalist too. Very much so. But I also pay good money to go to the football. And I like to be able to see what's going on ... and know which team has got possession of the ball when the play is on the opposite side of the ground.

And I'm quite sure, as CJH has suggested, that players often turn the ball over to the opposition because they have mistaken the colours in the heat of the moment.

But that Orange Kangaroos thing was diabolical. It should not be up to an individual club to instigate something like that. The A.F.L. should be the ones organising alternative strips ... and it should be done as a way of improving the spectacle ... not just to line the clubs' pockets with even more ill-gotten sponsorship money.



------------------
**floreat pica**

[This message has been edited by AlfAndrews (edited 28 October 2000).]

 

[Mr Ripper]

Agree 100%, CJH & Alf, re the alternantive jumpers.

It would be up to the AFL to implement such a rule though. I don't think the clubs would want to risk upsetting those dreaded "traditionalists" amongst their ranks.

P.S. Adelaide v Richmond is another shocker.