Strategy STAND rule

[biaseddustyfan]

That is utterly laughable that footage. The man in possession runs off his mark, taking about 5 paces off the line before the man on the mark moves past his allowable distance. The ump does not respond by calling play on, which is a complete error surely, and when the man on the mark adjusts so the man in possession can’t run straight past him the ump pings him 50m.

This rule is two things.

1. it is a total contrived technical mess, that will blight the game more than it could ever possibly improve it as a spectacle, and

2. it seems to be designed precisely in a way that would benefit a high volume marking, high free kick for team like Geelong against a low marking, high free kick against team like Richmond. And it has been brought in by a person who has only ever had one club affiliation, and it was a long one. That affiliation was with Geelong.

Governance wise, it is a shocking conflict of interest issue at the very least. The worst case scenario is it is the result of the Cats conspiring with Hocking to get the rules changed to favour them and specifically counter their nemesis, the Tigers.

Teams who want to be able to move the ball forward should look no further than the best team at it, the Tigers, who play on, run and forward handball and don’t play like they are petrified of losing possession.

It looks diabolical this new rule. If umpires don’t immediately call play on as soon as the player in possession steps to the side of his mark it contrives a situation completely in favour of the team in possession. If umpires do call play on immediately the player steps he may already have too big a break before the man on the mark has had time to react to the call of "play on." The rule came out of nowhere. It is a whiteboard rule. that is a sh*t way to introduce new rules regarding the flow of play. The greatest beauty of the game of Australian Rules Football, is it was not a game that was designed as such, it evolved organically by being played.

What. A. Mess.

can't wait for more scores from 50m penalties, after all that's everyone's favourite part of AFL footy right

 

[tigs2010]

Who is Simon Hocking?

Steven’s incompetent puppet master twin

 

[tigs2010]

Well don’t think I’ll be watching neutral games this year and potentially not our own. Pathetic.

 

[Woodstock]

I wonder if you're in the vicinity of the mark that you're made to stand the mark? Can you run away from it?

All standing the mark is going to do now is stop a player from playing on. You're probably better off having a couple of players zone back 10 metres and make the short - medium hit up kick harder, whilst having everyone else flood back to stop the long kick.

 

[smurfin]

Another problem I see happening with this rule is that the umpire will be so busy watching the player manning the mark - including our discussed ideas of standing off the mark and the umpire telling him to move up or move on - that there will be an even bigger delay between any actual play on and the umpire calling it.
In that Essendon footage it appeared the umpire was watching the man on the mark more than he was watching the player taking the free.

 

[juss]

That's ******* pathetic. * the AFL. Neautral games have no interest with this trash.

 

[RobsJourney]

Can someone with the know how start a petition? Gotta get rid of that s**t rule...

 

[Tiger Toffee]

That's it i'm out, really hard to get excited for the season with doubts over getting to go and ****ed up rules like that

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Another problem I see happening with this rule is that the umpire will be so busy watching the player manning the mark - including our discussed ideas of standing off the mark and the umpire telling him to move up or move on - that there will be an even bigger delay between any actual play on and the umpire calling it.
In that Essendon footage it appeared the umpire was watching the man on the mark more than he was watching the player taking the free.

That is absolutely spot on.

Teams kick about 12 behinds on average in a match after which now the kicker in as allowed to waltz out of the square unmolested with no-one allowed within 15 metres. Effectively it is normally kicked from 20-25 metres up the ground.

Teams get about 100 marks + free kicks per game each, so 200 in total quite often. Imagine watching a player just run 15 metres unmolested nearly every time that happens, 200 times per match, like in a kick in situation. That is what we are facing.

And you can just see variable policing across the season as well. Martinet adherence rd1 then easing the interpretation over time only to be tightened up again at some hugely important time.

I normally reserve judgement on these things, but not this. I am certain it will be no good for footy.

 

[VB_longneck]

That's it i'm out, really hard to get excited for the season with doubts over getting to go and f’ed up rules like that

umps gonna use us as guinea pigs again in rd 1

blooze will get 5 goals from 50s

 

[Meteoric Rise]

umps gonna use us as guinea pigs again in rd 1

blooze will get 5 goals from 50s

How can that be the case when they are only going to score about 3 goals?

 

[Tony Stark]

umps gonna use us as guinea pigs again in rd 1

blooze will get 5 goals from 50s

That's exactly what will happen and then an urgent umpires meeting with Hocking and cronies will change their interpretations the next day. Seeing they are already trialling the rule then to gain any sort of credibility the AFL have to stick with it for the entire season. Making and changing rules on the run just makes it look like amateur hour at best.

 

[I_Love_Thee_V]

Can you have no one man the mark and just chuck an extra back in defence

 

[GastevsBeard]

*Tin foil hat*

The rule seems to be a way to give the officiators carte blanche to influence the # of television commercials to throw to

No goals for 10 minutes? Throw in a cheap/dubious 50m penalty because a player manning the mark shifted .0004 mm to the left. Goal scored, tacky SportsBet commercial time

 

[chriso11]

They're bringing it in because they want higher scores and more free flowing football, which on the surface looks like a good aim, but the way its being done is diminishing the product. It will lead to more goals off the back of terrible 50m penalties, and the scores will increase but the spectacle will be poor.

Exactly. Maybe supporters want free flowing footy, but not at the expense of an increase in hair-tearing frustrating 50m penalties. The aggregate result is going to be a worse fan experience and spectacle. It’s fixing a broken arm by chopping it off

 

[RobsJourney]

So Essendon's second goal in this practice match, set shot from 45-50, but defender moves around on the mark and they pay 50 - free goal.

Tell me, HOW is this good for football?

FFS Steve Hocking.

EDIT: Look, I get the point of bringing in this rule, I do, but the most minor infringement of this rule leading to free goals, is that really what we want for football? Think about that - free farking goals. Remember in 2018 round 1 when Carlton got the better of the new protected area 50 metre penalties and were up by 30 points in the first quarter? It's just not footy getting these free scores... I have to agree with some other posters, I may be done with neutral footy

 

[VB_longneck]

So Essendon's second goal in this practice match, set shot from 45-50, but defender moves around on the mark and they pay 50 - free goal.

Tell me, HOW is this good for football?

FFS Steve Hocking.

EDIT: Look, I get the point of bringing in this rule, I do, but the most minor infringement of this rule leading to free goals, is that really what we want for football? Think about that - free farking goals. Remember in 2018 round 1 when Carlton got the better of the new protected area 50 metre penalties and were up by 30 points in the first quarter? It's just not footy getting these free scores... I have to agree with some other posters, I may be done with neutral footy

players need to imitate a deceased wrapped up egyptian mummy so that they dont pay a 50

 

[Drunken Wookie]

players need to imitate a deceased wrapped up egyptian mummy so that they dont pay a 50

Might as well just turn around and have your back to them so you're not tempted to shuffle slightly when they take off on a angle.

 

[Soberian Tiger]

Just goes to show that Geelong is on to something.

Not just with a marking game, but on the mark as well. The old codgers don't move quickly enough to infringe.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Can you have no one man the mark and just chuck an extra back in defence

Just stand a couple foot back so your allowed to move ?

Not on the mark, behind it

 

[Marcel Proust]

So Essendon's second goal in this practice match, set shot from 45-50, but defender moves around on the mark and they pay 50 - free goal.

Tell me, HOW is this good for football?

FFS Steve Hocking.

EDIT: Look, I get the point of bringing in this rule, I do, but the most minor infringement of this rule leading to free goals, is that really what we want for football? Think about that - free farking goals. Remember in 2018 round 1 when Carlton got the better of the new protected area 50 metre penalties and were up by 30 points in the first quarter? It's just not footy getting these free scores... I have to agree with some other posters, I may be done with neutral footy

What's the point of the rule?

 

[RobsJourney]

What's the point of the rule?

Stop guys with footy being corralled, let play flow more where possible.

 

[smurfin]

In my view, 50 metre penalties should be for dirty acts like late hits, and for petulant acts like not giving the ball to a player after they're given a free.
Both protected zones and moving sideways on the mark should be 15 metre penalties or something if they really feel they're needed.

 

[Cdog71]

For the brain to process something and decide on an action in response and begin to execute that action takes most people about 0.2 seconds.

Fun fact
If a sprinter takes off within that 0.2 seconds they call a false start because they are anticipating the gun and not reacting.
Its not possible to react quicker than 0.2 secs.

 

[Infamy]

All standing the mark is going to do now is stop a player from playing on. You're probably better off having a couple of players zone back 10 metres and make the short - medium hit up kick harder, whilst having everyone else flood back to stop the long kick.

I think this is 100% the strategy, a player is going to just be able to run around the player on the mark and kick from about in line with the mark, so instead of placing a single player on the mark, put 1-2 players around 5-10m behind the mark as the start of the zone defence and they'll be kicking from around the same spot. These players should be able to move around as much as they like as well.