Opinion stand rule

[Chunky09]

The best was when someone faked a handball and the guys toes moved and the ump paid 50. Punishment definitely fit the crime

I also liked the bit where they decided to alter the interpretation mid season.
Farcical isn’t even close to describing it, worst rule in sports history.

 

[Phar Ace]

I agree the penalty is over the top but the worst part is the uneven application of the rules. Sometimes the umpires will allow the player with the ball to walk back and move 5 or 10 metres sideways and still not call play on. The player on the mark is completely isolated It will be interesting to see how the coaches counter this rubbish rule

Totally agree - the umpires are just not up to it insofar as a consistent application is concerned because they have too much to officiate now. They drift in and out of it's proper application. It takes real concentration and some just are not up to it.

There were instants in the AFLW final game against North that were classic. One at the beginning of the 2nd qtr where the North player took off wide of the mark that was near the boundary - she went inward and gainied an easy 25m before the Richmond player was allowed to 'play on', and looked at the umpire with arms in the airs saying "where is the play-on call"! Later that same qtr, Jess Hosking played on from a mark, but it was called play on from one step, was corralled and had transfer in another direction and rushed the kick that went to the opposition. Am i blaming the umpires, only in part, because the applications vary so much from umpire to umpire - but it's a hard one adjudicate consistently.

Change it to "Any movement requires one step back (or a metre) and then across - this needs to be allowed for this rule to work with reasonable fairness. This 5m back requirement or stand perfectly still is bullshit.

 

[YeOldTiger]

A proper trial of this rule would have revealed the difficulties in consistent adjudication, allowed the football world and media to criticise the trial, not the AFL directly (as they are loathe to do now - hey Mick Warner how you doing mate) and revealed the rule to make grown adults look stupid (which could also be seen clearly when initially demonstrated by the moronic "Pinnochio" attempt to guard the mark/put Lynch off his kick by Harris (nob) Andrews seen in the previous season, which has now, sadly become the norm) playing the game at a professional level.

The crazy thing is a that a proper trial would also have reveled is that a simple tweak, allowing the man on the mark to only take one step sideways either way but still aggressively defend instead of standing like a ridiculous statue, would have provided much the same result - allowing/encouraging defenders to take the game on and limiting, but not stopping completely defensive acts by the man on the mark.

There was such a panicked rush to introduce the rule (I firmly believe SHocking had RFC's style of play and defensive structures in his sights - remember it was an anathema to both he and Chris Salt and I'm sure SHocking referred to it on occasions) without a proper trial and it's become a blight on the game.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

The crazy thing is a that a proper trial would also have reveled is that a simple tweak, allowing the man on the mark to only take one step sideways either way but still aggressively defend instead of standing like a ridiculous statue,

With all being equal these days.
Would that mean Baker could take 4 steps?

 

[Maurice Mitchell]

…One at the beginning of the 2nd qtr where the North player took off wide of the mark that was near the boundary - she went inward and gainied an easy 25m before the Richmond player was allowed to 'play on', and looked at the umpire with arms in the airs saying "where is the play-on call"!

Among the many annoying things, for me this was the worst.

Players running off their line especially with shots at goal and the umps don’t call ‘play on’. Makes a tough kick a pretty simple one.

I said all year, the umps need to on a line to see immediately the player runs off his line but they never did.

Wish they could fix that up, or preferably get rid of the rule entirely.