Stop coaching players on the rules

[Greenac]

Why the hell do umpires still coach players on the rules? Like, if its the week or two following a new rule change, okay, but why years later are they still coaching the 9 metre rule?

Every week we see guys run across the mark to get closer to the kicker, why is this not 50? Everytime they get repeated warnings to come back.

I can't remember who it was that Razor told to go back around the post because he had to come in through the point posts,not the goalposts why was he coached back around and not penalised?

Why do they ask 12 times for players to walk back 3 metres on the mark before ever giving 50? They should ask once.

In plenty of other sports you see players who know the rules and those who clearly don't and they are rewarded or penalised as appropriate.

Get rid of rules coaching and not cater to the idiots who can't be bothered reading the rulebook. Plus, rules should be rules- if the AFL want common sense interpretations that leads to inconsistency and it shows it isn't fit to be a rule.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Why the hell do umpires still coach players on the rules? Like, if its the week or two following a new rule change, okay, but why years later are they still coaching the 9 metre rule?

Every week we see guys run across the mark to get closer to the kicker, why is this not 50? Everytime they get repeated warnings to come back.

I can't remember who it was that Razor told to go back around the post because he had to come in through the point posts,not the goalposts why was he coached back around and not penalised?

Why do they ask 12 times for players to walk back 3 metres on the mark before ever giving 50? They should ask once.

In plenty of other sports you see players who know the rules and those who clearly don't and they are rewarded or penalised as appropriate.

Get rid of rules coaching and not cater to the idiots who can't be bothered reading the rulebook. Plus, rules should be rules- if the AFL want common sense interpretations that leads to inconsistency and it shows it isn't fit to be a rule.

They have to because the rules change every week. No one knows the rules anymore.
They changed an interpretation of a rule just this weekend because one of the coaches said to, they are making it up as they go. If there is a less professional sporting league in the universe I would like to know who it is.
It is simply junior sport stuff in the AFL.

 

[Greenac]

They have to because the rules change every week. No one knows the rules anymore.
They changed an interpretation of a rule just this weekend because one of the coaches said to, they are making it up as they go. If there is a less professional sporting league in the universe I would like to know who it is.
It is simply junior sport stuff in the AFL.

Ok thanks for clarifying.

 

[Quivorir]

I can't remember who it was that Razor told to go back around the post because he had to come in through the point posts,not the goalposts why was he coached back around and not penalised?

To be fair on this one, its a ******* stupid rule. Why does it matter what side of the post he came back through as long as he went back to his line behind the mark? Its little stupid rules like that, and holding up play so the man on the mark can move over to the left one centimetre.

Players aren't dumb. They deliberately ignore the ump knowing most of the time they will get away with it, allowing time for the team to drop back into defense. This game is so over officiated its ridiculous. Did he break a rule, yes or no, it should be as simple as that.

 

[D-N-R]

Why the hell do umpires still coach players on the rules? Like, if its the week or two following a new rule change, okay, but why years later are they still coaching the 9 metre rule?

Every week we see guys run across the mark to get closer to the kicker, why is this not 50? Everytime they get repeated warnings to come back.

I can't remember who it was that Razor told to go back around the post because he had to come in through the point posts,not the goalposts why was he coached back around and not penalised?

Why do they ask 12 times for players to walk back 3 metres on the mark before ever giving 50? They should ask once.

In plenty of other sports you see players who know the rules and those who clearly don't and they are rewarded or penalised as appropriate.

Get rid of rules coaching and not cater to the idiots who can't be bothered reading the rulebook. Plus, rules should be rules- if the AFL want common sense interpretations that leads to inconsistency and it shows it isn't fit to be a rule.

Agree to some extent. When there is a ball up in the goal square they inform the ruckmen not to punch the ball over the line. Why? If they don't know the rule, tough.

WRT kicking between the posts, if the player doesn't kick over the mark, he will get called back, so the umpire is right to get them in the correct position before they ply on.

Edit: come to think of it, isn't it a point if the player kicking in goes between the wrong posts? Or that used to be the rule?

Maybe the umps should be coaching the players.

 

[Greenac]

To be fair on this one, its a ******* stupid rule. Why does it matter what side of the post he came back through as long as he went back to his line behind the mark? Its little stupid rules like that, and holding up play so the man on the mark can move over to the left one centimetre.

Players aren't dumb. They deliberately ignore the ump knowing most of the time they will get away with it, allowing time for the team to drop back into defense. This game is so over officiated its ridiculous. Did he break a rule, yes or no, it should be as simple as that.

But that's it, if it's in the rulebook pay it. Simple as that. If we hate the rule, get rid. This in the middle bs causes angst amongst supporters and teams when it isn't applied consistently and black and white.

 

[Greenac]

Agree to some extent. When there is a ball up in the goal square they inform the ruckmen not to punch the ball over the line. Why? If they don't know the rule, tough.

WRT kicking between the posts, if the player doesn't kick over the mark, he will get called back, so the umpire is right to get them in the correct position before they ply on.

Edit: come to think of it, isn't it a point if the player kicking in goes between the wrong posts? Or that used to be the rule?

Maybe the umps should be coaching the players.

But that's it, it's a point and we all laugh at the player who did it and we move on.

 

[Leeda]

It's the rules Jeremy.. categorising each and everyone to the promised land is going to end in tears...

 

[hcd199]

There's a role for the umpires to play in directing compliance - the mark is here, the angle is this, and so on - but I agree that umpires shouldn't be providing what is effectively guidance rather than information ("knock it clear!", "east-west!", "don't hold!"). I already thought the "back to the nine" rule was yet another daft tweak from the AFL with no tangible benefit, but the amount of leniency the umpires show with it (especially knowing that, with little to no crowd, the player can definitely hear you) renders it almost completely pointless.

 

[kickazz]

Why the hell do umpires still coach players on the rules? Like, if its the week or two following a new rule change, okay, but why years later are they still coaching the 9 metre rule?

Every week we see guys run across the mark to get closer to the kicker, why is this not 50? Everytime they get repeated warnings to come back.

I can't remember who it was that Razor told to go back around the post because he had to come in through the point posts,not the goalposts why was he coached back around and not penalised?

Why do they ask 12 times for players to walk back 3 metres on the mark before ever giving 50? They should ask once.

In plenty of other sports you see players who know the rules and those who clearly don't and they are rewarded or penalised as appropriate.

Get rid of rules coaching and not cater to the idiots who can't be bothered reading the rulebook. Plus, rules should be rules- if the AFL want common sense interpretations that leads to inconsistency and it shows it isn't fit to be a rule.

Absolutely. They are umpires, not coaches.

And the 9m rule is the best example where they should just stay paying 50s.

Great post.

 

[Wallaby]

Agree with some here, but not the 'back to the 9'. The players don't know exactly where the mark is because they have been competing for the ball, so the ump tells them - he can't say 'the 2,000th blade of grass behind you' - he uses where the player is standing on the mark and goes from there 'back a bit etc'. It's also telling the player with the ball exactly where the mark is, if the defender is not actually on it. It's one of those rules like 'the Protected Zone' which is/was broken 100 times a game, but basically had no impact - should only be paid when there IS impact, such as the man on the mark smothering the kick.

I do hate the 'hit it out', 'don't hold' etc. Why do you need to tell a player not to hold? He either does or he doesn't, and if he does , pay a free.

 

[Greenac]

Agree with some here, but not the 'back to the 9'. The players don't know exactly where the mark is because they have been competing for the ball, so the ump tells them - he can't say 'the 2,000th blade of grass behind you' - he uses where the player is standing on the mark and goes from there 'back a bit etc'. It's also telling the player with the ball exactly where the mark is, if the defender is not actually on it. It's one of those rules like 'the Protected Zone' which is/was broken 100 times a game, but basically had no impact - should only be paid when there IS impact, such as the man on the mark smothering the kick.

I do hate the 'hit it out', 'don't hold' etc. Why do you need to tell a player not to hold? He either does or he doesn't, and if he does , pay a free.

Yes but as someone already said, they have a role in letting players know where the mark is but it doesn't have to be repeated 20 times snd the player given an eternity to come back. Ask once, if there isn't an immediate reaction pay 50. It's like setting any other mark around the ground. At present they are asking 400 times, the players are barely moving and someone even encroach first and then are brought back. It's deliberately slowing the game down.

 

[Greenac]

Matthew Cheating Nicholls coached Zak Butters out of bringing the ball back illegally through the behind posts instead of through the goalposts.

WHY?

Let him make the mistake and adjudicate accordingly. Surely this is cheating.