Studs Up - Going for a Mark

[Blind Turn]

I’m sorry, but it’s so difficult to watch our great game being cut to pieces by umpires/adjudicators with no feel for the game.

If someone sticks his foot in your back to attempt a mark (Duncan against Adelaide tonight), it should never be a free against. This and the fine against Aaron Francis for the perfect bump on O’Meara last year just makes me shake my head in dismay.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

I’m sorry, but it’s so difficult to watch our great game being cut to pieces by umpires/adjudicators with no feel for the game.

If someone sticks his foot in your back to attempt a mark (Duncan against Adelaide tonight), it should never be a free against. This and the fine against Aaron Francis for the perfect bump on O’Meara last year just makes me shake my head in dismay.

It was always going to be an issue when you create a rule to stop a player doing what few players can. Knees are still legal to protect space which is probably more dangerous.

It is what it is.

 

[Fluro Boots]

Its almost like players used to grow up learning how to protect themselves or wore the consequences

 

[Blind Turn]

It was always going to be an issue when you create a rule to stop a player doing what few players can. Knees are still legal to protect space which is probably more dangerous.

It is what it is.

You might say that it’s a typically knee-jerk reaction to Toby Greene’s erratic boots. The sentiment behind the rule is fine - you shouldn’t be able to shove your boot in someone’s face to take a mark. But as I intimated, there is no intuitive ‘feel’ for the game from those adjudicating. The same goes with taking the legs out from under someone - I agree with it in those rare occasions where someone slides in dangerously but if someone is bending over to pick up the ball and hits your legs, that is not what the rule was for.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

You might say that it’s a typically knee-jerk reaction to Toby Greene’s erratic boots. The sentiment behind the rule is fine - you shouldn’t be able to shove your boot in someone’s face to take a mark. But as I intimated, there is no intuitive ‘feel’ for the game from those adjudicating. The same goes with taking the legs out from under someone - I agree with it in those rare occasions where someone slides in dangerously but if someone is bending over to pick up the ball and hits your legs, that is not what the rule was for.

The problem us you can either use your feet to protect space or you can't. You can't penalise it just when Toby does it and you don't want him to be allowed to.

So this is where we end up.

 

[Blind Turn]

The problem us you can either use your feet to protect space or you can't. You can't penalise it just when Toby does it and you don't want him to be allowed to.

So this is where we end up.

No, let’s look at it a different way. If they give leniency with hands in the back for attempting a mark then the same goes for feet in the back. If Duncan takes one of the great marks jumping up and launching himself backwards (a bit like Gary Moorcroft),are we OK with some numpty ump with no feel for the game, ruling it a non-mark? Suddenly an iconic moment is reduced to farce.

 

[Hamingja]

As Bartel said it should be for front on contact only, that is when it is dangerous.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

No, let’s look at it a different way. If they give leniency with hands in the back for attempting a mark then the same goes for feet in the back. If Duncan takes one of the great marks jumping up and launching himself backwards (a bit like Gary Moorcroft),are we OK with some numpty ump with no feel for the game, ruling it a non-mark? Suddenly an iconic moment is reduced to farce.

It doesn't alter what I said though.

 

[Luv_our_club]

 

[WCfan22]

That was no free 100% umpired completely wrong needs to be taken out the back and flogged. It will be the end of the hanger if adjudicated that way. Soccer rules here we come.

 

[Blind Turn]

It doesn't alter what I said though.

Your comment was very black and white - you can or you can’t. I’m saying that it’s an adjudicating thing which is inherently grey and requires a feel for it. So, I believe it does alter what you’re saying.

The mark in our game has never been a real issue with blokes going for the ball. Why create one that may detract from the spectacle?

 

[Gaben]

As Bartel said it should be for front on contact only, that is when it is dangerous.

Think you mean, as Bartel said

'it shuld only be for c-c-c ontact should front on be, it should be only front on and.... transition'

 

[Chuckie357]

Geez Jarrad overwait is lucky he retired at the end of last season. He would never be able to play again otherwise!

 

[Blind Turn]

Free kick Richmond!

 

[Luv_our_club]

Free kick Richmond!

Free kick Garry Lyon

 

[Blind Turn]

Free kick Garry Lyon

Ha! Good point. Didn’t watch the whole clip tbh. Still, the point stands. That sort of mark would be threatened. Do we really want that to happen?

 

[CH Jazz]

Getting harder and harder to watch our game and give a shit.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Your comment was very black and white - you can or you can’t. I’m saying that it’s an adjudicating thing which is inherently grey and requires a feel for it. So, I believe it does alter what you’re saying.

The mark in our game has never been a real issue with blokes going for the ball. Why create one that may detract from the spectacle?

Rules by their very nature are black and white, and they need to be as much as possible if you want consistency.

If you make it more subjective, you won't achieve a good outcome, because subjective decisions by umps will be different to what you want.

 

[Blind Turn]

Rules by their very nature are black and white, and they need to be as much as possible if you want consistency.

If you make it more subjective, you won't achieve a good outcome, because subjective decisions by umps will be different to what you want.

The adjudication of our unique game will always rely on intuitive, common sense interpretations of rules. You’re kidding yourself if you think otherwise. Even if you go black and white, attempting to mark on someone’s back with your eyes on the ball should never be a free against.

 

[ManOfClay]

The problem us you can either use your feet to protect space or you can't. You can't penalise it just when Toby does it and you don't want him to be allowed to.

So this is where we end up.

Duncan attempting a mark is not the same as Greene protecting space collecting a high handball though

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Duncan attempting a mark is not the same as Greene protecting space collecting a high handball though

An orange and a lemon taste different. I'm sure you think that's relevant to the discussion too.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

The adjudication of our unique game will always rely on intuitive, common sense interpretations of rules. You’re kidding yourself if you think otherwise. Even if you go black and white, attempting to mark on someone’s back with your eyes on the ball should never be a free against.

Again it doesn't change what I said. It's actually not unique though. Every code that has a contest for the ball has a complex set if rules around that contest. You still need to make it as objective as possible.

 

[Substance]

An orange and a lemon taste different. I'm sure you think that's relevant to the discussion too.

You are such a dishonest poster. It's directly relevant to the conversation and you know it.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

You are such a dishonest poster. It's directly relevant to the conversation and you know it.

Pffft

In a thread about using feet to take a mark of course it isn't.

Just a tip. Someone choosing not to engage with your fantasy us not dishonest, it 's called facing reality.

 

[D-N-R]

Even the marking rule is subjective. "A player must control the ball" is subjective. But by having the same rule applied numerous times players, Umpires and fans have a feel for what constitutes a mark.

Same goes with the TB studs up mark. It looked wrong. It didn't look like numerous other marks where players have used the sole of the boot to climb over an opponent. It would have been simple to differentiate this mark from others but the AFL don't do simple and so will cut out some potential iconic grabs.