Stupid deliberate rule

Remove this Banner Ad

Back One Out

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 2, 2015
15,262
26,357
AFL Club
Hawthorn
One of the best rules in the game. Players are forced to keep the ball in play. The harsh rule interpretation makes it tougher for players to take the easy way out and kill the play dead. Fewer stoppages... More flow to the game...

Like many rules, it works well as a deterrent (but this doesn't stop the numbnuts like BT from complaining whenever it's paid)
FMD... Imagine we went back to the old days of 100 boundary throw-ins per game. How exciting would that be?

Once or twice per game, people whinge about a harsh deliberate OOB decision, but is the penalty really that bad?
How often do you see a goal result from one of these free kicks? Almost never...

A player will see he has no decent options further afield so he'll deliberately kick it 40-50 metres downfield towards the line, knowing he'll be penalised.
A player from the other team will get the free kick, usually about 80 or 90 metres from goal, and he'll be staring at 18 opposition players camped inside their defensive fifty.

Big deal... :rolleyes:

It's just a handover of possession a long way from goal due to having no options. Football justice.

It's hilarious the way everyone loses their shiit whenever one of these free kicks are paid. They need to get a grip.
They need to open their eyes and see the "penalty" isn't so bad.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

kickazz

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 12, 2010
8,939
12,081
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
It's just a handover of possession a long way from goal due to having no options. Football justice.
Indeed.

We complain about all the players being crowded in one half of the field. (Complaint #1)

Then a player kicks the ball long to nobody (because nobody is there), it goes out, and they are penalised.

And then we complain about that. Complain, about a rule designed in part to address our original Complaint #1.
 

kickazz

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 12, 2010
8,939
12,081
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
I'm actually happy for the long kicks to be given deliberate. It's almost an extension of the old "nobody touched it from the kick-in" rule: If a team cannot orchestrate possession or at least a touch from a 40m+ kick, then perhaps that should be penalised every time.

I prefer leniency on the defender trying to pick up a greasy ball with a bloke hot on his tail. Yes, they overplay the fumbling and all of that. But often, they are making the play, whilst the forward just sits off them waiting to tackle. These situations, the defender deserves a break.
 

matthew_s

Club Legend
Aug 19, 2013
1,177
2,206
AFL Club
West Coast
It’s not really a deliberate rule now, it’s basically last touch over line.
What are you talking about?

There are so many deliberates that dont get paid. They should be paying 5 more a game.

Sick of seeing super skilled players get all fake-fumbly because the boundary line is near.
 

greatwhiteshark

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 3, 2007
12,126
12,127
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
What are you talking about?

There are so many deliberates that dont get paid. They should be paying 5 more a game.

Sick of seeing super skilled players get all fake-fumbly because the boundary line is near.
And I am sick of seeing players being penalised for kicking the ball 40m plus in their teams direction that happen to roll out for deliberate when it clearly wasn’t deliberate.
 

Timmy from Thomastown

TheBrownDog
May 25, 2006
56,588
32,257
Beach
AFL Club
Collingwood
Happy with the rule... players have to actively try and keep the ball in play. If they decide to try and be be clever and hug the boundary a bit too closely and slightly miskick.. then they get pinged.

Like all rules its subject to interpretation and there will be some that are line-ball.
 

greatwhiteshark

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 3, 2007
12,126
12,127
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
Happy with the rule... players have to actively try and keep the ball in play. If they decide to try and be be clever and hug the boundary a bit too closely and slightly miskick.. then they get pinged.

Like all rules its subject to interpretation and there will be some that are line-ball.
No problem with that, just change the name of the rule. DOOB means player intentionally kicked the ball to the line which is not what is happening.
 

Gameova_

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 16, 2011
6,048
6,244
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
And I am sick of seeing players being penalised for kicking the ball 40m plus in their teams direction that happen to roll out for deliberate when it clearly wasn’t deliberate.
Finally someone who agrees with me. This deliberate rule is a farce. Now if a player kicks in their teams direction and it happens to go out free kick is paid against. What a disgrace imo
 

Underarm

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 13, 2011
9,259
11,269
AFL Club
Richmond
No problem with that, just change the name of the rule. DOOB means player intentionally kicked the ball to the line which is not what is happening.
It already is. Umpires always call out "Insufficient Intent", but that's not catchy so the Commentators and fans continue with 'deliberate'
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Purple Suit

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 30, 2011
9,487
15,417
Freo
AFL Club
Fremantle
It already is. Umpires always call out "Insufficient Intent", but that's not catchy so the Commentators and fans continue with 'deliberate'
Even that seems to be wrong. If a player shanks it and it's one bounce out, they generally ping them. The player might have fully intended to keep it in but stuffed it.

How about the poor attempt rule. Either skill execution or bluffing the umps.
 

yebiga

Come on Barbie let's go party
Aug 1, 2008
13,235
16,585
Post-Modern Clown-World
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
There is no other sport the in the world that attempts to adjucate intention.
If we want the players to keep the ball in play - then simply penalise any kick where the ball goes out of bounds on the full or not. Simple.
It is a farce, a lottery and embarrassing for the AFL = the players are being treated like 10 years olds.

Makes an absolutely mockery of the game and forget trying to sell it to anyone overseas
There is something almost PC - trying judge intent. It's neurotic.
 

Duckimus Prime

Premiership Player
Apr 26, 2008
3,477
5,258
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
And I am sick of seeing players being penalised for kicking the ball 40m plus in their teams direction that happen to roll out for deliberate when it clearly wasn’t deliberate.
Except it is clearly deliberate. The entire purpose of that kick is for the ball to go out of play when players do that. If it doesn't go out, its a turnover.

There is no other sport the in the world that attempts to adjucate intention.
In the biggest sport in the world, handball is only a free kick when a player does it intentionally.

Basketball has an intentional rating on flagrant fouls that result in a heavier punishment.

In motor racing sports deliberately crashing into another racer is treated differently to just making contact while attempting to overtake.
 

greatwhiteshark

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 3, 2007
12,126
12,127
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
Except it is clearly deliberate. The entire purpose of that kick is for the ball to go out of play when players do that. If it doesn't go out, its a turnover.
Of the ones paid deliberate it would be less than half that the players intention was for it to go out. Rushed kick out of defense under pressure is exactly what it is, a kick out of the area to relieve pressure. Umpires should not be adjudicating intention and should have more of a feel for the situation.
If it is as you think that all kicks that find the line are deliberate then just make it last touch out as a rule. It basically has become this anyway.
 

yebiga

Come on Barbie let's go party
Aug 1, 2008
13,235
16,585
Post-Modern Clown-World
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Except it is clearly deliberate. The entire purpose of that kick is for the ball to go out of play when players do that. If it doesn't go out, its a turnover.


In the biggest sport in the world, handball is only a free kick when a player does it intentionally.

Basketball has an intentional rating on flagrant fouls that result in a heavier punishment.

In motor racing sports deliberately crashing into another racer is treated differently to just making contact while attempting to overtake.
Soccer/Football - clearly not your strong suit - Whether its accidental or not is irrelevant if it has effected the play - the adjuration is entirely on whether your hand is away from your body - could you have moved it out of the way in the circumstance - if it is any where away from your body and is deemed to have influenced a shot or pass it is automatically deemed deliberate. Semantically, you can argue that it is like AFL but it is nothing like it. - only if his hand is in front of his torso and the ball strikes his hand its not hand ball.

Furthermore, this decision may occur once in 10 games; not 10 times in 1 game.

Basketball - first it's a foul - the additional punishment is much like our tribunal - irrelevant counter point. That is more like arguing for a send off rule.

I'm going to ignore your Car Racing argument because its too insane a comparison for words.
 

yebiga

Come on Barbie let's go party
Aug 1, 2008
13,235
16,585
Post-Modern Clown-World
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Of the ones paid deliberate it would be less than half that the players intention was for it to go out. Rushed kick out of defense under pressure is exactly what it is, a kick out of the area to relieve pressure. Umpires should not be adjudicating intention and should have more of a feel for the situation.
If it is as you think that all kicks that find the line are deliberate then just make it last touch out as a rule. It basically has become this anyway.
The last touch option is a dramatic change and has it's own issues with players hand balling and tapping the ball into their opponents so the ball will rebound out of bounds. On top of the players who clearly can pick up the ball shepherding opponents from getting a touch. It might be too much of a change. Personally, I'm agnostic about it but can see why other people might find it too much. Obviously this is used in Soccer and Basketball.

However, I see no down side - at all - for a kick which is untouched being paid as if it is on the full whether it bounces or not. Essentially, the old kickout from a behind rule extended across the ground.

I am certain it would dramatically improve the game by forcing players to kick the ball more centrally. I can't think of single problem with it and remain astonished something so obvious has escaped the rules committee for so long. Both forwards and defenders would be kicking the ball more centrally - reducing stoppages and increasing open play. It's all positive. And the umpires don't have to adjudicate intent.

Someone give me one negative.

Think of the ball that is kicked and will inevitably go out - how desperately players will charge to get a touch on it to avoid a the free and have a ball up instead. It's all up side.
 
Last edited:

Duckimus Prime

Premiership Player
Apr 26, 2008
3,477
5,258
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Soccer/Football - clearly not your strong suit - Whether its accidental or not is irrelevant if it has effected the play - the adjuration is entirely on whether your hand is away from your body - could you have moved it out of the way in the circumstance - if it is any where away from your body and is deemed to have influenced a shot or pass it is automatically deemed deliberate. Semantically, you can argue that it is like AFL but it is nothing like it. - only if his hand is in front of his torso and the ball strikes his hand its not hand ball.
Doesn't seem to be yours. Thats for sure.

We could look at Law 12... where offences are based on whether they are careless, reckless or using excessive force.

And whats the definition of reckless:
  • Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
In other words completely about the players intention.

As for handling the ball offences:

It is an offence if a player:
• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball

Accidental handball is only an offence if it directly leads to a goal.

And in the case with the arm being away from the body, thats actually built from IFAB guidance to referees on how to judge a players intent when they're defending the ball. Its legislating in the rules that if a player is performing those actions then they are acting to deliberately create the handling offence.

Furthermore, this decision may occur once in 10 games; not 10 times in 1 game.
Actually part of being a football referee is making judgements on the players intent in every single challenge.

Basketball - first it's a foul - the additional punishment is much like our tribunal - irrelevant counter point. That is more like arguing for a send off rule.
Well they are parts of the laws of the game that are entirely based on judging a players intent. You're just upset that its another thing that shows that your statement was wrong in just about every single sport that anyone could list.
 

Duckimus Prime

Premiership Player
Apr 26, 2008
3,477
5,258
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Of the ones paid deliberate it would be less than half that the players intention was for it to go out. Rushed kick out of defense under pressure is exactly what it is, a kick out of the area to relieve pressure. Umpires should not be adjudicating intention and should have more of a feel for the situation.
If it is as you think that all kicks that find the line are deliberate then just make it last touch out as a rule. It basically has become this anyway.
Yeah, you're kidding yourself if you don't think the intent is for the ball to go out of play even in those quick hack situations. If you made the law last touch out, then players will have no problem keeping their hack clearances away from the boundaries.
 

un_eggs

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 9, 2007
5,881
7,985
un
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Liverpool
The deliberate paid against Francis for spoiling Buddy is one of the worst decisions I’ve seen in a long time and it’s barely been mentioned anywhere...
 

Remove this Banner Ad