The new 50 meter penalty requirements are bad.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Aramis

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 31, 2016
Posts
3,436
Likes
6,991
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Take your fifty! you shouldn't be able to play on in the middle of receiving your 50.... ridiculous that players are allowed to do that in the first place. Even more ridiculous that as Leather said above... that you will give away an extra 50 if you're too close to the player on the mark which hasn't been set.

This isn't rocket science.... the problem is the goal of modern football rule engineering isnt to create a fairer contest its to make the stars stand out even more because they think thats all people want.. To see stars. We support clubs, not individuals.
 

wce4premiership

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Posts
14,269
Likes
4,769
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Watching AFL360 last night, I now get how it's meant to work.
Penalised player runs with the umpire staying ahead of the player with the ball running 50 is ok.
Player with the 50 runs ahead of penalised opponent, the opponent must stay back and cannot engage.
So the trick is when 50 awarded against you, stop sulking to the Ump and start running because if the player with the free runs ahead of you, you're out of the contest.
What if Boak gives away a free kick against Dangerfield for example. Dangerfield simply has to sprint at him, he is automatically "infringing" and thus Danger gets a 100 metre penalty.

******* ridiculous interpretation when Boak could be running his fastest without whinging at all and still get penalised for not being as fast a runner. The rule was bought in to allow players to play on while the umpire is setting the mark, because leads present themselves during this process. I'm happy for that to be the case but in no way should an athletic player be given this advantage over others.

The umpire should still be the lead man, he should do so as fast as is reasonable as determined by himself, if he is overtaken it should be play on.
 

rogiebear93

Premiership Player
Joined
May 17, 2017
Posts
3,382
Likes
5,764
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Haven't read through every page so I don't know if this has been addressed, but couldn't a quick player simply just use their pace to get close to someone if they're attempting to run ahead and eventually man the mark?

Also, if the offending player clears out of the area (which I believe is the intention) and another player has to estimate 50m downfield and man the mark, how do they estimate the protected area?

They almost ruined Richmond v Carlton Rd 1 with protected area calls last year, that rule still exists. It's now compounded with another rule that puts way too much onus on the umpires to interpret the rules and the play in order to make decisions.

We should be removing interpretation from the rules not constantly adding more.
 

shintemaster

Premium Gold
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
13,640
Likes
20,248
Location
Ponderama
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Agreed- fifty is just too much. 30 would be better, esp since they give them out so freely nowadays
I don't mind the idea of a 25-30m penalty for minor infractions (protected zone, running across the mark) however would retain the 50m. It would be useful still in instances where players are cleaned up unfairly and need to leave the field (say a high and "clumsy" late spoil) to ensure that opponents don't get an advantage of numbers behind the ball by taking a player down aggressively.
 

Whiskers

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Posts
5,377
Likes
3,752
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Another player down the field will have to leave his man to man the mark creating a free player for the attacking team.
It’s all designed for higher scoring.
It’s going to be frustrating the big penalties. Smart players are going to love it.
 

FlyHigh18

Team Captain
Joined
May 8, 2017
Posts
585
Likes
904
Location
North Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Liverpool
I hated the rule change a couple of weeks ago but I've come around. A 50m is a penalty that should hurt and finally it does.

The receiving team should have full advantage to use it without the opposition killing time to set up defense.

I also love that player giving away the 50 is now further penalised by being pushed aside and left behind the play.

Now just to make sure those initial 50s are paid fairly!
 

FlyHigh18

Team Captain
Joined
May 8, 2017
Posts
585
Likes
904
Location
North Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Liverpool
Take your fifty! you shouldn't be able to play on in the middle of receiving your 50.... ridiculous that players are allowed to do that in the first place. Even more ridiculous that as Leather said above... that you will give away an extra 50 if you're too close to the player on the mark which hasn't been set.

This isn't rocket science.... the problem is the goal of modern football rule engineering isnt to create a fairer contest its to make the stars stand out even more because they think thats all people want.. To see stars. We support clubs, not individuals.
Why shouldn't you be able to play on? It's a 50m penalty and you should be able to reap full benefits without the other team setting up their defense.

Who cares if the player giving away the 50 can no longer be on the mark, he screwed up so he deserves to be left behind play.

I disagree with your fairness comment also, this change makes the game fairer as the punishment is more fitting.
 

Coaster2012

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Posts
5,073
Likes
5,261
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Manchester City, Lakers
It's going to create too much hesitation. When a player is sprinting down the middle, but is only at the 40m mark of his 50m penalty, and the umpire hasn't got back yet, and in a packed MCG, the other player must run back with him with space, waiting and waiting for the ump to blow the whistle that the player may or may not even hear.
 

rogiebear93

Premiership Player
Joined
May 17, 2017
Posts
3,382
Likes
5,764
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I hated the rule change a couple of weeks ago but I've come around. A 50m is a penalty that should hurt and finally it does.

The receiving team should have full advantage to use it without the opposition killing time to set up defense.

I also love that player giving away the 50 is now further penalised by being pushed aside and left behind the play.

Now just to make sure those initial 50s are paid fairly!
Uh, when did 50m penalties ever not hurt? If you receive a 50m penalty anywhere forward from the back of the centre square you're essentially lining up on goal. If you receive one in the defensive 50 you don't have to worry about clearing the ball over a zone because you're pushed well ahead of that zone.

This is a soft, evidently easy to exploit 50m rule that in no way makes the game better.

If this rule has to happen, remove the 'play on at any moment' component and make the penalty based on physically impeding the run of the player who received the 50 and not simply running parallel or in that players space. Also have a downfield umpire set the 50m mark and allow the player to proceed to that mark at any pace they would like and be able to immediately play on before another player mans it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

FlyHigh18

Team Captain
Joined
May 8, 2017
Posts
585
Likes
904
Location
North Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Liverpool
Uh, when did 50m penalties ever not hurt? If you receive a 50m penalty anywhere forward from the back of the centre square you're essentially lining up on goal. If you receive one in the defensive 50 you don't have to worry about clearing the ball over a zone because you're pushed well ahead of that zone.

This is a soft, evidently easy to exploit 50m rule that in no way makes the game better.

If this rule has to happen, remove the 'play on at any moment' component and make the penalty based on physically impeding the run of the player who received the 50 and not simply running parallel or in that players space. Also have a downfield umpire set the 50m mark and allow the player to proceed to that mark at any pace they would like and be able to immediately play on before another player mans it.
They hurt a little and now they hurt more.

Your views are based off a 2 week learning phase. It only looked easily exploitable bc half the players didn't know what to do yet.

In the season proper I think you'll find that the the offending players will be more educated and aware. Including the umpires.
 

citizen-erased

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Posts
14,370
Likes
10,191
Location
Victoria
AFL Club
Essendon
Ive got a few questions on how this one will make its way into the season proper.

1) How protected is the 50m zone. Do all players need to clear out of it? can you follow an opponent through, or if they cut across before the ball carrier do you have to stop following in fear of impeding the play on
2) How wide is the zone through the 50? 5m either side? 10?
3) At what point are they deemed to have played on if the mark hasn't been set
4) How do you differentiate playing on from sprinting to a mark not set.

the quicker players will reap the benefit of this. The slower ones will be punished.
And umps are gonna have a hard time with it. And its not like they were handling the number of rules and interpretations on their plates previously well either.
 

Winky

Club Legend
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Posts
1,783
Likes
1,050
Location
Sunshine coast
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Swan Districts
They hurt a little and now they hurt more.

Your views are based off a 2 week learning phase. It only looked easily exploitable bc half the players didn't know what to do yet.

In the season proper I think you'll find that the the offending players will be more educated and aware. Including the umpires.

The 50 Metre penalty is already poorly and inconsistently umpired as is a huge advantage to the receiving team. This new rule makes it even more complicated and subject to more variation of interpretation. Fans are already annoyed at the current penalty and this will cause frustration for what was a minor fault in that opposing teams were setting up more defenders while the mark was being set. Just imagine the confusion for people trying to learn the game if the AFL is trying to promote it. There should be less 50s not more....and a 100 metre penalty is a joke, particularly if players can easily milk it
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2017
Posts
34
Likes
30
AFL Club
Collingwood
The 50 Metre penalty is already poorly and inconsistently umpired as is a huge advantage to the receiving team. This new rule makes it even more complicated and subject to more variation of interpretation. Fans are already annoyed at the current penalty and this will cause frustration for what was a minor fault in that opposing teams were setting up more defenders while the mark was being set. Just imagine the confusion for people trying to learn the game if the AFL is trying to promote it. There should be less 50s not more....and a 100 metre penalty is a joke, particularly if players can easily milk it
I really dont see the confusion about it, they have given the player a protected zone to play on just like any other mark, the protected zone follows the player forwards and backwards like other Mark's you can be infront of this zone to the side and even behind but not inside it, I think the zone is a 10 metre circle, if the player that gave the 50 away is too slow and gets to close to the player with the ball he needs to exit horizontally the same as any other protected zone, it makes more sense to add the protected zone to the 50 so it's the same every time a player has the ball from a kick/free kick they have a protected zone and now everyone should be on the same page eventually I think we will see less 50s given because the rules are constantly the same instead of changing etc
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2018
Posts
1,336
Likes
3,377
AFL Club
Richmond
So the player down the ground sees his teammate has to stay out of the way bc the ball carrier has already sprinted off ahead of him, the confusion for mine is where does he man the mark? how is he meant to judge where the umpire will set the mark? Do we therefore expect him to waltz out of the way as well until the umpire calls where the mark is - its basically Moses parting the red sea. Ridiculous rule
 

Winky

Club Legend
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Posts
1,783
Likes
1,050
Location
Sunshine coast
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Swan Districts
I really dont see the confusion about it, they have given the player a protected zone to play on just like any other mark, the protected zone follows the player forwards and backwards like other Mark's you can be infront of this zone to the side and even behind but not inside it, I think the zone is a 10 metre circle, if the player that gave the 50 away is too slow and gets to close to the player with the ball he needs to exit horizontally the same as any other protected zone, it makes more sense to add the protected zone to the 50 so it's the same every time a player has the ball from a kick/free kick they have a protected zone and now everyone should be on the same page eventually I think we will see less 50s given because the rules are constantly the same instead of changing etc
The point is that it adds unnecessary complication for little gain. As you say, you can think it through and understand the rule but unlike the protected zone existing up until now, this is a moving zone and can impact several players until such time as the umpire either calls play on or sets the new mark. The protected zone has been contentious anyway and umpires are inconsistent in interpretation. The 50 metres is too harsh a penalty for minor infringements and I believe we will now have more disruption and frustration.
 

Struggle

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Posts
5,680
Likes
8,824
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
So the player down the ground sees his teammate has to stay out of the way bc the ball carrier has already sprinted off ahead of him, the confusion for mine is where does he man the mark? how is he meant to judge where the umpire will set the mark? Do we therefore expect him to waltz out of the way as well until the umpire calls where the mark is - its basically Moses parting the red sea. Ridiculous rule
Yep, if he mans the mark 48m away because the umpire hasn't set it yet it's another 50
 
Last edited:

Simon_Nesbit

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 26, 2001
Posts
10,397
Likes
5,039
Location
Tasmania
AFL Club
Hawthorn
IF they don't get rid of protected zone entirely (I have no issue with actual physical obstructing the player being another 50m), then I would modify so that the mark is where the umpire is.

If the attacking player runs forward of the umpire, then that's the end of his advantage. He can plan on at any time, and has a protected zone (around the umpire which is the moving mark), but if he overtakes the umpire, it's now play on.
 

Thewlis Dish

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 9, 2003
Posts
25,208
Likes
17,665
Location
Five Star Laundry
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
FGR
3) At what point are they deemed to have played on if the mark hasn't been set
This is the bit that confuses me. A player playing on after a 50 is going to start sprinting straight away and will always be ahead of the umpire, so how does the umpire know when to signal play on? And players down field will need to be simultaneously watching the player who has played on and the umpire to work out when they can engage him. I can see the idea behind it but it seems very messy.
 

Duskfire

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Posts
5,941
Likes
4,210
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Geelong
My only real issue with it is setting the mark. Umpires judge 50 incorrectly all the time and that’s fine, distance is hard to judge at times. That also applies to players. It applies to the player down field setting the mark, and also to the player who got the 50 as well. They are meant to run, while looking for play on options, but also realistically trying to guess what is 50?

As people pointed out, a player could judge 50 and it’s actually 48m and that’s another 50 meter. Or they could judge it correctly but the umpire judges it incorrectly.

It’s just a weird situation with too many variables. I understand the point of it, but a 50 meter penalty was already a massive penalty. Especially when nowadays it can be easy to give one away if you aren’t careful.
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Posts
2,557
Likes
1,752
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Geelong Cats
I don't mind the idea of a 25-30m penalty for minor infractions (protected zone, running across the mark) however would retain the 50m. It would be useful still in instances where players are cleaned up unfairly and need to leave the field (say a high and "clumsy" late spoil) to ensure that opponents don't get an advantage of numbers behind the ball by taking a player down aggressively.
Fair point. The technical or 'unintentional" ones don't merit such a stringent punishment, but umpires do need the fifty to deal with cynical acts from players such as you describe.
 
Top Bottom