Rules The new man on the mark rule is utterly ridiculous.

[Stopher]

its a farce.And it'll become a bigger farce by the end of rnd 1 because whats stopping the player with the ball from running closer and closer to the man on the mark to within 2 mtrs and baulking him.By the time the umpire has called play on the player with the ball would already be 3 mtrs beyond the mark.
Coaches arn't stupid.It'll be already in practice.

U/10's stuff.

To so harshly punish a player acting on instinct, depending on whether the umpire can blow his whistle fast enough...it's a piss take.

 

[faible]

There will be than many 50m penalties given. It’s in a players nature to move if the ball carrier does.

If a player is smart they could fake a step, the man on the mark moves by instinct, 50m given.

There was one given away in the Essendon v Carlton practice game, what makes you think there's going to be a deluge of them?

 

[SunshineBoy]

But the Umpire won't listen to you. It happened to Ed Curnow in the Carlton game the other day. Essendon player takes a mark on the boundary at the intersection of the 50m arc. Takes about two steps back of his mark. Ed Curnow stops about 8m short of the 50m line (i.e about 10m from the player and 8m short of the spot where the mark was taken) and starts doing the flailing arms, side to side that players would ordinarily do. Umpire call's 50m immediately. Curnow throws his hands up ointing to the mark and the Umpire has NOTHING of it. Advance, penalised for daring to flaunt the AFL's agenda.

Scratch your nuts 50 meters

 

[theyellowsash]

There was one given away in the Essendon v Carlton practice game, what makes you think there's going to be a deluge of them?

Stupidity

 

[HPKS]

Oh btw keep clicking everyone the media have reeled you in hook line & sinker lol

 

[theyellowsash]

Oh btw keep clicking everyone the media have reeled you in hook line & sinker lol

Indeed. Out of the thousands of marks and free kicks in the practice matches. There's like what, 4 paid? But that's not what sells papers.

 

[Milanista28]

I love the rule - of course it's a salty * fan complaining about it. With Saad gaining 8km a game in 2021 I look forward to flat footed forwards league wide being unable to chase the mighty Saad down.

Lol pick 8 for a half back who can't kick

 

[Thetrader15]

There will be than many 50m penalties given. It’s in a players nature to move if the ball carrier does.

If a player is smart they could fake a step, the man on the mark moves by instinct, 50m given.

There's only one person who doesn't have this instinct...the umpire.

If they want faster play, call play on 3 seconds after a mark / free, or as soon as the player starts to move.

But in all seriousness, it's just a stupid rule and we are seeing that play out already.

 

[Thetrader15]

The worst one is the Joe daniher one. Because if he was dangerfield and the guy on the mark was mason cox, he would just keep running... this is going to be hilarious.

Why wasn't Daniher called for play on I wonder? Do we still have the 'natural arc' of the kick not being called play on?

 

[Thetrader15]

The end game here is no standing the mark. It's clear and eveyone know's what's happening. If a player takes a mark, everyone evacuates the protected zone and a player can then take the kick.

That way there's no disadvantage for the team without the ball and no restriction on where the player can kick.

 

[Suma Magic]

want the umpires to be out there carrying protractors to make sure theyre moving at 45 degrees?

I don’t want any change.

But the one I mentioned would be easier to implement than what they went with. Now they have to adjudge if anyone is within the 100m2 protected zone behind the mark. They also have to know where the mark is and where the man on the mark is. And if someone moves more than a tiny bit once they have told them to stand.

Making sure that someone has gone at least far back as sideways is simple compared to all that.

 

[Suma Magic]

It’s crazy that when a player taking a kick is 15m behind the mark, that means there is a 400m2 protected area. The size of a roughly average house block.

 

[theyellowsash]

I don’t want any change.

But the one I mentioned would be easier to implement than what they went with. Now they have to adjudge if anyone is within the 100m2 protected zone behind the mark. They also have to know where the mark is and where the man on the mark is. And if someone moves more than a tiny bit once they have told them to stand.

Making sure that someone has gone at least far back as sideways is simple compared to all that.

You think having someone stand on the spot is harder to adjudicate than having someone being allowed to run within a series of imagined lines at specific angles? Which is also being looked at from an angle and distance skewing the perspective even more...

 

[theyellowsash]

The end game here is no standing the mark. It's clear and eveyone know's what's happening. If a player takes a mark, everyone evacuates the protected zone and a player can then take the kick.

That way there's no disadvantage for the team without the ball and no restriction on where the player can kick.

It's not. That's just stupid. It's like saying the endgame for allowing gay marriage is to allow the marrying of dildos.

 

[Suma Magic]

You think having someone stand on the spot is harder to adjudicate than having someone being allowed to run within a series of imagined lines at specific angles? Which is also being looked at from an angle and distance skewing the perspective even more...

If only it was that simple...

Under the new rule players can’t run within 5m behind or 10 wide of the mark. And that mark may differ from where the “man on the mark” must remain. This is a new requirement which is going to be tough to assess.

So the umpires have to police the protected area as well as what the man on the mark is doing.

 

[theyellowsash]

If only it was that simple...

Under the new rule players can’t run within 5m behind or 10 wide of the mark. And that mark may differ from where the “man on the mark” must remain. This is a new requirement which is going to be tough to assess.

So the umpires have to police the protected area as well as what the man on the mark is doing.

and simply watching to see whether the man on the mark has moved at all, is much simpler and easier to do than watching to judge whether he has moved within an area bounded by imaginary lines with very specific requirements, relying entirely on his ability to judge angles and lines in 3d space at a distance

 

[faible]

So the umpires have to police the protected area as well as what the man on the mark is doing.

Hasn't the protected area already been a 'thing' for a while now?

 

[Suma Magic]

and simply watching to see whether the man on the mark has moved at all, is much simpler and easier to do than watching to judge whether he has moved within an area bounded by imaginary lines with very specific requirements, relying entirely on his ability to judge angles and lines in 3d space at a distance

You're missing the point. Under the current rule, umpires have to judge if any player enters the imaginary protected area. Under the old rule, and the other i proposed, you don't.

Of course its easier to work out if someone has moved at all than if they have stayed within an imaginary area. But the current rules does require you to workout if someone leaves or moves into an imaginary area.

 

[Suma Magic]

Hasn't the protected area already been a 'thing' for a while now?

Only for the area between the kicker and the man on the mark. They have now added a new area behind the man on the mark to accommodate this new rule.

 

[faible]

Only for the area between the kicker and the man on the mark. They have now added a new area behind the man on the mark to accommodate this new rule.

They've been trying to stamp out interfering with the man on the mark for a while now, I remember when Hawthorn used to do it all the time but now they get called on it.

 

[Obeanie1]

Got confirmation tonight that all country footy in Victoria is adopting this rule. If there was ever a rule not designed for local implementation by country umpires it's this one.

We've never brought in the rushed behind infringement so I don't know why it's necessary to bring in this joke of a rule.

IMO this rule is fine at the professional level with full time players and coaches.

Should not apply to a mature levels whatsoever.

If they bring this rule in for juniors OMG what a mess that will become.....

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

To so harshly punish a player acting on instinct, depending on whether the umpire can blow his whistle fast enough...it's a piss take.

Your right.Imagine being that player on the mark and all his instincts from way back at underage footy tells him too move left or right.The player with the ball is in a great position.The player flinches and its a 50 or he gains 10mtrs beyond the mark.
In a way i hope all clubs get together in rnd 1 and instruct the players to move.Imagine what a farce it would be with over 100 50mtrs awarded in every game in rnd 1.lol
What a great look for the game.lol

 

[theyellowsash]

You're missing the point. Under the current rule, umpires have to judge if any player enters the imaginary protected area. Under the old rule, and the other i proposed, you don't.

Of course its easier to work out if someone has moved at all than if they have stayed within an imaginary area. But the current rules does require you to workout if someone leaves or moves into an imaginary area.

That was already a rule, the protected area extended all the way to the man on the mark. they just never actually used it.

 

[Suma Magic]

That was already a rule, the protected area extended all the way to the man on the mark. they just never actually used it.

I think you've misunderstood. I was referring to the new protected area behind the man on the mark, not the existing protected area in front of the man on the mark.

This is from the 2020 laws:



This is from the 2021 laws.



And this grey area (haha the irony) is from the mark, not the man on the mark. So if the man on the mark is 1m to the right of the actual mark, then players can go within 9m of him on the right of the mark, and 11m from him on the left of the mark.

 

[Suma Magic]

Here are the 2021 laws for anyone interested, this new rule is on page 58: https://sanfl-content.imgix.net/content/uploads/2021/02/18144238/2021-Laws-of-the-Game-WEB.pdf