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

[NoobPie]

As far as I am concerned so far the new rule seems to be working.

As a proxy measure, scores are currently tracking at 6 points a quarter more than first round of last years preseason.

 

[Milanista28]

Rule is good. Coaches will drop numbers back if scoring stays high, some games may become real slogs

 

[40porpoise]

I’ve just seen port not man the mark at all for a period of play. Instead they have chosen to zone off the ball and man space.

Who would’ve thought there’d be an unintended ultra defensive reaction to a rule that hasn’t been properly thought out...

 

[mxett]

I’ve just seen port not man the mark at all for a period of play. Instead they have chosen to zone off the ball and man space.

Who would’ve thought there’d be an unintended ultra defensive reaction to a rule that hasn’t been properly thought out...

been happening all weekend. Geelong were doing it last night. The player who would normally stand the mark was retreating about 10m before the umpire could yell stand, then running from side to side like they used to when they were on the mark.

I can understand the concept, but basically they are conceding an extra 10m on the kick because the player with the ball can advance to the point of the mark without being called play on. They can also kick to a short target on either side of the mark because there's no one on the mark to worry about. Pretty stupid adaption if you ask me. Cant see it lasting

 

[Suma Magic]

The first 4 games of 2020 preseason compared to the first 4 games of 2021 preseason

2020
St Kilda vs Hawthorn - 108 tackles
Western Bulldogs vs North Melbourne - 168 tackles
Melbourne vs Adelaide - 141 tackles
Gold Coast vs Geelong - 164 tackles

2021
Carlton vs St Kilda - 93 tackles
Collingwood vs Richmond - 92 tackles
North Melbourne vs Hawthorn - 109 tackles
Geelong vs Essendon - 106 tackles

May I also say that the AFL website sucks for getting this sort of information. Footywire is so much better but footywire doesn't do preseason games.

Thanks for that. A stark difference, albeit a tiny sample size.

 

[NoobPie]

been happening all weekend. Geelong were doing it last night. The player who would normally stand the mark was retreating about 10m before the umpire could yell stand, then running from side to side like they used to when they were on the mark.

I can understand the concept, but basically they are conceding an extra 10m on the kick because the player with the ball can advance to the point of the mark without being called play on. They can also kick to a short target on either side of the mark because there's no one on the mark to worry about. Pretty stupid adaption if you ask me. Cant see it lasting

Exactly, conceding 10 metres is hardly some devastating "unintended consequence"

 

[GeTrain]

I like the rule. Teams will need to have strong targets up forward again with how quickly the ball moves. Also should see less bombs to the top of the square to a pack of 10 players.

 

[RUNVS]

Just adding

2020
St Kilda vs Hawthorn - 108 tackles
Western Bulldogs vs North Melbourne - 168 tackles
Melbourne vs Adelaide - 141 tackles
Gold Coast vs Geelong - 164 tackles
Brisbane vs Port Adelaide - 144 tackles
West Coast vs Essendon - 109 tackles

2021
Carlton vs St Kilda - 93 tackles
Collingwood vs Richmond - 92 tackles
North Melbourne vs Hawthorn - 109 tackles
Geelong vs Essendon - 106 tackles
Sydney vs GWS - 105 tackles
Adelaide vs Port Adelaide - 87 tackles

 

[NoobPie]

Just adding

2020
St Kilda vs Hawthorn - 108 tackles
Western Bulldogs vs North Melbourne - 168 tackles
Melbourne vs Adelaide - 141 tackles
Gold Coast vs Geelong - 164 tackles
Brisbane vs Port Adelaide - 144 tackles
West Coast vs Essendon - 109 tackles

2021
Carlton vs St Kilda - 93 tackles
Collingwood vs Richmond - 92 tackles
North Melbourne vs Hawthorn - 109 tackles
Geelong vs Essendon - 106 tackles
Sydney vs GWS - 105 tackles
Adelaide vs Port Adelaide - 87 tackles

Interesting whether that is due to reduction in "down the line" kicking to contests (leading to more repeat contests / stoppages) or a broader change in game styles

 

[Supercoach Bargain]

Not even the biggest issue of the rule changes:

‘Biggest test’ from AFL rule changes not man-on-mark: Buckley

Nathan Buckley and Damien Hardwick did not have to be prodded to speak about how two of the AFL’s rule changes might make footy look different in 2021.

www.theage.com.au

The interchange number cut makes more difference, according to coaches.

 

[Roby]

I've seen over two dozen instances of players not standing still, and at times blatantly block the wider angle with one or two side steps without it been called. If they were serious calling "all legitimate infringements" of this rule I'd reckon there would be about 5-10 a game more that I have noticed.

So the issue then becomes that 10% of these "not standing on the mark" decisions become arbitrary 50m penalties.

Also, correlation is not causition. And even if this was causation we have a very small sample size, in practice matches (important in itself), with some of these decisions resulting in scores which may have not occurred if the 50m penalty was not paid.

There is still another half of the Perth game left, while it may be boring to do so (another issue in itself), actually watch every player who mans the mark and see how often this rule is not paid.

 

[RUNVS]

I've seen over two dozen instances of players not standing still, and at times blatantly block the wider angle with one or two side steps without it been called. If they were serious calling "all legitimate infringements" of this rule I'd reckon there would be about 5-10 a game more that I have noticed.

So the issue then becomes that 10% of these "not standing on the mark" decisions become arbitrary 50m penalties.

Also, correlation is not causition. And even if this was causation we have a very small sample size, in practice matches (important in itself), with some of these decisions resulting in scores which may have not occurred if the 50m penalty was not paid.

There is still another half of the Perth game left, while it may be boring to do so (another issue in itself), actually watch every player who mans the mark and see how often this rule is not paid.

No rule is applied 100% of the time though. I mean can you imagine how many free kicks there would be if every illegal disposal was paid?

 

[Roby]

No rule is applied 100% of the time though. I mean can you imagine how many free kicks there would be if every illegal disposal was paid?

Well I've seen at least four blatant ones this quarter. There's been a few more less blatant.

Ultimately when you've paid one, you've just arbitrarily picked one. How is that fair.

 

[seanoff]

have now seen 3 games with this rule. who'd have thunk that making the man on the mark stand still would open up the game. there were forwards in the forward line all game. the game flowed better.

good let it go. pay the 50s. make it stick the footy looks much better. it looks like senior footy again, not under 6 Auskick.

 

[rick_422]

They put the umpires in a no win position because of the strict interpretation of the rule. It then becomes frustrating when the umpires miss a player moving on the mark in frenetic play compared to a clear and obvious half step that gets called 50m (Eg Daniel Howe

15

Daniel Howe

Age

30

Ht

193cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.2

4star

K

8.9

3star

HB

7.3

5star

M

4.3

4star

T

4.5

5star

CL

2.2

4star

No current season stats available

D

12.2

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

5.6

4star

M

4.4

4star

T

3.2

5star

CL

1.0

3star

yesterday for Hawthorn) that wouldn't have impacted play, and there's been more.

I don't understand why they don't give the umpires some leeway by instead of enforcing 'stand' where players have to be statues, allow players to move 1m/1-step either way of the mark. The problem wasn't players moving a metre either side of the mark. It was the players moving 3m+ either way. The rule change isn't a bad thing in my opinion. Just too big of an over correction that takes too much to manage for the umpires.

 

[mxett]

have now seen 3 games with this rule. who'd have thunk that making the man on the mark stand still would open up the game. there were forwards in the forward line all game. the game flowed better.

good let it go. pay the 50s. make it stick the footy looks much better. it looks like senior footy again, not under 6 Auskick.

I agree. I gotta hand it to whoever thought of this rule change. It's pretty outside the square really, and for such an insignificant change to the look of the game has had a substantial impact.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

No it isn't "self-evident" at all. You are confusing your own fanatical conviction with fact.

I don't think you understand what self evident means...

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Agreed. It is hard to explain, but the play just looks a bit more open. May be my imagination though.

Thats a little phenomenon called "pre season". It's this magical type of footy where the result doesn't matter and players don't defensively run as hard.

 

[Roby]

i would seriously just avoid engaging with that dude. A prize clown

I'm not sure how you still have an account.

 

[RUNVS]

Thats a little phenomenon called "pre season". It's this magical type of footy where the result doesn't matter and players don't defensively run as hard.

There are signifcant changes in the tackle count and a few other stats as well compared to the preseason last year, so it is having an effect.

 

[Sarcoidevo]

Its a practice match so there will always be less tackles.

Either way the stand on the mark rule has been offset by the umpire calling play on quickly even if the player with the ball hasn't moved off his line

It was very very evident in the Saints game and bits of the other games I have seen.

This quick play on call gives defending players less time to get back as the player with the ball will be forced to move it on before they can flood back and get into position properly

 

[RUNVS]

Its a practice match so there will always be less tackles.

Either way the stand on the mark rule has been offset by the umpire calling play on quickly even if the player with the ball hasn't moved off his line

It was very very evident in the Saints game and bits of the other games I have seen.

This quick play on call gives defending players less time to get back as the player with the ball will be forced to move it on before they can flood back and get into position properly

We are comparing it to last years practice matches though so the comparison is valid.

 

[Smithdogmaddog]

I can't "STAND!" it.

 

[queensberryrules]

I cannot "STAND" it.

I think it's on the mark.

 

[NoobPie]

I don't think you understand what self evident means...

You're right, I checked

"To claim a fact or situation is self-evident is a useful rhetorical advice for people with low intellectual standards trying to arrogate a wholly subjective assertion"

My apologies