The 'running too far rule', has something changed?

[BACCS]

Now I thought this was a pretty clear cut rule, but there has been 3 instances in 3 separate games over the weekend where the interpretation of this rule has been perplexing to say the least. Firstly in the Sydney/Freo game (against a Sydney player, can't remember who?), then today against Douglas in the 1st quarter of the Adelaide game, and another one in the WCE/St Kilda game (against a Saints player, Fisher?). The players have run no more than 10 metres in each case, which is why I am wondering if the rule has changed or something? Or has it been a really shit weekend for the umpires?

 

[Buddy Goes Bang]

Players are always allowed to run further than ten metres.

They get pinged if they run further than 15 I reckon. Players with longer strides get to run further too.

Buddy ran 20m today and didn't get pinged.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Reckon Ben Johnson was unlucky on Friday night.

We all know the umpiring department has flavour-of-the-month crackdowns, but try getting anyone at the AFL to admit it.

 

[Notorious_29]

It's obviously been brought up as the rule of the week. I have seen 2-3 shockers in the 4 games I have watched this weekend. The Fisher one was easily the worst.

 

[Last of the Roys]

The Umpire Nichols one against Adelaide was absolutely hilarious. Did he blink while the guy was bouncing the ball??? (Worst umpire in the universe, so hardly unexpected).

Seriously there must have been some sort of directive, and this is what you get. I have seen at least two absolute shockers. Well done Giesch, keep up the good work.

 

[brucetiki]

I'd love to see Giescham defend Nicholls. How the heck could he consider less than 8 metres to be 'running too far'. The only option the AFL have for Nicholls is for him to be dropped next week.

 

[Murraj1966]

That was a joke the Fisher one, he moved like 5 meters forward, taking sideways steps.

Buddy today in the Hawks blues game moved far more without bouncing, but took greater strides. It shouldn't be steps it should be distance covered.

 

[soho]

ben johnson got stiffed big time... crucial point in the game too if i remember... then he got done for throwing a ball, when the replay on the big screen looked like he handballed fairly...

bad umpiring in general...

 

[Bob_vic]

That was a joke the Fisher one, he moved like 5 meters forward, taking sideways steps.

Buddy today in the Hawks blues game moved far more without bouncing, but took greater strides. It shouldn't be steps it should be distance covered.

15.2.2(b) Where a Player is moving whilst in possession of the football, he or she must bounce or touch the football on the ground at least once every 15 metres, irrespective of whether such Player is running in a straight line or otherwise.

Therefore, going 5 metres to the left then 5 metres to the right is 10 metres.

 

[Scroater]

Did anyone see the Mcmahon (Nth) mark about 20 out fom goal when he flew over the top of Addison?

He then played on, ran around Hudson and ran to the line and kicked the goal. All without bouncing the ball.

Johnson was very stiff indeed.

 

[Murraj1966]

15.2.2(b) Where a Player is moving whilst in possession of the football, he or she must bounce or touch the football on the ground at least once every 15 metres, irrespective of whether such Player is running in a straight line or otherwise.

Therefore, going 5 metres to the left then 5 metres to the right is 10 metres.

Yes, but he didn't cover 15 metres of ground anyway.

It was a farce, if you can think that what Fisher covered was 15 meters of ground, Buddy covered the length of the Flemington earlier that day.

 

[harmesy 37]

Players are always allowed to run further than ten metres.

They get pinged if they run further than 15 I reckon. Players with longer strides get to run further too.

Buddy ran 20m today and didn't get pinged.

Only 20 metres? I thought it was about 80 metres he ran, and also Franklin was allowed to hold the ball, be tackled, do 380 degree rotations whilst being tackled and still it wasn't holding the ball.

If you are a spectacular player or more exciting player I think they give you a bit of extra wriggle room with the rules eg Hodge, Franklin etc.

Still doesn't change the fact we didn't have a good enough match up for Franklin today - we (Carlton and the umpires) played him back into form.

 

[-CG-]

I'd love to see Giescham defend Nicholls. How the heck could he consider less than 8 metres to be 'running too far'. The only option the AFL have for Nicholls is for him to be dropped next week.

If McLaren can get dropped after making one terrible decision than so should Nicholls. The guy has no clue and has fast become my most despised umpire.

Seriously Douglas bounced the ball ran nine steps had a kick and got pinged for running too far. It makes no sense whatsoever

Learn the rules!!

 

[TimmehJC"]

Only 20 metres? I thought it was about 80 metres he ran, and also Franklin was allowed to hold the ball, be tackled, do 380 degree rotations whilst being tackled and still it wasn't holding the ball.

If you are a spectacular player or more exciting player I think they give you a bit of extra wriggle room with the rules eg Hodge, Franklin etc.

Still doesn't change the fact we didn't have a good enough match up for Franklin today - we (Carlton and the umpires) played him back into form.

He covered about 50 metres, but did bounce it twice, the last run was about 25, probably should have been paid. As for Hodge and holding the ball, have a look at what he was getting pinged with the last few weeks, Hodge gets very little wriggle room

 

[cryptor]

If you are a spectacular player or more exciting player I think they give you a bit of extra wriggle room with the rules eg Hodge, Franklin etc.

LOL. Pull the other one mate. Franklin is one of the hardest done by when it comes to "wriggle room with the rules". So much so that he is often getting pinged for things his direct opponents are getting away with and even getting it blown against him when it should go to him.

Yes, he should have got pinged for holding the ball yesterday arvo for that run and I would gladly trade that call if it meant the umpires would actually give Franklin a free kick once in a while whenever he is held, pushed or has his arms chopped when going for the ball in our forward 50. It happens every game he plays and it definitely happened yesterday arvo and it was even mentioned numerous times by the commentary team on channel 7.

 

[King Elvis]

The Douglas one, pretty sure the Umpire didn't see him bounce it.

Which is pretty incredible to start with, and then just stupid to pay a free if you aren't sure (although that seems to be the preference).

 

[Blowfly]

If McLaren can get dropped after making one terrible decision than so should Nicholls. The guy has no clue and has fast become my most despised umpire.

Seriously Douglas bounced the ball ran nine steps had a kick and got pinged for running too far. It makes no sense whatsoever

Learn the rules!!

Except he didn't, he got dropped for several poor decisions on the night.

 

[Buddy Goes Bang]

Only 20 metres? I thought it was about 80 metres he ran, and also Franklin was allowed to hold the ball, be tackled, do 380 degree rotations whilst being tackled and still it wasn't holding the ball.

If you are a spectacular player or more exciting player I think they give you a bit of extra wriggle room with the rules eg Hodge, Franklin etc.

Still doesn't change the fact we didn't have a good enough match up for Franklin today - we (Carlton and the umpires) played him back into form.

Yeah. The umpires are renouned for their favourable treatment of Franklin.

 

[melbournemartin]

I must admit, I always thought that it was the amount of footsteps you take, not the amount of metres covered. Some players obviously share my opinion because they'll basically jog on the spot in defence sometimes yet still tap the ball on the ground.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

I must admit, I always thought that it was the amount of footsteps you take, not the amount of metres covered. Some players obviously share my opinion because they'll basically jog on the spot in defence sometimes yet still tap the ball on the ground.

generally, 1 long step is a meter long, however, the rule is 15m, not 15 steps.

 

[BACCS]

Except he didn't, he got dropped for several poor decisions on the night.

It was made pretty clear the Slattery decision cost him his spot the next week, you can dig up the quote from Gieschan for proof. The thing is, if it was the 'flavour of the week' rule, then why the inconsistencies accross the matches? Pathetic.

 

[King Elvis]

I must admit, I always thought that it was the amount of footsteps you take, not the amount of metres covered. Some players obviously share my opinion because they'll basically jog on the spot in defence sometimes yet still tap the ball on the ground.

If they run back and forwards 3 metres, 5 times, they've run too far, but aside from that, they often do it so if they do need to take off and start running, they haven't already used up a lot of the metres they can run....

 

[Scroater]

Just saw the Douglas one on OWAAT on one hd and the funny thing is, you could see Nichols was actually in the clear and had a perfect view. Very ordinary as usal.

 

[melbournemartin]

If they run back and forwards 3 metres, 5 times, they've run too far, but aside from that, they often do it so if they do need to take off and start running, they haven't already used up a lot of the metres they can run....

Good point.

 

[Blowfly]

It was made pretty clear the Slattery decision cost him his spot the next week, you can dig up the quote from Gieschan for proof. The thing is, if it was the 'flavour of the week' rule, then why the inconsistencies accross the matches? Pathetic.

Sorry, having real trouble finding that quote where Gieschen confirms that the Slattery decision alone cost him his spot

http://sportal.com.au/afl-news-display/mclaren-stood-down-90538

"Scott won’t be umpiring this weekend, not just because of that one decision (against Slattery) but because of a few decisions in the game like the Andrew Welsh high contact, push in the back in the marking contest (which was not paid)."

http://sportal.com.au/afl-news-display/mclaren-stood-down-90538

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-dumps-experienced-umpire-mclaren-20100503-u3ci.html

Gieschen said the dumping related not only to the Slattery decision, but to several other mistakes during the Essendon-Hawthorn game at the MCG.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-dumps-experienced-umpire-mclaren-20100503-u3ci.html

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/defenders-get-leeway-as-mclaren-dumped-20100503-u3s9.html

Gieschen said McLaren's failure to award a free kick to Andrew Welsh, taken high in a marking contest, also had contributed to the decision to drop him.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/defenders-get-leeway-as-mclaren-dumped-20100503-u3s9.html