The Tom Lynch 2 goals in 30 seconds freekick - AFL need to fix this

YippeeYiYeo

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 21, 2015
7,292
10,950
AFL Club
West Coast
Tom Lynch just ran into an open goal and less than a second after he kicked the ball through the goals he was pushed in the back and awarded another set shot at goal. That rule is a joke. No way does a push in the back warrant an extra 6 points. If anything Richmond should get a freekick from the next centre bounce. Thats it. People think the 50m rule is harsh at times. Under no circumstances should anyone get a free goal for a push in the back immediately after kicking a goal.

Get this crap right AFL.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

caspian

Team Captain
Jan 6, 2019
416
669
AFL Club
West Coast
It was a stupid, undisciplined act man. Perhaps you're right about it that it should be a "downfield" (centre square) free kick.

But really I think a lot more of flak needs to go to the port player for doing something so stupid. What was he expecting to happen?
 

caloschwaby

You Beauty
Jan 3, 2017
3,757
4,238
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Celtics, Renegades, Packers
Had the privilege of paying one of these in a junior game after a bloke did the exact same thing, only in the side about 3 seconds later :p
Poor kids tried to convince me I was making up the rules. It's not me mate! It's the AFL...
 

Chism

Moderator
Sep 7, 2008
30,390
26,250
Admiring Anya.
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Cowboys, Pacers , HotSpurs ,Dodgers
The push was clearly after the goal was kicked. No excuse.
The problem is that the Umps choose to pay it whenever they see fit with bias.

The exact same act will not be paid every time, especially to the lower teams and no name players. Do it to a star of the game the Umps cannot blow the whistle quick enough!

Consistency is all most want.
 

Duskfire

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 30, 2007
6,601
5,245
Perth
AFL Club
Geelong
The problem is that the Umps choose to pay it whenever they see fit with bias.

The exact same act will not be paid every time, especially to the lower teams and no name players. Do it to a star of the game the Umps cannot blow the whistle quick enough!

Consistency is all most want.
How often does a clear free kick like that happen though after a goal has already been kicked? As soon as I saw it I knew what was going to happen, and I can’t recall too many blatant ones like that.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

longsuffreosupp

Premiership Player
Jul 10, 2002
4,352
2,156
WA
AFL Club
Fremantle
The problem is that the Umps choose to pay it whenever they see fit with bias.

The exact same act will not be paid every time, especially to the lower teams and no name players. Do it to a star of the game the Umps cannot blow the whistle quick enough!

Consistency is all most want.
I agree.

The baffling thing is the commentators were banging on about it. They should be the one's who pull the umps up when they don't call it.
 

Duskfire

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 30, 2007
6,601
5,245
Perth
AFL Club
Geelong
How can people be happy with this rule? A push in the back anywhere else on the ground doesnt results in a guaranteed goal. Its a joke. The ball has gone though the goals. The play now restarts back in the middle. Thats where the freekick should be given.
Because it’s a stupid avoidable free kick. Something similar happened to Geelong in the 09 Grand Final and I hated it. But ultimately it was Milburns fault not the umpires.
 

Bone71

All Australian
Oct 13, 2007
840
208
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Glenelg
How can people be happy with this rule? A push in the back anywhere else on the ground doesnt results in a guaranteed goal. Its a joke. The ball has gone though the goals. The play now restarts back in the middle. Thats where the freekick should be given.
What are you talking about? A blatant push in the back in front of goal by a defender is almost always a guaranteed goal. A free should be paid where it occurs or where the ball is when it occurs which ever is the greater penalty.
 

blue harvest

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 11, 2008
10,016
12,779
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
How can people be happy with this rule? A push in the back anywhere else on the ground doesnt results in a guaranteed goal. Its a joke. The ball has gone though the goals. The play now restarts back in the middle. Thats where the freekick should be given.
Free kick is given where the offence occurs. Doesn't matter that a goal has been scored. Did you see Sicily against Bulldogs, lol and his wasn't even worthy of a free.
 

demondavey

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 18, 2005
22,520
18,377
AFL Club
Melbourne
The problem is that the Umps choose to pay it whenever they see fit with bias.

The exact same act will not be paid every time, especially to the lower teams and no name players. Do it to a star of the game the Umps cannot blow the whistle quick enough!

Consistency is all most want.
Who do they favour do you think?
 

Back One Out

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 2, 2015
13,800
23,646
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
G.A.G.F.
Funny seeing all the nob ends contradict the OP and criticise Burton's undisciplined act

Classic Big Footy

OP is dead right. This is one of the worst rules in the game. Always has been. Nobody wants to see goals like that nor see a close game decided by less than a goal because of a ridiculously over-the-top rule such as this.

A free kick from the ensuing centre bounce would be enough of a deterrent to stop asshole defenders from dumping forwards to ground after a goal is scored. No need for an extra 6 points. The AFL need to understand that LESS IS MORE. No need for all these cheap penalty goals which only serve to undermine the game as a contest.


-----------------------------------------------

edit: as I typed this Tom Lynch score another cheap goal courtesy of another bullshit rule. Umpires should NOT award a 50m penalty when the man on the mark reacts to someone playing on. It's BULLSHIT the defender must wait for the ump to blow his whistle. The game ends when the ump hears the siren - not when he blows his whistle. Likewise it should be play on when the player in possession plays on - not when the ump blows his whistle a full second later

This is another of the shittest rules in AFL footy.
 
Last edited:

Max zero

Premium Platinum
Jul 19, 2005
14,038
10,284
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Agreed with the free kick. I personally hate the amount of attention a kicker recieves after releasing the ball. Was just a push in the back this time but often its just some cheap hit on a vulnerable player.
 

blue harvest

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 11, 2008
10,016
12,779
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
edit: as I typed this Tom Lynch score another cheap goal courtesy of another bullshit rule. Umpires should NOT award a 50m penalty when the man on the mark reacts to someone playing on. It's BULLSHIT the defender must wait for the ump to blow his whistle. The game ends when the ump hears the siren - not when he blows his whistle. Likewise it should be play on when the player in possession plays on - not when the ump blows his whistle a full second later

This is another of the shittest rules in AFL footy.
Totally agree with this.
Everyone knows when someone has played on.
 

Atomboy

Club Legend
Jan 22, 2007
2,398
1,237
Yes
AFL Club
St Kilda
How can people be happy with this rule? A push in the back anywhere else on the ground doesnt results in a guaranteed goal. Its a joke. The ball has gone though the goals. The play now restarts back in the middle. Thats where the freekick should be given.
Don’t be a gutless coward and push a bloke in the back when he is not expecting it.

Problem solved.
 

Top Bottom