The Vent Thread

[chopperduck]

High free kicks will be annoying this year. Its not high if you burrow your way into a tackler, but I bet this doesnt mean ducking, and distinguishing the two will be sure to frustrate fans this year with high kicks etting paid against then let go 2 min later.

I still fail to see what is so hard about holding the ball either, its a pretty simple rule which they are making harder each year. Either you had prior or you didnt, either you legally dispose of it or you didnt. This making a genuine attempt rubbish is ruining a simple rule.

 

[Hollow Knight]

I still fail to see what is so hard about holding the ball either, its a pretty simple rule which they are making harder each year. Either you had prior or you didnt, either you legally dispose of it or you didnt. This making a genuine attempt rubbish is ruining a simple rule.

This! Imagine if you could get away with a forward pass in League as long as the umpire reached the subjective opinion that you were genuinely trying to throw it backwards.

 

[chopperduck]

That is a great example because it makes as much sense. Even if you didn't have prior, you now need to 'pretend' you are trying to dispose of the ball (legally or illegally, doesn't matter if the kick connects or you 'fumble' the ball out of the tackle) or it's holding the ball. If you did have prior, but you get tackled in the action of making a 'genuine attempt to dispose of the ball' then it's a flip of the coin (and probably what team you play for) to if it's holding the ball or play on.

 

[karix]

I still fail to see what is so hard about holding the ball either, its a pretty simple rule which they are making harder each year. Either you had prior or you didnt, either you legally dispose of it or you didnt. This making a genuine attempt rubbish is ruining a simple rule.

Just did my umpiring coarse and it specifically says that the ball being dislodged as part of the the tackle is not a free kick, so unless its a blatant and obvious throw or the like.. then you can just drop it when you get tackled and it's fine.

 

[Skoob]

Just did my umpiring coarse and it specifically says that the ball being dislodged as part of the the tackle is not a free kick, so unless its a blatant and obvious throw or the like.. then you can just drop it when you get tackled and it's fine.

There lies the problem. With all due respect, you've "done your umpiring course" and you believe "you can just drop it when you get tackled and it's fine".
That is not correct. There is a difference between the ball being knocked out and simply "just dropping it".

I still fail to see what is so hard about holding the ball either, its a pretty simple rule which they are making harder each year. Either you had prior or you didnt, either you legally dispose of it or you didnt. This making a genuine attempt rubbish is ruining a simple rule.

I disagree with this bit. "Making a genuine attempt" only applies when there is no prior opportunity and stops players just holding the ball in, knowing they had no prior and therefore creating a stoppage. Instead, they must get rid of the ball and play goes on.

That is a great example because it makes as much sense. Even if you didn't have prior, you now need to 'pretend' you are trying to dispose of the ball (legally or illegally, doesn't matter if the kick connects or you 'fumble' the ball out of the tackle) or it's holding the ball. If you did have prior, but you get tackled in the action of making a 'genuine attempt to dispose of the ball' then it's a flip of the coin (and probably what team you play for) to if it's holding the ball or play on.

If they have had a prior opportunity to dispose and are legally tackled and don't dispose legally, it's a free kick. "Genuine attempt" to or not.
I just don't see the confusion.

 

[western royboy]

27 First round draft picks!!!!!

 

[karix]

There lies the problem. With all due respect, you've "done your umpiring course" and you believe "you can just drop it when you get tackled and it's fine".
That is not correct. There is a difference between the ball being knocked out and simply "just dropping it".

No I don't believe you can drop it when tackled and it's fine. I think it's crap, but it's hard to penalise. And the interpretation doesn't say 'knocked out' it says dislodged. So that means if you're running with it in 2 hands and you get tackled/bumped it can just drop out of your hands.. due to the contact of course .

The reality of it is unless the umpire can actually put eyes on a player blatantly throwing it away from himself or otherwise opening his hands to drop before contact has occurred then they can't call it. Because umpires can only call what they see, if a tackle occurs and the ball comes out then it's not a free kick for incorrect disposal because the ball has been dislodged. The problem with the rule or it's interpretation is it's so easy to let the ball slip out of your grip as you're tackled without it looking even vaguely suspicious, and while I'm sure no player would ever try to deliberately use the rules to gain an advantage, it does happen.

Trust me, I was very disappointed when I did that part of the course. Dropping the ball to avoid being pinged is a pet hate of mine.

 

[Skoob]

No I don't believe you can drop it when tackled and it's fine. I think it's crap, but it's hard to penalise. And the interpretation doesn't say 'knocked out' it says dislodged. So that means if you're running with it in 2 hands and you get tackled/bumped it can just drop out of your hands.. due to the contact of course .

The reality of it is unless the umpire can actually put eyes on a player blatantly throwing it away from himself or otherwise opening his hands to drop before contact has occurred then they can't call it. Because umpires can only call what they see, if a tackle occurs and the ball comes out then it's not a free kick for incorrect disposal because the ball has been dislodged. The problem with the rule or it's interpretation is it's so easy to let the ball slip out of your grip as you're tackled without it looking even vaguely suspicious, and while I'm sure no player would ever try to deliberately use the rules to gain an advantage, it does happen.

Trust me, I was very disappointed when I did that part of the course. Dropping the ball to avoid being pinged is a pet hate of mine.

I understand what you're getting at, but there is a video to illustrate interpretations. Is the video each year for umpires or just to educate the public? If so, is the video wrong? I understand a grey area exists where the ball is dropped on impact (then it is dislodged) but often it is obvious that the ball is dropped as opposed to dislodged.
The first 3 examples of holding the ball (prior opportunity) show exactly what we are talking about and are adjudged HTB. Start at 27secs.
http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-01-12/2014-laws-of-the-game-holding-the-ball

 

[chopperduck]

Illegal disposal basically doesnt exist anymore. You have to do a 1 hand under arm throw to a team mate to get done. As long as you tried your hardest to kick or handball then its play on. I feel like its back in school and you have to show your working in maths class. You are pinned on the ground with no prior, make sure you do some fake fist pumps or its holding the ball. Just does nothing for the game.

 

[Toffee Lion]

Being quoted alongside Melbourne and St.Kilda as a bottom 4 team is seriously starting to get on my nerves.

I seriously look at our list and think we can beat anybody in the comp on our day (The past few years has shown that with big wins against top 4 sides).

If we beat Hawthorn next week, everyone will brush it off as a one off- but since GWS and GC win, they're suddenly powerhouses.

Ugh.

 

[karix]

I understand what you're getting at, but there is a video to illustrate interpretations. Is the video each year for umpires or just to educate the public? If so, is the video wrong? I understand a grey area exists where the ball is dropped on impact (then it is dislodged) but often it is obvious that the ball is dropped as opposed to dislodged.
The first 3 examples of holding the ball (prior opportunity) show exactly what we are talking about and are adjudged HTB. Start at 27secs.
http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-01-12/2014-laws-of-the-game-holding-the-ball

Those examples aren't really what we're talking about though surely? They're all tackled clean and they don't lose control of the ball until they are fully tackled - which is textbook 'holding the ball'. I thought what we were discussing is when a player lets the ball get dislodged at the moment of initial contact with the tackle. It has the double whammy of meaning he probably won't be pinged for holding AND if the tackle continues the tackler might get pinged for tackling without possession.

And while I'm sure it's obvious that the player has dropped the ball to make it look dislodged to us watching on TV or from the side line I'm not convinced it's so obvious to the umpires.

 

[Skoob]

Dunno, looks like the ball is dropped pretty much straight away in those first 3 examples.
Anyway, I think we're just going 'round in circles now, we'll have to wait & see some live examples.
In any case I don't think any argument will be proved one way or the other because of interpretation and so many decisions are either in direct contradiction to the rules video, or just missed completely (which is kinda point).

 

[brizrider]

Its not high if you burrow your way into a tackler, but I bet this doesnt mean ducking, and distinguishing the two will be sure to frustrate fans this year

I don't quite understand this. Ducking is play on this year isn't it? In terms of player safety I wonder if the ducker should actually be penalised rather than just calling play on.

 

[chopperduck]

They haven't really said ducking though. They have said if you make contact with a stationary person. I think if both players are in motion and the one with the ball ducks, they will still get a free kick for being high. A good example actually is jumping Jack last night when he thought he would walk through a player. He got the ball and just kept his head down and tried to basically tunnel his way through or ride off the tackle. Didn't work, and he did cop high contact, but didn't get the free kick. I'm just not sold that ducking like the selwood's do is going to be cracked down on just yet. Hopefully i'm wrong.

 

[chopperduck]

If you duck you basically shouldn't get a free kick for high, the only exception to this is when you have your head over the ball going for it. If you've put your head over gone in and collected the ball, but keep your head down and try come out the other side of a tackler you shouldn't get squat, but the rules do need to protect the player when going for the ball always.

 

[Skoob]

They haven't really said ducking though. They have said if you make contact with a stationary person. I think if both players are in motion and the one with the ball ducks, they will still get a free kick for being high. A good example actually is jumping Jack last night when he thought he would walk through a player. He got the ball and just kept his head down and tried to basically tunnel his way through or ride off the tackle. Didn't work, and he did cop high contact, but didn't get the free kick. I'm just not sold that ducking like the selwood's do is going to be cracked down on just yet. Hopefully i'm wrong.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-01-12/2014-laws-of-the-game-drawing-head-contact

 

[chopperduck]

Thats all well and good. Not sold that that is how it will go cone match day though.

 

[Skoob]

This is another example of where the idea is right, but just further complicates matters (although it shouldn't).
What has seemed apparent to me so far this year, is that some umpires are scared to pay a high contact free in case the ball carrier had ducked.
Deliberate ducking can be hard to distinguish from a downward movement through natural body movement or stride, so we have seen a lot more high contact let go. This undermines the rule and potentially puts more players at risk once tacklers learn they don't need to be as careful as the last couple of years.

 

[dlanod]

This is another example of where the idea is right, but just further complicates matters (although it shouldn't).
What has seemed apparent to me so far this year, is that some umpires are scared to pay a high contact free in case the ball carrier had ducked.
Deliberate ducking can be hard to distinguish from a downward movement through natural body movement or stride, so we have seen a lot more high contact let go. This undermines the rule and potentially puts more players at risk once tacklers learn they don't need to be as careful as the last couple of years.

This is very much what I've been noticing as well.

 

[patfullfankezz]

100 pages of vents. How far we've come.

 

[Big Lion]

100 pages of vents. How far we've come.

Group therapy.

 

[Skoob]

100 pages of vents. How far we've come.

I know, wait 'til we're really pissed.

 

[patfullfankezz]

I know, wait 'til we're really pissed.

You're all just waiting for Fox Footy to misspell Patfull.

 

[Skoob]

You're all just waiting for Fox Footy to misspell Patfull.

I don't have Foxtelll

 

[patfullfankezz]

How many times do we need to see a player get completely knocked out? Do we REALLY need to see it in slow motion?! It's disgusting and disrespectful and in case anyone hasn't noticed, those players are human beings! Show some consideration.