Which rules would you get rid of?

[TheWeapon]

Being umpire appreciation week thought it would be a good time to discuss this. The rules of our game as of 2013 are getting more and more complicated, leaving too much interpretation to the umpires and ruining the game. A lot of rules could be simplified or flat out gotten rid of. Examples to start off:

- Hands in the back: free kick only if hands in the back + pushing motion (contact is fine, front on/side on pushing fine)

- High tackle: free kick if over the shoulder. If player ducks the head = play on (think this one is slowly getting better)

- Staging for frees: this needs to be ironed out quickly otherwise we are heading the way of soccer. Staging should be a free against 1st time, and a report + automatic 2 game suspension for repeat offenders in the same game

- Centre bounces: always ball up to avoid random bounces in the centre square. This may annoy some traditionalists, but at the highest level I think its necessary.

- Goal umpire reviews: get rid of it until we have good enough technology to be certain in most cases (eg. Hawkeye)

- Sliding rule: get rid of it, it penalises the players who are hardest at it

- Cap number of interchanges: if the AFL are worried about the game getting too fast, cap the interchanges at 80 per game. This should also promote more head to head match-ups on the field

Thoughts?

 

[DardySingh360]

Hands in the back, sliding and the adjudication of holding the ball

 

[Hoops]

The push-out rule, just penalises the stronger player

 

[Mervyn Beasley]

50m for anything that is not a reportable incident.

 

[El_Scorcho]

50m for anything that is not a reportable incident.

To be replaced by what?

 

[Mateyman]

The rule of round 6: you can't push in a marking contest. Needs to be gotten rid of ASAP. Hands in the back is a good rule, and clears up confusion far more than the alternative

 

[It Just Is]

Not penalising players for throwing the ball away when tackled. That **** me right off.

 

[SSSSSS]

I forget who said it but I reckon a 15m-25m penalty should be brought back for some of the softer infringements such as the protected zone crap. 50 is way too harsh for that.

 

[Substance]

change 50m penalty to 25m

change 15m before bouncing to 20m AND ENFORCE IT

change minimum kick to mark dist 20m AND ENFORCE IT

No in the back to be paid to players on their knees. must be considerable force

2 goal umpires at each end + cameras in goal posts. +high FPS cameras that can actually slow the video without seeing a blurry shit everywhere

Sliding rule only enforced to very dangerous slides mainly legs first. injuries happen. It's part of the game.

4 on the bench with 2 subs

actually give players 30 seconds to kick for goal without being interrupted. when the 30 seconds is up just call playon.

Stop calling play on just because a player goes very slightly off his mark. I've noticed this one this year. they aren't allowing players to move enough on the mark.

those off the top of my head. probably too many but w/e

 

[Balance]

You should be able to tackle any way you want, front, side, in the back... as long as it's a tackle. No more soft "in the back"s!

 

[Woody15]

Obviously you wouldnt get rid of it, but the over interpretation of push in the back is really grinding my gears. A player might be lying flat on his stomach or lying on top of the ball, yet the umpire wishes for the player to lie down right beside him and lovingly put his arms around him to tackle. A player might have him around the waist, flat on the ground, the reposition himself over his back more, then the umpire calls it pushing in the back. Its crazy.

Head high contact as well - players are charging through leading with their head knowing if they get tackled, they will get a free kick. I know they've always protected the player with his head down and attacking, but players are milking it ridiculously. Alex Silvagni blatantly charged around like a bull with his head leading tonight and rightfully wasn't payed a free kick. Walters seems to be good for fishing for free kicks this way.

Players have a lot to answer for as well.. so many now just play for kicks knowing theyll get a free. Any contact behind, they fall forward. Its just crazy.

The hysterical interpretation of pushouts like Thompson and Reid last week.. absolutely insane.

The protected zone is another one.. last week in the Fremantle game, I think Richmond had a free kick, and a Richmond player ran behind his teammate who had the free kick, and his Fremantle opponent followed, yet was pinged for being too close. What was he meant to do ? Run away from the player with the ball and allow Richmond to dish off a handpass ?

And of course the diving on the ball leg rule pile of shit.

I would like to know what the statistics are this year compared to others on the average number of free kicks paid in a match is. Its driving me up the wall this year to the point im switching off unfortunately.

Geischen needs to go.

 

[Woody15]

cStop calling play on just because a player goes very slightly off his mark. I've noticed this one this year. they aren't allowing players to move enough on the mark.

this as well.. a false start is not play on. A player might go to kick the ball and stop and pull back, but is called play on. If that is the rule, its flipping idiotic. He never moves off the line.

 

[The Swert]

Nobody has mentioned it!

50 metre penalty for encroaching the 'protected area'

It's the biggest joke of a rule in the game. Every other rule you can at least see it's intention but wtf is a 'protected area' anyway?

 

[Leather Poisoning]

The high fend off rule.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

The advantage rule **** me off

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Scrap the lot of them pay frees for coathangers and dangerous tackles thats it.

 

[hunteyes]

Holding the ball should override any other free kick, if they have had prior opportunity then doesnt matter if its in the back or an arm slides up over the shoulder. only the blatant tackle right around the neck should be paid before holding the ball.

No high tackles for players that drop their knees, play on every time, and no in the back when a player falls forward. once they stop paying it, the players will stop diving forward. too many piss weak frees these days, ruins the game!

 

[big_e]

The rule of round 6: you can't push in a marking contest. Needs to be gotten rid of ASAP. Hands in the back is a good rule, and clears up confusion far more than the alternative

Exactly.

 

[underthestars]

15m penalty for softer infringement.
Never blow the whistle on anything not 100%. Not even if the crowd boos or 'balls'!

 

[The King!]

Sub rule!!!


As fas as umpires go, the interpretation needs work, it is so set in stone, no room for common sense. Prime example is the 50 for encroachment. If a player chases his opponent through the mark and the player with the ball is just picking the ball up forget it. But if the player has started his approach and they run across fine call it. Give umpires more scope to warn players too and judge the feel of a game.

Cant we trust people to recognise sliding into the head no eyes for the ball v a geniune attack at getting the thing?:

 

[scomac]

Need to move the rules committee into oblivion,which other professional sport has a bloody rules committee.
Lets morph back to the nineties,get the coaches to adopt a code of practice where they will not allow more than 7 defenders into the backline untill the last 2 minutes of every quarter.Game is a rugby generic which has taken out contested ball, this is what happens when soft seagulls are on a rules committee i am looking at you Hungry Bartlett.

 

[Jcpdragonx]

the 0 force touch in a marking contest.

 

[Aussie_boy]

I would have to say that push in the back is the most frustrating rule for me. The players dive forward and the umpires just give them the free kick so easily.

Of course the sliding in rule is ridiculous in my eyes. Just a rule that the AFL thought it would be good to get in there somehow.

Also agree on the advantage rule as the players stop because of the whistle and then maybe someone with the ball takes off and gain an unfair advantage in my eyes.

Also scrap the sub rule, never have seen any reason behind it really, also is incredibly frustrating when someone in my dreamteam is a sub.

 

[melbournemartin]

I definitely agree what was said before regarding the bounce distance. Players almost always go over 15 metres and I think it's good for the game. If 15 metre bounces were actually vigorously enforced then you wouldn't get a lot of fantastic fast running plays. Make it 20 and enforce it properly.

 

[winty]

Definitely the sliding rule. Eliminates what players have had drilled into them from juniors - going in and under for the ball.

Another one I'd get rid of is the interchange infringement rule. Is losing possession and giving away a 50m penalty really an appropriate penalty for a player being a few metres over the line while the player coming off hasn't left the ground yet, even though more often than not the play is 50-100m away?