Why do we allow the clock to continue while having a set shot?

[greatwhiteshark]

The League over the years have called time off for almost everything, stoppages, boundary throw in's etc etc as they don't want time wasted but still we have this stupid situation where players get 30 seconds to have a shot on goal and while they take that 30 seconds the clock keeps running. Why is this not deliberate time wasting?
Player takes mark and is awarded mark by umpire. Time off should be called immediately. Time on starts again once player has kicked the ball and or played on. Time should not be ticking by while player pulls up his socks, takes mouthpiece out, points where mark should be. Probably 5-6 minutes or maybe more a game wasted off the clock by players doing this.

 

[ManInWhite]

Bit of a bizarre question. All the other instances of time on apply when the play has stopped. If a player is kicking for goal, it mightn't look like much is happening but is still an act of active play. What happens if the player decides to play on? For consistency I assume you would want all other set kicks around the ground to have time on added and if not, why not?

IMO the crazy kicking in triangles in the defensive 50m to ice the clock is a more blatant example of time wasting than a player having a kick for goal.

I think you're trying to fix something that isn't a problem.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Bit of a bizarre question. All the other instances of time on apply when the play has stopped. If a player is kicking for goal, it mightn't look like much is happening but is still an act of active play. What happens if the player decides to play on? For consistency I assume you would want all other set kicks around the ground to have time on added and if not, why not?

IMO the crazy kicking in triangles in the defensive 50m to ice the clock is a more blatant example of time wasting than a player having a kick for goal.

I think you're trying to fix something that isn't a problem.

Because all other kicks around the ground they don’t get to slick back their hair for the camera, pull up their socks, take their mouth guard out and actually look at the clock to make sure they use up the 30 seconds.
Your example of time wasting the ball is actually moving and all the opposition has to do is man up to stop it. Set shots for goal they deliberately waste the 30 seconds.

 

[HTT]

Stopping the game clock during a set shot isn't a bad idea, but it completely kills the idea of a shot after the siren, which would be sad.

Solution is that the shot clock applies to the team, not the player. If Player A takes a mark and indicates he is taking a set shot, he gets his 30sec. But if he takes 15 and passes it to Player B, Player B only gets 15sec. When it runs out, each successive mark only gets as long as any other mark around the ground.

 

[ManInWhite]

Stopping the game clock during a set shot isn't a bad idea, but it completely kills the idea of a shot after the siren, which would be sad.

Solution is that the shot clock applies to the team, not the player. If Player A takes a mark and indicates he is taking a set shot, he gets his 30sec. But if he takes 15 and passes it to Player B, Player B only gets 15sec. When it runs out, each successive mark only gets as long as any other mark around the ground.

Problem is that a player "having a shot at goal" from just inside the 50 might mis kick and have it drop short and marked by a team mate. Gets messy then - will that be construed as needing to share the 30 seconds or will the first player insist he wasn't having a shot at goal and was "only planning to hit the top of the square" and the second player has a full 30 seconds? Need to be careful about introducing too many vague interpretations - we have too many already!

 

[HTT]

Problem is that a player "having a shot at goal" from just inside the 50 might mis kick and have it drop short and marked by a team mate. Gets messy then - will that be construed as needing to share the 30 seconds or will the first player insist he wasn't having a shot at goal and was "only planning to hit the top of the square" and the second player has a full 30 seconds? Need to be careful about introducing too many vague interpretations - we have too many already!

It's generally pretty obvious when a player is lining up for a set shot. To cover all cases, maybe the player could need to indicate clearly to the umpire by whatever means that he intends to take a set shot. Any set shot the umpire has come in and set the mark anyway. That's a much less vague rule than 'if the umpire thinks the player is taking a shot'

 

[nylexbandit]

They should just do a set clock runoff instead - if player indicates shot on goal (and it’s reasonable) there’s a 20 second clock runoff, players own team can’t mark it, player still only gets 30 seconds to start runup

 

[2Knights]

The League over the years have called time off for almost everything, stoppages, boundary throw in's etc etc as they don't want time wasted but still we have this stupid situation where players get 30 seconds to have a shot on goal and while they take that 30 seconds the clock keeps running. Why is this not deliberate time wasting?
Player takes mark and is awarded mark by umpire. Time off should be called immediately. Time on starts again once player has kicked the ball and or played on. Time should not be ticking by while player pulls up his socks, takes mouthpiece out, points where mark should be. Probably 5-6 minutes or maybe more a game wasted off the clock by players doing this.

The natural and best solution to this problem is to scrap the 30-second shot clock, one of the AFL's silliest ever ideas.

 

[theyellowsash]

Because we'd rather rush the player taking the kick and then complain about goalkicking not being as good as when they could take a minute to catch their breath