2020 Non-Crows AFL Discussion

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Actually Scorpus I reckon that rule doesn't refer to frees after disposal at all.

Just to where 'normal' free kicks are taken from.

Eg McHenry grapples with a player in the centre and earns a free while the ball is at half back for the Crows. Free kick taken by McHenry in the centre because that is the greater penalty to the offending team.

Talia gets illegally shepherded in the goal square while the ball is in dispute at half forward for Collingwood. Free kick taken by the Crows at half back because that is the greater penalty to the offending team.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

Grow some balls Longmuir and ark up

 

[Scorpus]

Actually Scorpus I reckon that rule doesn't refer to frees after disposal at all.

Just to where 'normal' free kicks are taken from.

Eg McHenry grapples with a player in the centre and earns a free while the ball is at half back for the Crows. Free kick taken by McHenry in the centre because that is the greater penalty to the offending team.

Talia gets illegally shepherded in the goal square while the ball is in dispute at half forward for Collingwood. Free kick taken by the Crows at half back because that is the greater penalty to the offending team.

There is no rule in the entire rules of the game about frees after disposal.

I think in your example the McHenry free would be "at the location where it is awarded" and the Talia free would be "where the football is at the time"

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

There is no rule in the entire rules of the game about frees after disposal

Umpires been ruling to an imaginary rule all this time?

 

[Scorpus]

Umpires been ruling to an imaginary rule all this time?

Well it's not specifically there. However the umpires are allowed to give frees "where it is awarded or where the football is at the time, whichever is the greater penalty against the offending Team" which allows for frees after disposal

What I discovered isn't in the rules at all is awarding the free to the closest player to the infringement. The rules technically don't specify anything about who should take the free

 

[FR0GGY]

Grow some balls Longmuir and ark up

I’m not sure I’ve ever heard him speak.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

There is no rule in the entire rules of the game about frees after disposal.

That's interesting

So it's like another "pay the man in front" marking rule that doesn't actually exist

 

[Interloperer]

Very vague and if that's all there is completely ineffective and will need to be rewritten.

This is Hocking's rewritten version.

The previous iteration was much more explicit, ("where the ball finishes or where it crosses the boundary,") and spelled out basically every possible edge-case. But it was replaced by this "simplified" version.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

I’m not sure I’ve ever heard him speak.

It’s not that interesting.

Wish this happened to Hawthorn. Clarko would have been entertaining.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

Well it's not specifically there. However the umpires are allowed to give frees "where it is awarded or where the football is at the time, whichever is the greater penalty against the offending Team" which allows for frees after disposal

What I discovered isn't in the rules at all is awarding the free to the closest player to the infringement.

I think what they rule is that “where the football is at the time” is where the ball lands and since it landed out of bounds and you can’t give a free kick off the field, it goes back to where the indiscretion happened.

 

[FR0GGY]

It’s not that interesting.

Wish this happened to Hawthorn. Clarko would have been entertaining.

You’ll have to keep wishing that something like that would ever happen to them

 

[FR0GGY]

The logical spot is where it goes out of bounds but I guess if the free is for after disposal the players kick shouldn’t have been affected, therefore the free should be from where they disposed of it, not down the ground.

 

[Scorpus]

That's interesting

So it's like another "pay the man in front" marking rule that doesn't actually exist

It's not explicitly there I should say. I believe down field free kicks come from the interpretation of the passage I quoted.

However:

- Pay the free to the closest player = NOT explicitly in the rules at all or able to be interpreted
- Pay the man in front = NOT in the rules

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

This is the biggest controversy to finish a Fremantle game since Sirengate

 

[Scorpus]

I think what they rule is that “where the football is at the time” is where the ball lands and since it landed out of bounds and you can’t give a free kick off the field, it goes back to where the indiscretion happened.

That's possible. I guess it depends whether the out of bounds free kick is deemed to have been awarded first (and therefore reversible). If the ball is out of play, the out of bounds free hasn't yet been awarded, there is a case to be made the free should revert to the location of infringement.

That goes to whether frees are awarded at the time of infringement, or at the time the umpire signals the free. This isn't covered in the rules either

 

[FR0GGY]

It’s not that interesting.

Wish this happened to Hawthorn. Clarko would have been entertaining.

Ross Lyon could have been fun after this game.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

It's not explicitly there I should say. I believe down field free kicks come from the interpretation of the passage I quoted.

According to the rule as written the umpires have paid every single one of them wrong for decades.

They should be paying the free where the ball is when the infringement occurs, even if that's only a few metres from the kicker. Not where the kick eventually lands.

According to the rules....

 

[Scorpus]

According to the rule as written the umpires have paid every single one of them wrong for decades.

They should be paying the free where the ball is when the infringement occurs, even if that's only a few metres from the kicker. Not where the kick eventually lands.

According to the rules....

Yes that's true. It's also not defined whether the free should be awarded from the location of the ball when the infringement occurs, or when the umpire whistles the free kick.

 

[BACCS]

 

[Scorpus]

Looks like this is the official passage from the 2020 rule book, which has been updated since 2019 which I quoted

 

[Scorpus]

However by the letter of the law, the free then should have been closer to goal. Or in the air? Still unclear

Also what happens if a player just kicks the ball really far away in their advantage?

And to make matters worse, an earlier version of the rules specifically included a 'contact after disposal' provision!

 

[Big Crow]

Joke comp is a joke.

What else is new?

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

Betts the biggest blunder Crows ever made

Forget Tippett, Dangerfield and Lever, letting Eddie Betts leave West Lakes for Carlton in 2020 was the worst playing list error in the Adelaide Crows’ history, writes Kane Cornes. SEE THIS WEEK’S WINNERS AND LOSERS

thewest.com.au

 

[From The Pocket]

While we're delving into the rule book


How does (h) make sense, if to be Out of Bounds On the Full the football has to be kicked?

 

[Scorpus]

While we're delving into the rule book
View attachment 936815
View attachment 936817
How does (h) make sense, if to be Out of Bounds On the Full the football has to be kicked?

Yep that's an inconsistency. They mean hit over the boundary line on the full but used incorrect wording