Umpiring Hawthorn now the High FK Kings.

[_Mike_]

penalise the player, who ducks to draw the high free, with a HTB. Be consistent, it will remove it from the game.

 

[hawkman]

Many were complaining that this was a duck on Friday night. Struggling to see what else Watson genuinely do here

 

[The Hobo]

Not true.

You're being very one eyed of you don't recognise that Hawthorn have several players who chronically stage for Frees.

Most teams have 'that guy'. One dude who does it.

Hawthorn have about 8 of them.

It's shameful.

Spot on, every team has one, maybe two that are absolutely chronic stagers, and a few others that will try it on here and there in certain situations.

Then you have the Hawks

 

[The Hobo]

And as I said above. Start fining players for it.

Easier said than done. There are of course the easy ones, where players grab their head when there's zero contact for example.

But then you get the other ones, like Moore when tackled by Burgoyne, where it seems like he's drove his head forward into the turf to draw the free. But can you be 100% sure on it?

Then you have the shrugs, which is an even trickier one. Some players shrug tackles to evade the tackle and break through - which often ends up getting shrugged high. Should this be a fine? I don't think so, because it's an attempt to break the tackle. But then some players are doing it purely to draw a free kick. The obvious queue is some players simply stop and plead for the free, whilst others continue to play after the tackle slips. But if the rule changes to be that, then the player would also keep playing.

 

[The Hobo]

We changed a rule based on 1% of players doing it. Just ridiculous.
Head high contact is head high contact. It’s a free kick and should be paid every time.
Tacklers don’t even bend their knees anymore. They stand up and now expect the tackler to stand up straight.
I’m sorry but I reckon the AGL got this way wrong. Player with ball can do as he pleases. Don’t tackle him high.

The problem is that the 1% was growing, and impacting games and outcomes. It may have started with Selwood, but it wasn't long before Puopolo, Shuey and many others jumped on board. Then the next generation comes through in Ginnivan, and the AFL sees footage of him actively training how to draw high free kicks, of course they're going to do something about it. You can't wait until the 1% becomes 5,10,50% before they act.

I totally disagree with your statements, as the game itself shifts if players are actively playing to gain free kicks. That is not the AFL we all love - and if there was a game full of these players doing these moves, it would result in an insane amount of free kicks and ruins the flow of the game.

Tackling is already in contention these days as it's very high risk for little reward until the recent rule changes. So few HTB calls, far more free kicks conceded when tackling, and now the added risk of suspension. This is not how the game used to be.

 

[The Hobo]

We all know you can’t duck, but you can lower your body by dropping your knee to weave out the way. The tackler should have to adapt as they always did.
Very simple stuff

......

What is the difference?

 

[The Hobo]

A player's natural instinct to protect his/her head is now being re-engineered by the AFL.

Players are being encouraged to lead with their heads, or try to hit their head on the ground in a tackle.

Spot on - watch some older games (even early 2000's) and the way players approach contest. Players attack contests but protect themselves at the same time. These days players go in with zero thought on protecting themselves, and then the other player does what we're all taught to do, turn your body - and then they get suspended for high contact. I'm not talking cheap hits on a player with their head over the ball, i'm talking more a direct 50/50 when approaching the ball.

We've rewarded this and now players just put their heads in places they shouldn't.

I would love to know how many concussions we see today vs back in the day during genuine 50/50 footballing contests without dirty play involved. Players were so much more adept at protecting themselves.

 

[The Hobo]

Many were complaining that this was a duck on Friday night. Struggling to see what else Watson genuinely do here

He's got the ball, and his initial movement is to dive low and into the tackler with his arm raised. It's hardly the worst example, but it's still a technique to draw a high contact free kick. If his mindset was to actually try and dispose of the ball, he doesn't move towards the tackler, he moves away. The intent here is to solely win a high tackle free kick.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The problem is that the 1% was growing, and impacting games and outcomes. It may have started with Selwood, but it wasn't long before Puopolo, Shuey and many others jumped on board. Then the next generation comes through in Ginnivan, and the AFL sees footage of him actively training how to draw high free kicks, of course they're going to do something about it. You can't wait until the 1% becomes 5,10,50% before they act.

I totally disagree with your statements, as the game itself shifts if players are actively playing to gain free kicks. That is not the AFL we all love - and if there was a game full of these players doing these moves, it would result in an insane amount of free kicks and ruins the flow of the game.

Tackling is already in contention these days as it's very high risk for little reward until the recent rule changes. So few HTB calls, far more free kicks conceded when tackling, and now the added risk of suspension. This is not how the game used to be.

So you are of the opinion that player with the ball must be a tin soldier otherwise he is creating the contact.
Wow

 

[The Hobo]

So you are of the opinion that player with the ball must be a tin soldier otherwise he is creating the contact.
Wow

No, but i'm of the opinion that if you duck and get caught high, then it's on you. If you shrug a legal tackle up and force it high, that's on you.
Having said that, the umpires need to use a bit of nuance here - you can't coathanger a player when they've ducked, however incidental brushing of the head etc should be let go. I know it's hard to write rules to this effect, but we don't want it to be a free hit.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

No, but i'm of the opinion that if you duck and get caught high, then it's on you. If you shrug a legal tackle up and force it high, that's on you.
Having said that, the umpires need to use a bit of nuance here - you can't coathanger a player when they've ducked, however incidental brushing of the head etc should be let go. I know it's hard to write rules to this effect, but we don't want it to be a free hit.

I agree.

I think It's pretty simple to be honest. Since Jesus played Full Back for Jerusalem - if you ducked and were taken high, it was Play On.

It was always considered that you were the cause of the high contact, not the tackler. So it was always "Play On! You ducked."

I honestly fail to see why that same logic and principle would not apply to all other forms of drawing high contact?

 

[greatwhiteshark]

No, but i'm of the opinion that if you duck and get caught high, then it's on you. If you shrug a legal tackle up and force it high, that's on you.
Having said that, the umpires need to use a bit of nuance here - you can't coathanger a player when they've ducked, however incidental brushing of the head etc should be let go. I know it's hard to write rules to this effect, but we don't want it to be a free hit.

So you feel the tackler should be allowed to be the tin soldier ?
Every bloody head high free kick now we have fans saying he ducked, led with his head. The player with the ball is now always guilty.
The tacklers do t even bend their knee anymore. They just all charge in at one height knowing they have no responsibility anymore.
And the classic one is the player making the ball his focus, bends over to pick it up. Opposition player charges into contest front on and fans and umpires now say leading with the head instead of paying the obvious head on charge free kick.
The head is certainly not sacrosanct and I am sick to death of the player with the ball being penalised by weak poor technique tackling.
It’s Auskick rubbish, rewarding the weak.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I agree.

I think It's pretty simple to be honest. Since Jesus played Full Back for Jerusalem - if you ducked and were taken high, it was Play On.

It was always considered that you were the cause of the high contact, not the tackler. So it was always "Play On! You ducked."

I honestly fail to see why that same logic and principle would not apply to all other forms of drawing high contact?

Again you have the ball and I am the tackler . Are you telling me you should not be able to try and avoid my tackle and if you do and I get you high that’s on you.
The game is stuffed if this is where we are at.

 

[The Hobo]

So you feel the tackler should be allowed to be the tin soldier ?
Every bloody head high free kick now we have fans saying he ducked, led with his head. The player with the ball is now always guilty.
The tacklers do t even bend their knee anymore. They just all charge in at one height knowing they have no responsibility anymore.
And the classic one is the player making the ball his focus, bends over to pick it up. Opposition player charges into contest front on and fans and umpires now say leading with the head instead of paying the obvious head on charge free kick.
The head is certainly not sacrosanct and I am sick to death of the player with the ball being penalised by weak poor technique tackling.
It’s Auskick rubbish, rewarding the weak.

It's simple, go back and watch footy from 20 years ago or earlier, and watch how the player with the ball moves and acts - then compare it to today. You can't tell me that the difference between then and now is just the tackler not bending their knees, and not the ball carrier trying to draw high contact through various mechanisms.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Again you have the ball and I am the tackler . Are you telling me you should not be able to try and avoid my tackle and if you do and I get you high that’s on you.
The game is stuffed if this is where we are at.

No, there's obviously nuance to it. Same as the old 'you ducked, play on' unwritten rule. There still had to be discretion and a judgement call made as to whether the player did in fact duck or not.


But technically, based on your view, a player could be standing on the wing minding his own business 100m off the ball and another players runs at his arm head first. Is that a Free Kick?

That's obviously an extreme and unrealistic example - but the logic of a player NOT being reckless, NOT being negligent, and laying a tackle with a LEGAL technique - and the only reason any contact was made above the shoulders was because the player with the ball initiated it, goes against of the spirit of the rule.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

No, there's obviously nuance to it. Same as the old 'you ducked, play on' unwritten rule. There still had to be discretion and a judgement call made as to whether the player did in fact duck or not.


But technically, based on your view, a player could be standing on the wing minding his own business 100m off the ball and another players runs at his arm head first. Is that a Free Kick?

That's obviously an extreme and unrealistic example - but the logic of a player NOT being reckless, NOT being negligent, and laying a tackle with a LEGAL technique - and the only reason any contact was made above the shoulders was because the player with the ball initiated it, goes against of the spirit of the rule.

It’s gone way too far the other way.
Don’t like it.

 

[The Hobo]

Again you have the ball and I am the tackler . Are you telling me you should not be able to try and avoid my tackle and if you do and I get you high that’s on you.
The game is stuffed if this is where we are at.

That's how it's always been - the difference is players weren't actively trying to create high contact in the past, their sole focus was disposing of the ball or breaking the tackle.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

It’s gone way too far the other way.
Don’t like it.

The issue here though, is that the guys drawing Frees have made it borderline impossible to adjudicate.

That's my fundamental issue with it, and why I see it as such an important issue in the sport.

The same applies to the Cerra's and Weightman's of the world that lunge forward every time they're near the ball in an attempt to deceive the umpire into thinking that their opponent shoved them in the back.

The umpire have to constantly second guess themselves with In The Back and Too High as a result. That's why umpiring is so inconsistent and seemingly so poor.

These flogs that cheat are the cause.

Just play the game on its merits FFS.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The issue here though, is that the guys drawing Frees have made it borderline impossible to adjudicate.

That's my fundamental issue with it, and why I see it as such an important issue in the sport.

The same applies to the Cerra's and Weightman's of the world that lunge forward every time they're near the ball in an attempt to deceive the umpire into thinking that their opponent shoved them in the back.

The umpire have to constantly second guess themselves with In The Back and Too High as a result. That's why umpiring is so inconsistent and seemingly so poor.

These flogs that cheat are the cause.

Just play the game on its merits FFS.

Yes but that’s in all honest a utopia. Interpretations of rules has ruined the sport. We have 4 umps out there now who see each and every rule differently.
Still reckon if you paid each and every head high contact in black and white form then within two weeks the coaches will instruct their players to drop their tackles by 30cm.
Then we have no issue.

 

[Back One Out]

Selwood was the first I knew of to actually create a technique for manufacturing free kicks. Most teams had a few players quickly adopt it, but less consistently. The AFL did nothing.

Ginnivan at Collingwood developed it further, and was the first to rub the opposition's nose in it. The AFL through its umpires had a period of open season on Ginnivan to try to beat it by forcing him from the game. This didn't work, and we had reverted to the do nothing approach by the end of Ginnivan's time at Collingwood.

The modified Selwood method is now pretty standard, with Hawthorn players the best exponents. The AFL has taken the view that high tackles can't be allowed (very true) and so the cheats (and that's what they are) have to be allowed to get away with it to protect every player's head, at least a little bit. The bang the head on the ground free kick is an added complication.

I really can't see a simple solution. I think we are stuck with the current unsatisfactory situation where the umpire has to judge whether the player set up the free kick or not. As I see it, they are erring on the side of the cheats at the moment, but that could change at any time.

A start would be to direct the commentators to stop calling it "drawing a free kick" and routinely call it staging and cheating, which is what it is. This is not an answer, but it at least faces the problem.

Just don't limit the discussion to the Hawthorn small forwards. Be fair and mention ALL the gun players who duck their head into tackles, or draw the free kick by hooking the tacklers arm over the shoulder.

Jason Horne-Francis is one of the most chronic duckers who not only draws a ton of high free kicks, but also gets praised for it by the arse-licking commentators. The Port fans I've mentioned this to seem to think it's okay for JHF to duck into tackles because he is a midfielder...

Every club has their share of free kick stagers... The OP acts like Tyson Stengle never ducked into a tackle.

Unless people volunteer up the names of duckers from their own club who try to con the umps and they're willing to bag them out too, then I'll just assume they're being butt!hurt about the Hawthorn small forwards; they're just having a sook and their "for the good of the game" opinions can't be taken seriously.

 

[Gaspard]

Just don't limit the discussion to the Hawthorn small forwards. Be fair and mention ALL the gun players who duck their head into tackles, or draw the free kick by hooking the tacklers arm over the shoulder.

Jason Horne-Francis is one of the most chronic duckers who not only draws a ton of high free kicks, but also gets praised for it by the arse-licking commentators. The Port fans I've mentioned this to seem to think it's okay for JHF to duck into tackles because he is a midfielder...

Every club has their share of free kick stagers... The OP acts like Tyson Stengle never ducked into a tackle.

Unless people volunteer up the names of duckers from their own club who try to con the umps and they're willing to bag them out too, then I'll just assume they're being butt!hurt about the Hawthorn small forwards; they're just having a sook and their "for the good of the game" opinions can't be taken seriously.

Most of us haven't limited the criticism to Hawthorn. Ginnivan was one of mine when he brought his particular flavour of cheating to senior football. I was very critical of him on the Collingwood board for that and his other failings. He is also a very gutsy player who takes the lumps that come with his attitude.
Most clubs, as has been said her a lot of times, have some duckers, divers, head bangers or shruggers. The point is that something needs to be done, before one of these people cheats himself into a broken neck or life destroying concussion. It is the AFL's job to find a rule combination or sanction regime that reduces the incidence of this foolhardy behaviour.

 

[HairyO]

They are pushing the boundaries of footy etiquette with their milking of free kicks. It’s almost similar to soccer players diving for penalties… they score a lot of goals from F50 free kicks…

Charlie Curnow gets more free kicks than most of our team.

He scores a lot of goals from F50 free kicks.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Many were complaining that this was a duck on Friday night. Struggling to see what else Watson genuinely do here

He’s probably one of the smallest blokes the game has seen for 20yrs and he’s going to get a lot of high free kicks, particularly when he’s bending down to get a ground ball.

The idea that he should just go from picking up the ball to completely upright and no one should be penalized for getting him high is pretty damn stupid by Ralph.

 

[tropicaltiger]

Wow, just wow!
No idea at all

your comments are the reason fans dislike the divers and arm lifters.

 

[smasha]

The only way to fix the Ginnivan umpiring is put him in a Richmond jumper.
Umps will pay em against him every time then.