Higgins goal
- Thread starter Sarcoidevo
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Do the rules make an exception for a bounce like you suggest is ok? No.
Did Higgins use the throw as an alternative to a handball - which is clearly a free kick - or as an alternative to a ball drop - which is undefined?
SSwans2011
Hall of Famer
The wording of the rule is literally: When the football is in play, a Free Kick shall be awarded against a Player who ... throws the football." It's not hard to understand. If it's undefined, then any rational person would assume the relevant law which is already in place would be applied.
Rule 15.2.2 gives the player allowance to bounce the ball, so yes there is an exception. Nowhere in the rules does it state the ball can be thrown on to the boot, and Higgins didn't even do that. He threw the ball, then he kicked it. Clever, but technically illegal, and should have been a free kick. I'm genuinely gobsmacked it's even an argument.
Gobsmacked people think the decision which was given the OK by the AFL is correct?
I didn’t see anyone complain about this goal
SSwans2011
Hall of Famer
I said earlier in the thread the on-the-back goals should technically be paid as throws too. I also said Buddy's goal against the Crows should have been a free kick because he ran so far. Spectacular moments, no doubt, but by the letter of the law, all were free kicks.
The AFL is a farce. It's not at all surprising that they would contradict their own laws. Maybe they will clear it up next year, but by the letter of the law at present, Higgins threw the ball, which is an illegal act, and thus it should have been a free kick.
Agree to disagree mate. Some of us only want obvious shit paid, and don’t care about the little nit-pick free kicks.
No he didn't. The intent of the rule is for disposal of the ball by throwing it. Higgins didn't do that.
blckcaviar
Team Captain
- Jul 21, 2018
- 484
- 1,259
- AFL Club
- Carlton
It shouldn't have been a free kick. Because the umpires, and the AFL, even after looking at the slow motion footage, have said that they made the correct decision in calling his action of getting the ball from hand to foot a kick, not a throw.
The AFL and the boss of the umpiring department have not come out and said "the umpires made the wrong decision". They have said it was the correct decision, and that it was CLEARLY a goal.
You’re very wrong about this, you can be tackled and drop the ball onto your foot.
Higgins isn’t disposing of the ball with a throw, he is attempting to kick it by throwing it at his foot, which he did.
Imo you have already been proven wrong by the video above when the Port player is on his back and throws it up to kick it. As long as the ‘throw’ is an attempt to kick it is all good.
There was absolutely no debate whatsoever with the Port player or anyone else who has ever thrown the ball onto their foot.
Now it is a debate and you’ve always thought that Port player threw it. I’m genuinely baffled as to why this is only being debated after Higgins has done it like many others before him.
“ It was one of the greatest goals in the history of the game”. Nonsense, and monumental overreaction You should get out and about a bit more. Clear throw, and should have been called as such.
I think my final thoughts on this are best summed up by the cliche:
'We've never seen that before!'.
No we haven't, and the lawmakers hadn't allowed for it either. Now we are struggling along, trying to fit existing rules to the situation. Hopefully, the AFL can clear this up in the next rule review regurgitation and clarification (probably due in about 5 minutes - we haven't had one for a day or so
).
I think the things that need to be resolved are:
1) Can you 'throw' the ball in any circumstances? Obviously, not for a disposal, yes, for a bounce etc. Can you throw the ball around or over a player, or a post, or both? What about an umpire?
2) If we allow throws in some circumstances, are you still deemed to be in possession (as for a bounce). Could Moore have tackled Higgins before he re-gathered or kicked?
Or do we just leave it with the umps, and trust them to make a real-time call in 'the spirit of the game' - after all, it may never happen again.
I said earlier in the thread, I thought by the letter of the law it was illegal. I probably still do, but I'm glad I will get to see the goal on highlights for years to come. However, one question is, would you be happy to see Higgins do that to get around an opponent in the middle of the field? I would definitely not be in favour of that.
'We've never seen that before!'.
No we haven't, and the lawmakers hadn't allowed for it either. Now we are struggling along, trying to fit existing rules to the situation. Hopefully, the AFL can clear this up in the next rule review regurgitation and clarification (probably due in about 5 minutes - we haven't had one for a day or so
).I think the things that need to be resolved are:
1) Can you 'throw' the ball in any circumstances? Obviously, not for a disposal, yes, for a bounce etc. Can you throw the ball around or over a player, or a post, or both? What about an umpire?
2) If we allow throws in some circumstances, are you still deemed to be in possession (as for a bounce). Could Moore have tackled Higgins before he re-gathered or kicked?
Or do we just leave it with the umps, and trust them to make a real-time call in 'the spirit of the game' - after all, it may never happen again.
I said earlier in the thread, I thought by the letter of the law it was illegal. I probably still do, but I'm glad I will get to see the goal on highlights for years to come. However, one question is, would you be happy to see Higgins do that to get around an opponent in the middle of the field? I would definitely not be in favour of that.
cleomenes
Cancelled
- Nov 18, 2010
- 1,483
- 2,053
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Digressing from the thread focus to gloat over a win and pretend that injuries don't influence the results of games (such obvious nonsense) gives the feel that you somehow feel that the wins you have achieved are somehow unworthy because you have had a good run. They aren't. look at a little history and you will find that the only team in memory that have not been at the good end of injury lists when they won the flag is Footscray. All of the others (including us in 2010) had great injury runs in their premiership years. Some (like Hawthorn) were lucky in this way for several years in a row. There a lot of other factors in winning, but the players on the field are the most important. You need a good list, and you need most of them, particularly the best, available most of the time. If you are unaware of this, then you probably shouldn't follow football.
cleomenes
Cancelled
- Nov 18, 2010
- 1,483
- 2,053
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
The important point in the argument is that I don't think that the umpires saw a throw. The action of throwing was very small. and as many have said, was only really apparent in slow motion. I don't think any judgement was made, just no infringement seen. So as in every other such case, play on. If they actually saw a throw, then yes, it was a mistake, but I really don't think that they did.I think my final thoughts on this are best summed up by the cliche:
'We've never seen that before!'.
No we haven't, and the lawmakers hadn't allowed for it either. Now we are struggling along, trying to fit existing rules to the situation. Hopefully, the AFL can clear this up in the next rule review regurgitation and clarification (probably due in about 5 minutes - we haven't had one for a day or so
I think the things that need to be resolved are:
1) Can you 'throw' the ball in any circumstances? Obviously, not for a disposal, yes, for a bounce etc. Can you throw the ball around or over a player, or a post, or both? What about an umpire?
2) If we allow throws in some circumstances, are you still deemed to be in possession (as for a bounce). Could Moore have tackled Higgins before he re-gathered or kicked?
Or do we just leave it with the umps, and trust them to make a real-time call in 'the spirit of the game' - after all, it may never happen again.
I said earlier in the thread, I thought by the letter of the law it was illegal. I probably still do, but I'm glad I will get to see the goal on highlights for years to come. However, one question is, would you be happy to see Higgins do that to get around an opponent in the middle of the field? I would definitely not be in favour of that.
Your not allowed to bounce pass it like in basketball
That’s a throw .....from my understanding
If your attempting to kick it and it’s in the one action it’s ok
I argue Powell peppers is close to one action ....whereas Higgins was a throw to get the ball to a spot where he could kick it
Hmmm pepper kinda just puts the ball in a position to kick as he kind of drops it but drops it upwards if that make sense ....to me there is little difference in an over the head handball
The Higgins one is flat out threw it .....100%
Pepper one I’m kinda ok to let that go .....it was at least in one action or very close to it ...whereas the Higgins one was two distinct seperate movements that were not connected in any way
Spot on. You’ve check mated him with logic and facts. ( again )
cleomenes
Cancelled
- Nov 18, 2010
- 1,483
- 2,053
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
In premiership sides, it covers teh bottom end of your list, but doesn't cope with your stars. Is that not obvious.
Depends an umpire might go no ....remember our rules are very much open to interpretation...yes they are written in black n white ink ....but very grey
Similar threads
