holding/dropping the ball rule gone ?

[richardnose]

i just watched the last quarter of the demons vs brisbane and the umpires.

did i miss the mid-season announcement from jeff geischen that holding/dropping the ball is only going to paid in extreme cases now and players have 4 times longer to dispose of the ball when tackled, than they did in the first half of the year ??

it's clear from the way the game has been umpired in the last few weeks that they've backed right off in paying these frees and we're now back to constant stoppages and ball-ups. why is that ?

 

[beez]

Hasnt been paid all year

Nothing new

 

[whelan=legend]

The one where Brennan took on 3 players then got tackled and placed the ball on the ground was the most baffling non-decision i have seen all year.

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

The one where Brennan took on 3 players then got tackled and placed the ball on the ground was the most baffling non-decision i have seen all year.

I couldn't beleive that didn't get paid. I went outside shaking my head wondering what the hell

 

[konstas_87]

The one where Brennan took on 3 players then got tackled and placed the ball on the ground was the most baffling non-decision i have seen all year.

im sure i will be criticised for bias, but i thought that decision was correct.
you actually have to be tackled not just touched to be given holding the ball, and Brennan never was tackled.

having said that i agree with the thread, umpiring was poor in both directions all day.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Power's tackle on Valenti was the worst lack of a holding the ball decision I've seen all year.

The Brennan incident was the right call, the tackle slipped, Brennan touched the ball on the ground but didn't drop it and then kept going.

I'm not saying the umpiring cost us the game though, Dees earned the win.

 

[weagles_fan]

Power's tackle on Valenti was the worst lack of a holding the ball decision I've seen all year.

The Brennan incident was the right call, the tackle slipped, Brennan touched the ball on the ground but didn't drop it and then kept going.

I'm not saying the umpiring cost us the game though, Dees earned the win.

Brisbane were lucky the umpires favoured them heaps during the game. Melbourne should've won by 4-5 goals.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Brisbane were lucky the umpires favoured them heaps during the game. Melbourne should've won by 4-5 goals.

Yeah... nah.

Umpiring went both ways. You were obviously rooting for the underdogs/better draft pick and it tainted your perceptions.

Brown was molested all day, and Bate got a goal from a soft free.

Brisbane got an equal share as well.

Had a couple of Demons supporters come onto our board and express similar sentiments about the umpiring being equally bad in either direction.

 

[Dez!]

Yeah... nah.

Umpiring went both ways. You were obviously rooting for the underdogs/better draft pick and it tainted your perceptions.

Brown was molested all day, and Bate got a goal from a soft free.

Brisbane got an equal share as well.

Had a couple of Demons supporters come onto our board and express similar sentiments about the umpiring being equally bad in either direction.

It was the order of the day, the umpires just sucked.

 

[Corrosion]

Power's tackle on Valenti was the worst lack of a holding the ball decision I've seen all year.

The Brennan incident was the right call, the tackle slipped, Brennan touched the ball on the ground but didn't drop it and then kept going.

I'm not saying the umpiring cost us the game though, Dees earned the win.

I thought Valenti got a kick away, whilst be slung to the ground. Actually, scrap the word "kicked" away, and replace it with "shinned" away. Still a legal way of disposing of the ball.

The Brennan tackle would've been paid for holding the ball. However, the umpire who was sitting in the Lions 50 had blown his whistle just prior to Brennan being tackled, as he seen there was a holding infringement on Bradshaw.

 

[whelan=legend]

Yeah... nah.

Umpiring went both ways. You were obviously rooting for the underdogs/better draft pick and it tainted your perceptions.

Brown was molested all day, and Bate got a goal from a soft free.

Brisbane got an equal share as well.

Had a couple of Demons supporters come onto our board and express similar sentiments about the umpiring being equally bad in either direction.

You got plenty of goals too from soft frees. Umpires were absolutely shit, its probably my one eye but i think they anally r*ped us all day and brissy were lucky to get within one point.

 

[Monkey King]

No one drops the ball anymore... it spills.

 

[w00dy]

i felt the dubious umpiring decisions seemed to result in brisbane goals, or stop melbourne goals...

miller marking the ball 40 from goal, free kick paid off the ball, heads down the other end, goal...

holding the ball not paid against brennan, followed by the free to bradshaw resulted in a goal...

as for the topic of the thread, it seems the umpires are actually giving the umpires prior opportunity now, which at the start of the season they didn't seem to give the players prior opportunity... we may not want stoppages, but you shouldn't penalise the player going for the footy... this was happening earlier in the season, isn't now...

adjudication of this rule has been much better recently for mine...

 

[lions_den]

im sure i will be criticised for bias, but i thought that decision was correct.
you actually have to be tackled not just touched to be given holding the ball, and Brennan never was tackled.

having said that i agree with the thread, umpiring was poor in both directions all day.

yes, yes and yes.

 

[Thommo 42]

hasn't been paid all year.

It seems the rule is now as follows.

If you have prior opportunity and get tackled, then its a free kick.

If you have prior opportunity, get tackled and make a feeble handball or kick after struggling for about 5 seconds in the tackle, then its not a free kick

If you have had no prior opportunity and get tackled, no free kick.

Generally I'm ok with the above interpretations, but I think blokes are given too long to get rid of it in a tackle.

The one that I don't like is the following.

No prior opportunity, get tackled and drop the ball cold - no free kick.

No opportunity or not, if you drop it cold in a tackle it should be a free kick.

This interpretation I think is a result of umpires being instructed to look for players who 'make an effort' to get rid of it when tackled to ground etc. I guess dropping it cold is now considered 'making an effort'

Its the same even in 3rd grade AFLQ where I play, and its a complete joke.

 

[CAMEL]

Generally I'm ok with the above interpretations, but I think blokes are given too long to get rid of it in a tackle.

The one that I don't like is the following.

No prior opportunity, get tackled and drop the ball cold - no free kick.

No opportunity or not, if you drop it cold in a tackle it should be a free kick.

This interpretation I think is a result of umpires being instructed to look for players who 'make an effort' to get rid of it when tackled to ground etc. I guess dropping it cold is now considered 'making an effort'

Its the same even in 3rd grade AFLQ where I play, and its a complete joke.

Law 15.2.4 (a, b, c, d, e) is a good law. Everyone needs to read it. I visited the MCG for 2 games on the weekend and was completely astounded at how little it seems fans know about any rules. They might be annoying or inconvenient when your team is losing, but they are the rules. It was a bad idea to sit behind the Richmond 'cheer/abuse own team/umpires when losing group'.

Same when umpiring in my local competition. A player will tackle another player in the same motion as the player picks the ball off the ground, fairly slings him around as the player tries to kick it and the ball spills out without being kicked. No prior opportunity at all, "Play On". Then the tackling player abuses and swears at you for not giving him a free kick. Five minutes later the same player will go on a big run and bust through 3 tackles then gets wrapped up and gets no disposal. And gives the same abuse and swearing for correctly penalising him.

But anyways, the umpires seemed to want to do less work this weekend. Didnt want to stop the clock and only wanted to bounce the ball when completely needed. It didnt look good.

 

[thegreenmachine]

I hated it when holding the ball was paid when they had only a millisecond to get rid of it, as they did pay it on some occassions in the past. Holding and dropping the ball should only be paid when they have a very legitimate chance of disposing the ball and when they deliberately drop it to the ground. If it's accidentally knocked away and they are dispossessed of the ball when there is no legitimate chance they could have got rid of it, they should call play on. This is just my opinion.

 

[Thommo 42]

Law 15.2.4 (a, b, c, d, e) is a good law. Everyone needs to read it. I visited the MCG for 2 games on the weekend and was completely astounded at how little it seems fans know about any rules. They might be annoying or inconvenient when your team is losing, but they are the rules. It was a bad idea to sit behind the Richmond 'cheer/abuse own team/umpires when losing group'.

Same when umpiring in my local competition. A player will tackle another player in the same motion as the player picks the ball off the ground, fairly slings him around as the player tries to kick it and the ball spills out without being kicked. No prior opportunity at all, "Play On". Then the tackling player abuses and swears at you for not giving him a free kick. Five minutes later the same player will go on a big run and bust through 3 tackles then gets wrapped up and gets no disposal. And gives the same abuse and swearing for correctly penalising him.

But anyways, the umpires seemed to want to do less work this weekend. Didnt want to stop the clock and only wanted to bounce the ball when completely needed. It didnt look good.

your example is a poor one.

I'm talking about blokes who get tackled and drop it cold as soon as the tackle is made, usually deliberately.

 

[NSWCROW]

Ah , the old " INCORRECT DISPOSAL " HTB rule.....that was LAST year , wasn't it ??

Can't recall too many " holding it's " this weekend either.

 

[richardnose]

Law 15.2.4 (a, b, c, d, e) is a good law. Everyone needs to read it. I visited the MCG for 2 games on the weekend and was completely astounded at how little it seems fans know about any rules. They might be annoying or inconvenient when your team is losing, but they are the rules. It was a bad idea to sit behind the Richmond 'cheer/abuse own team/umpires when losing group'.

Same when umpiring in my local competition. A player will tackle another player in the same motion as the player picks the ball off the ground, fairly slings him around as the player tries to kick it and the ball spills out without being kicked. No prior opportunity at all, "Play On". Then the tackling player abuses and swears at you for not giving him a free kick. Five minutes later the same player will go on a big run and bust through 3 tackles then gets wrapped up and gets no disposal. And gives the same abuse and swearing for correctly penalising him.

But anyways, the umpires seemed to want to do less work this weekend. Didnt want to stop the clock and only wanted to bounce the ball when completely needed. It didnt look good.

i think i have a pretty good understanding of the rules. what i don't understand is why the interpretation of this rule is so much more lenient now that it was in the first half of the year. i would be willing to bet that the average number of holding/dropping the balls paid per game now is significantly down and the number of ball-ups is way up. it isn't because the players have changed the way they play, it's because the interpretation has shifted dramatically.

this happens every year, interpretation of certain rules shifts about halfway thru the year. that was the point behind my original post. you're an umpire - tell me why that happens.

btw - i disagree with your condescending view of footy fans understanding of the game. supporters yelling for a holding/throwing the ball would, in most cases, have been expecting something that would have been paid six weeks ago. i reckon most of them probably understand the rules pretty well, they're just baffled as to why the umpires have collectively changed the way they interpret those rules.

 

[CAMEL]

i think i have a pretty good understanding of the rules. what i don't understand is why the interpretation of this rule is so much more lenient now that it was in the first half of the year. i would be willing to bet that the average number of holding/dropping the balls paid per game now is significantly down and the number of ball-ups is way up. it isn't because the players have changed the way they play, it's because the interpretation has shifted dramatically.

this happens every year, interpretation of certain rules shifts about halfway thru the year. that was the point behind my original post. you're an umpire - tell me why that happens.

btw - i disagree with your condescending view of footy fans understanding of the game. supporters yelling for a holding/throwing the ball would, in most cases, have been expecting something that would have been paid six weeks ago. i reckon most of them probably understand the rules pretty well, they're just baffled as to why the umpires have collectively changed the way they interpret those rules.

I know what you mean. From the games on the weekend/recently it was obvious the umpires were told to make sure they did give the player with the ball heaps more time than normal to get rid of it and the let 'play' go on as long as possible. Which I am sure is not how they were trained to umpire. So they focus on what they were specifically told to focus on which leaves them open to make silly mistakes and potentially stuff a game. The focus should be on the whole game, not just one area of it.

I think is is fairly clear some clown told the umps to change their interpretation slightly which was very silly because now the fans, players and even the umpires are not sure what the correct ruling should be. That shouldnt happen in the middle of a season.

 

[richardnose]

I know what you mean. From the games on the weekend/recently it was obvious the umpires were told to make sure they did give the player with the ball heaps more time than normal to get rid of it and the let 'play' go on as long as possible. Which I am sure is not how they were trained to umpire. So they focus on what they were specifically told to focus on which leaves them open to make silly mistakes and potentially stuff a game. The focus should be on the whole game, not just one area of it.

I think is is fairly clear some clown told the umps to change their interpretation slightly which was very silly because now the fans, players and even the umpires are not sure what the correct ruling should be. That shouldnt happen in the middle of a season.

ok, fair enough. btw - i don't agree with your description as changing the interpretation slightly. a word like "significantly" would be more appropriate.

my other point is this that this mid-year shift in interpretation happens every, single year without fail. why ?

 

[james_omahoney]

ok, fair enough. btw - i don't agree with your description as changing the interpretation slightly. a word like "significantly" would be more appropriate.

my other point is this that this mid-year shift in interpretation happens every, single year without fail. why ?

Agree. Most of the issues with umpiring don't come from the rules themselves, but from the variances in application of these rules. Consistency shouldn't just be from quarter to quarter, game to game, or even across a season. No interpretation, and hence application, of any law of the game should vary unless specifically addressed prior to the commencement of a season. If no formal communication is made then the football community has the right to expect that things won't change from even year to year.

Now I am aware that the AFL does make some announcements (such as hands in the back, head high bumps etc), but this is nowhere near comprehensive enough to cover the changes in interpretations that we witness on a regular basis.

 

[Bob_vic]

Perceived variation in interpretation of HTB comes from the general public's lack of knowledge of all the rules that apply to HTB. Once the understanding is there, you find the rules are applied by the umpires consistantly, with only the odd error.

 

[james_omahoney]

Perceived variation in interpretation of HTB comes from the general public's lack of knowledge of all the rules that apply to HTB. Once the understanding is there, you find the rules are applied by the umpires consistantly, with only the odd error.

Disagree strongly. Variation is definitely there and shifts over time, and exists regardless of the knowledge of the general public, because those of us who know the rules well can see the shifting and inconsistent interpretations.

I definitely don't agree that there's only the odd error. I think you could count the amount of blatantly obvious/blind freddy free kicks on two hands for each match, but those that are not so blatantly obvious number much more, but still should be picked up by the umpires.