Holding the Ball - what gives?

[Beau_Waters for PM]

Look, I respect that the umpires have a tough job and have copped alot of stick this year especially with regards to the hands-in-the back rule.
But this weekend's application of the Holding The Ball rule is possibly the worst I have ever seen.
Umpires are repeatedly being 'conned' into paying HTB decisions when opposition players are in fact the ones who are trapping the ball against the player on the ground. This practice seems to be happening more often lately.

I witnessed many examples this weekend.
Scott Thompson had one payed against him, when he clearly went to ground and, while trying to scrape the ball out, it was cleverly held in by one of the Hawthorn players, who was practically sitting on top of him.
The exact same thing happened numerous times in the Collingwood v Sydney game - first a free payed to Josh Fraser who was holding the ball tightly against one of the Sydney players (think it was Bolton). The same thing happened to Brett Kirk, who was penalised for HTB later on.

Is anyone else annoyed by this? Surely umpires must cotton on sooner rather than later - since this tactic is becoming more widespread. It defeats the very purpose of the HTB rule - which is aimed at keeping the ball moving and preventing unnecessary ball-ups.

 

[jimmy35]

There were some shit calls in the Pies game . Thankfully we got the best of them .

 

[The Hobo]

Totally agree

 

[madcat001]

Totally agree

me too. the interpretation is very wayward.

 

[nihh]

yep although you would take them every time, it definetly hurts when you are on the recieving end.

Can't blame the players though, it is Demetriou and his adhoc rule commitees that are to blame.

Worst rule though is the deliberate out of bounds, I really hope this rule never decides a team's season because who knows what was going through the player's head.

 

[Froggy]

On another note I wish they'd reward a good tackle when someone drops the ball instead of yelling out "ball is clear" etc just to keep the game going. A lot of the time a guy will chase down someone only to have the ball dribble free and a call of play on and another team mate of the person who was in possesion sweeps in and pisses off with the ball, leaving the tackler with no reward for catching someone with the ball which is the whole point of the rule.

 

[mdc]

On another note I wish they'd reward a good tackle when someone drops the ball instead of yelling out "ball is clear" etc just to keep the game going. A lot of the time a guy will chase down someone only to have the ball dribble free and a call of play on and another team mate of the person who was in possesion sweeps in and pisses off with the ball, leaving the tackler with no reward for catching someone with the ball which is the whole point of the rule.

Absolutely. Any time the ball gets "knocked out" after a great tackle it's play-on, even though otherwise it's a clear holding-the-ball.

Today's Sydney-Pies game was a great example of the problem with the HTB rule. Sydney copped a couple of terrible decisions on the ground - but also got away with a couple when they were chased down and the ball dropped out. They have to reward the tackler more and be sensible with the "dragged it in" calls.

 

[Beau_Waters for PM]

They have to reward the tackler more and be sensible with the "dragged it in" calls.

I agree.

 

[92 94 06]

I have noticed one clear thing

the home team always wins more holding the ball decisions

west coast last night..bang red hot...port player throws the ball ...or drops it play on......aami


tonight swans player gets sat on crowd yells ball....holding the ball

and hawks also...

its down to home crowds...will be interesting tomorow though....probably will pay less.....

 

[estibador]

It seemed like that central umpire in the Pies game gave them a HTB free every single time they tackled the Swans in the 2nd half. Forget prior opportunity, if you were a Swans player and were tackled in the centre of the ground it was an automatic free against you.

 

[Juza]

I have noticed one clear thing

the home team always wins more holding the ball decisions

west coast last night..bang red hot...port player throws the ball ...or drops it play on......aami


tonight swans player gets sat on crowd yells ball....holding the ball

and hawks also...

its down to home crowds...will be interesting tomorow though....probably will pay less.....

What about When Judd took them on, got tackled & dropped the ball, but Play-on was called?
Hawthorn did not get the better of HOB's yesterday. I can give an example... Gurrea pinned, Doesn't have the ball.

 

[AAMI]

They have to reward the tackler more

You are kidding, aren't you?

How about rewarding the guy getting the footy?

The quick holding the ball decisions this weekend have been nothing short of ludicrous.

If the AFL keep going this way, they may as well forget about bouncing the ball and just reward a free kick to the tackler every time.

 

[Beau_Waters for PM]

He was referring to the 'run-down' tackles from behind. Those tacklers are seldomly rewarded for their efforts these days.

 

[thesting]

Got to agree with basically everything that has been said here. I think Saturday nights game we were lucky with one HTN in the first half. I think it was Josh Fraser who ran down Leo Barry, but Barry did get a fist to the ball as he was being tackled so I can see why he wasn't pinged for it. The handball he got away went nowwhere and Collingwood popped through an easy goal becasue of it.

In the second half though it just descended into farce. The free given against Bolton when Fraser dragged the ball into him was frustrating, but I always knew it was going to be paid as that is a very consistant (and frustrating) ruling. Players are smart and know what to do to get themselves a free in that situation.

The whole thing needs to be exaimined in the off-season and an easier to interpret apprach needs to be brought in.

 

[Underdog]

Is anyone else annoyed by this? Surely umpires must cotton on sooner rather than later - since this tactic is becoming more widespread. It defeats the very purpose of the HTB rule - which is aimed at keeping the ball moving and preventing unnecessary ball-ups.

It's quite funny really - every recent new rule has been totally exploited eventually by players and coaches. Now because these are not working to take the game in the AFL's desired direction, they want to introduce even more like no mark for kicking backwards and others. Do they really think more rules that change the game won't be exploited!?

For the kicking backwards one, that may reduce time wasting, but it will greatly increase flooding as opposition know they MUST push it forward.

Thats just one example

 

[Nt Bomber]

In the Sydney St Kilda game there was at least three clear holding the ball decisions in my opinion called play on by the umpires.

 

[dylza]

In the Sydney St Kilda game there was at least three clear holding the ball decisions in my opinion called play on by the umpires.

Well that's your opinion

 

[MELTY]

Well that's your opinion

his opinion is that he believes they shuld have been paid

 

[dylza]

his opinion is that he believes they shuld have been paid

onya palbert

 

[Scroater]

In the Sydney St Kilda game there was at least three clear holding the ball decisions in my opinion called play on by the umpires.

In particular where the players stopped on the wing and Umpire Sully stated tackle didn't stick. I would have thought that it wouldn't matter how long the tackle was, if the player with the ball doesn't dispose of it properly by foot or hand after having prior opportunity, he should be pinged for incorrect disposal. No point telling players tackle didn't stick, free kick should have been paid. Tackle was good enough to take player to ground.

 

[soho]

whats worse is when players DECIDE not to dish off, draw the tackle and force another stoppage...

cannot stand this...

i dont care for players on the ground getting done when others are holding the ball in... if you're on the ground, dont even attempt to take possession of the ball, just knock it out... players of course dont want to do this for there is a chance they will knock it to an opponent...

 

[Ferdinand Lewis]

Look, I respect that the umpires have a tough job and have copped alot of stick this year especially with regards to the hands-in-the back rule.
But this weekend's application of the Holding The Ball rule is possibly the worst I have ever seen.

this week?

try watching the first 5 min of the Richmond v Hawthorn practice game in Tassie and the holding the ball giving against Matt White.

worst ump effort i have seen.

 

[Bob_vic]

In particular where the players stopped on the wing and Umpire Sully stated tackle didn't stick. I would have thought that it wouldn't matter how long the tackle was, if the player with the ball doesn't dispose of it properly by foot or hand after having prior opportunity, he should be pinged for incorrect disposal. No point telling players tackle didn't stick, free kick should have been paid. Tackle was good enough to take player to ground.

Sully is right as far as tackle having to "stick". I didn't see the actual tackle though.

The rule actually used to say that the tackle had to "****** his progress", but that hasn't been in the rules for 10 years, and has therefore the application changed a little but, but not much - "******ing progess" is still a guideline for determining whether a tackle has been executed. The tackle has be completely executed, not just a "half-tackle" where the tackler lets go and the player then falls to ground and lets go of the ball. In other words, the tackler should be still holding the player while the incorrect disposal occurs. If the tackler lets go before the ball spills, then it's play on.

 

[Blommy]

The biggest problem with holding the ball is quite simple. We are penalising the player who goes in and gets the ball. We need to reward the player who goes in and gets the ball first and give them TIME and OPPORTUNITY to dispose of it.

The situation with the AFL is concerned, it is rewarding the player who is second to the ball. If it keeps going this way, we are going to be watching one of those chipmunk cartoons (After you - no no no, after you) as far as going in and getting the pill is concerned. We already are seeing players sitting back waiting to tackle the player who goes in first.