Minimising pack formations - Ball on the ground rule

[RustNeverSleeps]

One of the blights on the game at the moment is the appalling inconsistancy of umpires when metering out free-kicks when packs develop.

It appears that there is an AFL directive to do whatever it takes to keep the game flowing and minimise the formation of packs.

Unfortunately the implementation of this directive is flawed with inconsistant and patently unfair holding the ball (HTB) decisions in pack situations.

Generally the ball-player is penalised by being deemed to have:
- dragged the ball in
- not attempted to dispose of the ball

Many times, the ball-player has instinctively reached out to gain possession of the ball and then been immediately tackled by multiple opponents. This should never be construed as HTB as NO prior opportunity was afforded the ball-player.

A player's natural reaction is to gain possession of the ball in dispute, but these new HTB rule interpretations are penalising the ball-player and even worse, compromising their natural football instincts.


Reducing pack formations
An interesting rule employed during the international series was the "ball on the ground" rule. http://mm.afl.com.au/afl_archive/cp2/c2/webi/article/149743al.pdf

This rule states:
"A player on the ground or on his knees may not pick the ball up – can only knock ball on".

It seems the rule's intention IS to reduce pack formations and the adjudication on this requires no umpire "interpretation".

Perhaps a rule such as this could be introduced to the AFL to assist in keeping the game flowing. This would also obviate the need to introduce the farcical and frustating HTB rule interpretations that the players and football public currently endure.

Opinions welcome.

 

[Slattery_20]

Let's change every rule!!!

The herd is restless. No rules changes to complain about this year = need new rules.

 

[Hawk-in-syd]

No need to change the rule or add a new one. Just modify the way they call it. The majority of the time the person who first gets hold of the ball isn't the one holding it in. It's the multiple defenders laying the tackle. Don't punish the first to the ball just punish the one holding it in. If two opponents both have hold of the ball give them a second to get it out then ball it up. If one releases the ball and lays a tackle the one left with the ball must get rid of it.

 

[Slattery_20]

BS, the guy with it first holds it in heaps of the time.
They're not (often) dumb enough to hold it with their hands tho. Neither the guy who dives on it nor the tackler. You grab it and push it under a body, yours or theirs so you can't be pinged.

I don't like the sounds of "let go of it to tackle". That's clearly ridiculous and just as bad as sitting on the bloke with it now.

As boring as it is to watch, packs and stack's on are part of footy.

 

[Hawk-in-syd]

BS, the guy with it first holds it in heaps of the time.
They're not (often) dumb enough to hold it with their hands tho. Neither the guy who dives on it nor the tackler. You grab it and push it under a body, yours or theirs so you can't be pinged.

I don't like the sounds of "let go of it to tackle". That's clearly ridiculous and just as bad as sitting on the bloke with it now.

As boring as it is to watch, packs and stack's on are part of footy.

Not sure of the technical definition of "heaps" but no doubt it happens, but just as often it is the tackler who is holding the ball in with hands/feet/legs or teammate ect. They are rewarding the person creating the stoppage. The tackler is also often the one that pulls the ball back under the ball player. Its not often someone will dive on the ball knowing that they will give away a free.

 

[Slattery_20]

They only reward them if it's judged an effective tackle.
It's obviously a bitch to umpire, and they do & always will make mistakes on these ones, but I don't see the need for a huge change because frankly, any change is only going to cause more trouble than it's worth.

The worst thing about tackling & HTB now is that players are allowed to just let it go for no penalty and it's covered across the board by 'knocked free in the tackle'.
Dropping the ball anyone?

 

[Mitchell Madness]

How about do one of 2 things

1) Let the umpires get used to these rules rather then introduce more they dont understand.

2) go back to the old way. none of this seagul circles around the pack from the umps, none of this "get it out, get it out." Quick, Sharp and Simple calls from the umps and the packs stop (just watch a replay from before about 1995.

 

[Papa Juggs]

It would make the game ******ed.

Nobody would be able to lose their feet or they would be out of the play. Much of the time when players are trying to prevent out of bounds they will slide to grab the ball and take possesion. Nobody would go near it if they had to keep their feet to pick it up and I don't want to see the game as being all knock ons...

The problem is that some umpires don't like bouncing the ball over and over.

They've gotta get rid of the bounce.

Yes for opening bounces / resets from goal but anywhere else just have a quick throw up.

 

[soho]

after consecutive ball ups, umpire pings a non-existent free kick to disperse the pack...

this rule has been in effect for several seasons now...

 

[Papa Juggs]

The problem is it takes time to clear out for a bounce and then the umpire has to run backwards to get out the way.

If it was just a quick throw every time it would make their job much easier.

The centre bounce should stay as it's part of the game but field bounces are just stupid and slow the game down.

 

[rgill]

The priority is to keep the game open - but picking out a dubious free kick to get the ball moving again doesn't seem fair - if they make decisions on technical indiscretions - then they need to be paid all day in every situation (but I would prefer to see frees paid only for obvious breaches of the rules!!).