Questions about the rules that you are unsure of thread

[im_a_lazy_sod]

why isn't letting the ball drop out of your hand onto the boot (or throwing it onto your boot under pressure) not a throw? yet a drop kick whilst being tackled is a throw, even if executed perfectly.

Wondered this also. And I agree - it's a legal disposal so shouldn't technically be penalised. Just you see players throw the ball out and hope to get connection on it with their foot. Determining intent for a drop kick would be interesting for the umpires

 

[kranky al]

When a player takes a mark, why doesn’t 10 of his teammates quickly sprint up, form a circle around him, link arms and escort him the length of the field while he jogs inside the circle bouncing the ball as required?

Surround him with dont-arguing-dustys

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

When a player takes a mark, why doesn’t 10 of his teammates quickly sprint up, form a circle around him, link arms and escort him the length of the field while he jogs inside the circle bouncing the ball as required?

Firstly, how high are you?
Secondly, can I have some?
Thirdly, thank you for opening my mind

 

[Power Raid]

When a player takes a mark, why doesn’t 10 of his teammates quickly sprint up, form a circle around him, link arms and escort him the length of the field while he jogs inside the circle bouncing the ball as required?

the scrum!

I like it

 

[cmndstab]

Can someone explain the ruck rules/frees to me please?

Yeah, I'm with this one. I genuinely don't know what 90% of the ruck infringements are for and in almost all cases it seems that both ruckmen are doing the exact same thing as each other.

I understand all the new rules about nominating and not blocking, etc. It's the ones about who engages first and what constitutes holding and so on that I've never been able to figure out after decades of watching footy.

 

[yeahmate]

Why is a free kick paid every time a defender running back without eyes on the ball makes any contact at all to a forward attempting to mark (even otherwise legal contact to the body)? Umpires seem to pay the free for not having eyes on the ball?. Is there actually a rule that says you cant make any contact in a marking contest if you don't have eyes on the ball?

 

[PieLebo87]

Yeah, I'm with this one. I genuinely don't know what 90% of the ruck infringements are for and in almost all cases it seems that both ruckmen are doing the exact same thing as each other.

I understand all the new rules about nominating and not blocking, etc. It's the ones about who engages first and what constitutes holding and so on that I've never been able to figure out after decades of watching footy.

It’s funny because even the ruckmen are genuinely confused most of the time.

 

[ManInWhite]

Why is a free kick paid every time a defender running back without eyes on the ball makes any contact at all to a forward attempting to mark (even otherwise legal contact to the body)? Umpires seem to pay the free for not having eyes on the ball?. Is there actually a rule that says you cant make any contact in a marking contest if you don't have eyes on the ball?

Incidental contact is allowed as long as the player is making a genuine attempt to mark the ball.

 

[Sentinel]

Scenario: A defender on the goal line puts his fist up to stop a goal, only rather than punching it through he spoils it back into play. The goal umpire signals a goal but on review the ball is judged to have not completely crossed the line, so the goal is overturned. Play has stopped due to the goal umpire's original call.

What happens here? It's not a goal and it can't be a point because the ball needs to have completely crossed the line, and without the goal umpire's incorrect call the ball was still in play. Is it a ball up on or near the goal line?

 

[yeahmate]

Incidental contact is allowed as long as the player is making a genuine attempt to mark the ball.

Thanks, but isn't incidental contact also allowed if you are making a genuine attempt to spoil? Otherwise there would be lots of frees paid where all the defender is trying to do is prevent the forward from marking...Why is it different if the defender doesn't have eyes on the ball?

 

[Power Raid]

Can someone explain the ruck rules/frees to me please?

kneeing your opponent or putting your boot into their stomach is OK but don't touch their arm or block them

 

[cmndstab]

Scenario: A defender on the goal line puts his fist up to stop a goal, only rather than punching it through he spoils it back into play. The goal umpire signals a goal but on review the ball is judged to have not completely crossed the line, so the goal is overturned. Play has stopped due to the goal umpire's original call.

What happens here? It's not a goal and it can't be a point because the ball needs to have completely crossed the line, and without the goal umpire's incorrect call the ball was still in play. Is it a ball up on or near the goal line?

I'm almost certain that this would be a ball-up near the goal line, yes.

 

[PieLebo87]

I'm almost certain that this would be a ball-up near the goal line, yes.

I’ve never seen a defender punch forward. They always punch up to ensure it still goes through for a rushed behind.

 

[Ratcat]

Umps controlling Geelong again, dumb afl.

 

[toxic]

Question for those smarter than me.

4 weeks ago team A declared the winner of a game by a point.
Scores entered and accepted by league

4 weeks later team B review the tape and turns out actual result was a draw. Scoring error made in 3rd quarter.

Should the result stand as declared
Should it be declared a draw?
As it stands Team A have to now cough up 5k to appeal the overturned decision of a draw

Thoughts?????

 

[cmndstab]

Don't think it would be changed. The scores are already reviewed by both goal umpires and ratified at the end of the game. I imagine at that point it's too late for any queries.

I’ve never seen a defender punch forward. They always punch up to ensure it still goes through for a rushed behind.

Sure, but it could happen. Or alternatively, a player could attempt to mark it and have the ball spill forwards off their hands.

 

[PieLebo87]

Sure, but it could happen. Or alternatively, a player could attempt to mark it and have the ball spill forwards off their hands.

It could. It’s odd that it never has though. Considering the amount of goal line contests we have.

 

[Sentinel]

Sure, but it could happen. Or alternatively, a player could attempt to mark it and have the ball spill forwards off their hands.

It could. It’s odd that it never has though. Considering the amount of goal line contests we have.

Closest I've seen, and the reason why the question came to mind, was Johanissen's goal in the last quarter of the 2016 Grand Final which was overturned. The ball was punched back into play, but bounced on it's point and crossed the goal line:

It was originally judged a goal but the goal review decision was that it didn't fully cross the line before being punched back, so the final decision was a behind. If the ball hadn't bounced on its point and then over the line, but instead ended up in the goal square, I don't know what the ruling would have been - as mentioned before, I presume a ball up.

I do find it strange it's never happened since the goal review was brought in, it's bound to at some point.

 

[IKnowtheDog]

The deliberate rushed behind rule was causing issues last night in Cats v Swans. Amazing a rule is in place and players aren't sure what covers it.

Also how cone the 360 degree tackle no longer equals holding the ball?

 

[JHF1870]

Closest I've seen, and the reason why the question came to mind, was Johanissen's goal in the last quarter of the 2016 Grand Final which was overturned. The ball was punched back into play, but bounced on it's point and crossed the goal line:

It was originally judged a goal but the goal review decision was that it didn't fully cross the line before being punched back, so the final decision was a behind. If the ball hadn't bounced on its point and then over the line, but instead ended up in the goal square, I don't know what the ruling would have been - as mentioned before, I presume a ball up.

I do find it strange it's never happened since the goal review was brought in, it's bound to at some point.

Anyone with digital analysis experience, or experience with lenses could NOT conclusively make a call on that image. This is where the AFL is half arsed with its goal review technology. I have pointed this out in another thread that the lens distortion, and angle of the camera make it impossible to make an accurate call, but nobody wants to acknowledge it.

You can clearly see the distortion in any image. Look at the line and how it gets narrower to the other side goal post. When you see edges of the frame you can see distortion. This is why if you're a guy you want to be on the outside of a group photo and if your a woman you want to be in the middle.

The camera is in the MIDDLE of the post. There is a definite angle between the point at which the ball APPEARS to be at the verge of the line and the camera in the middle of the post. This angle is significant. The ball, in the middle of the goal line is being compared to the position at the far end of the goal line (WHICH IS DISTORTED).

 

[JHF1870]

Can you get reported for a deliberate push in the back, say guy marks 2m out from goal.

 

[Freo Quokkas]

What does 'six chains in the forward half (by the Dockers against Melbourne) compared to the AFL average of 37' mean and refer to?

 

[Hoops]

This more an observation to a rule anomoly than a question. Tonight a Bulldog player attempted to take a mark over the boundary line. The boundary umpire correctly said the ball touched the ground as he went over the line before losing control and the ball going to ground. The anomoly is that the ball was over the line before it was deemed he doesnt have control. but yet if he had full control then it doesn't matter if the ball was carried over the line before the player had full control. Are you following? Cause im aware im struggling to explain it clearly.

 

[Randomizor]

Is there a process for forfeiting a game? Could, say, Carlton just decide to forfeit the rest of the season? How? Would the AFL punish them?

 

[JHF1870]

Is there a process for forfeiting a game? Could, say, Carlton just decide to forfeit the rest of the season? How? Would the AFL punish them?

Could never happen. They would lose fans and sponsors. But IF and its a big IF, a team were to forfeit they would probably cop massive sanctions for bringing the game in onto disrepute.