Toast Round 10 = Collingwood 78-74 Adelaide

[ElliottsMaggies]

The aim of the AFL is to make the game faster.

The rules haven't changed but interpretation is different and inconsistent.

They seem to want continuous play, packs forming. Even the players at times seem to look for the whistle to be blown.

And that is what I was referring to... 'incorrect disposal' doesn't appear to exist anymore.

The umpires are interpreting it differently/it's been relaxed, however you want to call it.

But it's been significantly more noticeable in the past month. And yes, the umps have obviously been directed to do so.

I just don't recall them telling us that publicly. Maybe I, Lethal, Pendles & others missed the memo.

 

[Kes1984]

He ran across 3 mowing strips.

I called it as 25 minimum. Would love to know how wide those strips are. I was under the impression they were 10m wide which would mean he ran 30m lol

I was wondering the same. How big are those strips. Would give an indication of the length for the umpires if that’s a known thing.

 

[sideswipe]

The biggest change, as I see it, is that it is now alright for a player to get the ball and just hold it in, while he searches for a good option, almost indefinitely. If no option presents, he just hangs on, and is almost never penalized. Most of these are cases of holding the ball, as it is very deliberate. There is rarely even a pretend handball attempt, because the moving of one arm might let the ball out, and this is not the player's purpose.

This is not a fault of the umpires, but the result of an AFL direction, instituted without telling anyone, like so many of the changes we suffer. Umpires are extraordinarily good. They make few mistakes in judging who had hands on marks, and rarely get it wrong when judging who is doing the holding. Most of the "mistakes" , such as unpenalized blocks are like the holding the ball problem: the result of AFL directions.

Don’t dispute that holding it in whilst not actually taking possession is almost a blight on our game - even though it is how we win close games once in the lead. However, the “AFL directions” idea is a bit far fetched. They simply don’t run their organisation like that.

Can you imagine the furore that might arise if there were such “directives” and some disgruntled umpire decided to blab? The afl simply isn’t run that way - there are no “directions from on high”.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[gerryg400]

I was wondering the same. How big are those strips. Would give an indication of the length for the umpires if that’s a known thing.

9m. They are used at full back when the maggot calls “back to the nines”.

 

[JuniorB]

The biggest change, as I see it, is that it is now alright for a player to get the ball and just hold it in, while he searches for a good option, almost indefinitely. If no option presents, he just hangs on, and is almost never penalized. Most of these are cases of holding the ball, as it is very deliberate. There is rarely even a pretend handball attempt, because the moving of one arm might let the ball out, and this is not the player's purpose.

This is not a fault of the umpires, but the result of an AFL direction, instituted without telling anyone, like so many of the changes we suffer. Umpires are extraordinarily good. They make few mistakes in judging who had hands on marks, and rarely get it wrong when judging who is doing the holding. Most of the "mistakes" , such as unpenalized blocks are like the holding the ball problem: the result of AFL directions.

It's actually one aspect of how we shut games down - a player looks like he's trying to get the ball out but can't.
He gets tackled, then a teammate or two pile in to make sure the ball doesn't get out into the open.
This leads to back to back to back stoppages.
In this particular game, there would have been almost zero chance of Adelaide getting a shot on goal with time remaining.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Ok I watched the first four minutes of that clip - Lethal just spoke in generalities, didn’t bring up an actual example and not once mentioned the two key elements- prior opportunity and genuine attempt to dispose of the pill.

Lethal needs to work on his substantive comment.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Incorrect disposal & holding the ball interpretations is what he spoke about during the show. It's what Tom Morris said he'd bring up with the new umpire boss and he did. It's what Pendles has also spoken about.

They all said they were confused about the 'incorrect disposal' & HTB interpretations, most noticeable recently. And the umpire's boss has admitted they have relaxed the interpretation and will call 'play on' when they think there is an attempt, (seemingly) regardless if it is dropping the ball & in many instances a throw.

They were all discussed at length on sen (& other shows) during the week.

No one is saying umpiring is easy and all may interpret things differently..maybe they think it makes it less complicated by getting rid of incorrect disposal altogether, encourages a quicker game, stops constant whistle blowing, etc etc.

My observation was it looks like 'incorrect disposal' no longer exists.

 

[Unknown Identity]

That’s right.When a player is running at full pelt like Rankine was,their stride would be a lot more than a metre,probably more like 1.5 metres at a minimum.

The average male running stride is 1.57m

Elite athletes who are trained in running techniques can be up to 2 metres.

Rankine at 14 steps was about 1.72 per stride.

Either way 2 and half grass cuts is close to 23m.

Strange narrative, umpires finally call it correctly and everyone loses their mind. Hopefully they continue to call it, some of these players taking the piss with how far they get to run without bouncing.

#bringbackthebounce

 

[Kes1984]

I was at the game so only now watched the replay.

IQ played his best game for the season so far. Looked more his normal self again.

That smother was huge too!

 

[Gaspard]

Don’t dispute that holding it in whilst not actually taking possession is almost a blight on our game - even though it is how we win close games once in the lead. However, the “AFL directions” idea is a bit far fetched. They simply don’t run their organisation like that.

Can you imagine the furore that might arise if there were such “directives” and some disgruntled umpire decided to blab? The afl simply isn’t run that way - there are no “directions from on high”.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

You seriously believe this?

 

[sideswipe]

You seriously believe this?

I know it.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Ted Potter]

Strange narrative, umpires finally call it correctly and everyone loses their mind. Hopefully they continue to call it, some of these players taking the piss with how far they get to run without bouncing.

Not really. I think what players, coaches, supporters and everyone wants above all else is consistency in the way the game is umpired. The HTB rule has come under criticism lately precisely because it is not consistent with the way it has been adjudicated in the past.

I don't blame Adel supporters feeling hard done by. Technically yes, he ran too far, but in practice players regularly run such distances without penalty.

People say they want umpires to make the correct decision, but so much of umpiring decisions rely on interpretation. What we really want is consistent interpretation. The decision against Rankine was not consistent with the way it is normally umpired.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

The media are all awash with the "controversial" free kick, as if it affected the result.
Rankine ran nearly 10m more than the rule allows, so it was the correct decision.
It's a bit like the "keep left unless overtaking" rule - seldom enforced.

This is ultimately the issue

They almost never pay it and they decided to at a crucial moment in the game

At the ground almost every week I complain they never pay too far. Almost every single player who runs out from kick outs runs too far and they never pay it

It’s a 50m line.

It’s a 9/10m goal square

If the player runs without bouncing past the halfway point of the tip of the square and the 50m line then they’ve run at least 20m and they NEVER pay it

 

[gouki88]

Not really. I think what players, coaches, supporters and everyone wants above all else is consistency in the way the game is umpired. The HTB rule has come under criticism lately precisely because it is not consistent with the way it has been adjudicated in the past.

I don't blame Adel supporters feeling hard done by. Technically yes, he ran too far, but in practice players regularly run such distances without penalty.

People say they want umpires to make the correct decision, but so much of umpiring decisions rely on interpretation. What we really want is consistent interpretation. The decision against Rankine was not consistent with the way it is normally umpired.

I think it was fairly in line with 'normal' umpiring - he ran almost 10m more than the 15m allowed, which is quite an extreme breach of the rule. There is usually lots of leeway given to runs up to about 20m, but getting close to 25m is often called I would think

 

[Mollythedolly]

Didn't look like HTB from where I was sitting. One more step and you probably say he had enough prior.

He threw it out and had run a considerable distance before he did it which is his prior opportunity.

 

[Ted Potter]

I think it was fairly in line with 'normal' umpiring - he ran almost 10m more than the 15m allowed, which is quite an extreme breach of the rule. There is usually lots of leeway given to runs up to about 20m, but getting close to 25m is often called I would think

Watching it on TV it did not strike me as running too far. That it was measured to be 24m only tells me that players regularly run such distances without penalty.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Just heard a replay of the radio call on ABC. Absolutely nailed it… saud something like “ he’s run a long way”…..

Cameron ling went on to congratulate the callers on just calling as they saw it and then bagged out the tv commentators making stupid comments like the umpires should have not blown the whistle because it ruined the moment ( or whatever they said)

 

[Big Bryza]

I have to admit that I am one of those clowns. After 3, the desire and pressure just didn't seem to be there. I have no idea how they switched it back on, but am mightily grateful that they have.
The way that the "possibles" have stepped up to become the "how can we leave them outs" is astounding.
The way that Jack Crisp has regained the fire is the most significant factor to my eye.

Its scent in the nostrils type stuff. The season started earlier than usual which is a valid point. We also ran into 3 teams at the top of their game in GWS, Sydney and St.Kilda (fcuk me dead how did we lose this).

The Swans are flying, the Giants are stumbling and the Saints are just flat out shithouse with a coach stuck in 2012.

I love your point about our possibles being exposed and stepping up to the plate.

The next 2 weeks are huge to keep in touch with the top 4. Then a massive one on Kings Bday with hopefully some troops back in the side.

 

[sideswipe]

Watching it on TV it did not strike me as running too far. That it was measured to be 24m only tells me that players regularly run such distances without penalty.

There are always decisions that could go either way. In terms of one that went against us, Nick D getting pushed after passing to Jamie in the dying minutes of Anzac Day should have been a free downfield. Surprised more wasn’t made of it.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Watching it on TV it did not strike me as running too far. That it was measured to be 24m only tells me that players regularly run such distances without penalty.

lots of people didn’t. Reckon it’s phsycological. . It was probably because there were only 20 seconds on the clock, viewers minds are attuned to the outcome of the next contest and the possibility of a free kick for running too far not on the radar. It’s not exactly a free that gets paid a lot because usually players aren’t stupid or desperate enough to make the mistake . Desperate in this case rather than stupid. Probably had no choice but to go for it.

 

[Big Bryza]

This is ultimately the issue

They almost never pay it and they decided to at a crucial moment in the game

At the ground almost every week I complain they never pay too far. Almost every single player who runs out from kick outs runs too far and they never pay it

It’s a 50m line.

It’s a 9/10m goal square

If the player runs without bouncing past the halfway point of the tip of the square and the 50m line then they’ve run at least 20m and they NEVER pay it

Players take the genuine pi55 with this, regularly running 30 plus metres from kick outs. Which umpire will have the balls to actually pay a free?

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

I was wondering the same. How big are those strips. Would give an indication of the length for the umpires if that’s a known thing.

It's weird that they get the 50 metres penalties wrong so many times. How many times do they go nowhere near 50 metres .. either way too short or way too long.

 

[manicpie]

It's weird that they get the 50 metres penalties wrong so many times. How many times do they go nowhere near 50 metres .. either way too short or way too long.

It's Rankine's theory of measurement and time

 

[gouki88]

It's weird that they get the 50 metres penalties wrong so many times. How many times do they go nowhere near 50 metres .. either way too short or way too long.

Again, do we need to introduce markings on the field to indicate distance?

 

[Pistol Night]

Again, do we need to introduce markings on the field to indicate distance?

Why not just make the mowing strips 15m to make it easier

 

[gouki88]

Why not just make the mowing strips 15m to make it easier

And have them mow squares? Same concept - either way, umpires are generally iffy on what constitutes a metre