Rules Sirengate 2 - Freo v North

[sherb]

But it's the going out of bounds that makes it a free kick.

Imagine Howe's kick bounces away from the boundary line instead of towards it. The kick definitely shows no intent to keep it in play, but because it doesn't go over the line, there's no free kick.

So the act that makes it a free isn't the kick, it's the crossing of the line.

If Howe's kick doesn't go out, then it's not a free kick and therefore not an issue.

The point is defining when the free kick becomes payable in circumstances like this.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

And Im saying its irrelevant whether the ball crossed the boundary before the siren or not.

It wasn't a judgement call by the umpires - it was an incorrect application of the rules as they are written.

According to the umpires, it’s not irrelevant.

Theres no rule specific for this by your own admission. Not sure why you continue to contradict yourself by saying there is a rule. There isn’t.

Just accept it. The umpires made a decision.

 

[Whisper in the Wind]

I like how you have no idea how a timer works. When it goes to 0:00 it's really 0:00:99. There's still a whole second left when it shows 0:00.

Lucky I know how stopwatches work. There was roughly 1.38 seconds between the clock hitting 0:00 and the ball crossing the line. So, even if there was 0:00:99 left, the ball was in play when the timer hit 0:00:00.

 

[BigTacoBandit]

According to the umpires, it’s not irrelevant.

Theres no rule specific for this by your own admission. Not sure why you continue to contradict yourself by saying there is a rule. There isn’t.

Just accept it. The umpires made a decision.

Yes, they made a decision - the wrong one.

There is also no rule saying that the ball has to cross the boundary before the siren either hence the grey area in the rules.

I've explained how out on the full and insufficient intent are treated differently when it comes to the siren which implies that insufficient intent should be treated like scoring and the ball still live.

 

[Erakor]

Firstly, the sky can be purple - around sunset, sunrise and at night sometimes - you need to spend more time outside.

Secondly only one of us knows how the game works and it ain't you.

Thirdly ... its their not there.

You dont mention the actual topic at hand once. Just an arrogant, patronising and smug snipe.

I'm used to seeing someone correct spelling/grammar and inevitably make a mistake themselves. But you made the same grammar rule mistake that you were correcting. "Its their not there" ....It's*. Possessive v contraction.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Yes, they made a decision - the wrong one.

There is also no rule saying that the ball has to cross the boundary before the siren either hence the grey area in the rules.

I've explained how out on the full and insufficient intent are treated differently when it comes to the siren which implies that insufficient intent should be treated like scoring and the ball still live.

Key word…. Implies.

That’s a lot different from your previous posts saying it’s written in the rule book.

They are treated differently in the rule book in that one is specifically mentioned…. And one doesn’t get a mention at all. There are no conclusions one can draw from that except to say there is no rule that exists for this circumstance.

The umpires therefore made a decision on the spot. It’s not right or wrong because there’s no rule to make them right or wrong. It’s just their decision.

 

[BigTacoBandit]

Key word…. Implies.

That’s a lot different from your previous posts saying it’s written in the rule book.

Unless you can show me where in the rules it says that the ball has to cross the boundary before the siren the goes for an insufficient intent free kick to be paid, then that too is implied.

I've never said that it is written in the rule book. Just that the way the rules are written would lead one to believe that the AFL wanted out on the full and insufficient intent to be treated differently when it comes to the siren sounding.

They are treated differently in the rule book in that one is specifically mentioned…. And one doesn’t get a mention at all. There are no conclusions one can draw from that except to say there is no rule that exists for this circumstance.

I think you can draw a conclusion from one being mentioned and one not. The AFL went out of its way to describe what should happen with when the siren sounds with a 18.10.2(a) free kick (out on the full) but not what should happen with the very next free kick, 18.10.2(b) (insufficient intent). The fact that they clarify one and not the other would indicate they want them treated differently.

The umpires therefore made a decision on the spot. It’s not right or wrong because there’s no rule to make them right or wrong. It’s just their decision.

The AFL is saying they DID make the right decison, but as you point out "its not right or wrong because there's no rule to make them right or wrong". I would have preferred the AFL to come out say something like "we acknowledge that there is grey area in the rules and the decision on the night was acceptable given the circumstances, but we are going to look at tightening up the rules to clarify what should happen".

But as usual, the AFL is putting their head in the sand and hoping it doesnt happen again. Until it does.

 

[SplintWhisky]

Here are the rules of the game for 2023. The way I have read this and got my head around it is that what the AFL said about the Boundary umpires on Saturday night was correct. They are the ones that deem that ball has gone out to the field umpires and then the field umpires call the break in play.

When we accept that as the case (8.2.2 (b) shows this to be true) then what happened is a bit more difficult to understand. The game ended with the ball PHYSCIALLY OUT when the siren went but STILL IN PLAY. So in the physical reality the ball was out before the siren but in the "games reality" the ball was still in. The Field umpire called the end to the game before the boundary umpire signaled that the ball was out. The game ended with the ball never actually being recorded as going out despite the fact that it was clearly physically over the line when the siren went.

Because the boundary umpire never signaled that the ball went out before the siren went (and the field ump called the end of the game), the main conditions for paying a deliberate free kick never occurred during playing time. It would be different if say there was a high tackle that happens before the siren and the umpire then has the chance to blow the whistle for it after the siren because the offense happened during the game

 

[BigTacoBandit]

View attachment 1642678

Here are the rules of the game for 2023. The way I have read this and got my head around it is that what the AFL said about the Boundary umpires on Saturday night was correct. They are the ones that deem that ball has gone out to the field umpires and then the field umpires call the break in play.

When we accept that as the case (8.2.2 (b) shows this to be true) then what happened is a bit more difficult to understand. The game ended with the ball PHYSCIALLY OUT when the siren went but STILL IN PLAY. So in the physical reality the ball was out before the siren but in the "games reality" the ball was still in. The Field umpire called the end to the game before the boundary umpire signaled that the ball was out. The game ended with the ball never actually being recorded as going out despite the fact that it was clearly physically over the line when the siren went.

Because the boundary umpire never signaled that the ball went out before the siren went (and the field ump called the end of the game), the main conditions for paying a deliberate free kick never occurred during playing time. It would be different if say there was a high tackle that happens before the siren and the umpire then has the chance to blow the whistle for it after the siren because the offense happened during the game

I'm not sure I agree with that interpretation.

1. I would suggest that that the boundary umpire did signal it was out before (or just as) the siren. See pic and note that no one is celebrating. The field umpire didn't signal end of game til seconds later.


2. My reading of the rules indicates it's irrelevant if the ball crosses the boundary before the siren goes. All that is asked for to pay a free kick under 18.10.2(b) is the ball to cross the boundary and the player to not show sufficient intent to keep it in. No mention in the rules of what happens if the siren goes after the kick

Out on the full free kick are specifically excluded if the ball lands after the siren but not insufficient intent free kicks.

 

[ferball]

If Howe's kick doesn't go out, then it's not a free kick and therefore not an issue.

The point is defining when the free kick becomes payable in circumstances like this.

If the ball goes out of play after the siren then the event that makes it a free kick happens after the siren. IE After the game has finished.

At the moment of the siren the ball was in play and then it was called dead as the game ended, therefore when it went out it was after it had been called dead. As far as the game is concerned the ball didn't go out, it was still in play when the game ended.

How hard is that to understand?

On top of that the umpires control the game. So nothing counts until the umpires say it counts. And the boundary umpire is the one who says the ball is OOB.

So before a free can be oob with insufficient intent to keep it in play it has to cross the boundary line and then be signalled oob.

That's clear yeah?

When the or (if there are four of them,) when an umpire hears the siren they signal game is over immediately. As soon at that happens the game ends, except for one exception - scoring shots (that were either kicked before the siren or free kicks awarded before the siren.) Those shots on goal are exceptions, exceptions that prove the rule that the game ends when the umps hear the siren then signal time.

That exception exists because the score is how the game is determined. Its easier, saner and fairer to allow that exception. It just makes sense. Because goals matter. And shots on goal that start or are awarded before the siren need to be honoured.

In this situation everything happens after the siren and iirc after one umpire says they called the game.

Therefore the game ended then the ball went over the boundary line.

If you want to play a free for a deliberate oob signalled after the siren why can't we then pay marks that are taken after the siren if the ball is kicked before the siren?

Imagine how exciting that would be.