Rules "Stand" Rule

[31550]

I hate it. Serves no purpose. Hard to umpire. Inconsistently applied.
The rule was supposedly brought in to make the game more free flowing, and prevent the man-on-the-mark being unfairly taken out of the contest. It achieves neither of these. We end up with spurious 50-metre penalties where a player didn't 'stand' correctly, even though it made no difference to the contest. The 'outside 5' calls for the players and umpires to estimate what is 5 metres - impossible to be consistent.
Firstly - why does the umpire decide whether the opposition player is to 'stand' or be 'outside 5', and what criteria do they use?
Why can't the opposition player decide for themself if they want to 'stand' the mark or not?
If the player stands the mark, why does the player with the ball NOT have to then kick OVER the mark?
It is blatantly unfair that a player is forced to stand on the mark, while the player with the ball runs to his side without 'play-on' being called.
They don't even line up the player with the ball initially.

Also when a free kick is paid, I thought the rule was that opposition players behind the ball need to remain 'outside 5'? Why is it that an opponent is allowed to run from behind the player with the ball to stand the mark? That should be an automatic 50-metre penalty.

Get rid of it and go back to the old system. If a player stands on the mark, then the player with the ball must kick over the mark. If there's no-one on the mark, they can play on. And play-on is called as soon as they deviate off their line, or cross the mark, or dispose of the ball.

 

[Sentinel]

My biggest issue with the rule is the impact on set shots around the 50m mark. Players kicking close to their limit are now able to play on towards the end of their run up, allowing them to kick effectively unchallenged from a position more or less next to the man on the mark who is unnecessarily stuck flat footed.

I'm not sure what the solution to that would be (if it's considered a problem), perhaps by allowing the man on the mark the ability to move laterally if the player with the ball has signalled for a set shot and given themselves the full 30 seconds?

 

[Romeoh1]

Good rule. Keep it.

 

[31550]

Good rule. Keep it.

What's good about it?

 

[Underarm]

The Big issue with the Rule is most people don't understand the nuances of football enough to realise what the problem with the man on the mark being able to cut off the kick inside the corridor. So the only change those people notice is an increase in 50 meter penalties and they don't see the good its doing to speed up the game.

Firstly - why does the umpire decide whether the opposition player is to 'stand' or be 'outside 5', and what criteria do they use?
Why can't the opposition player decide for themself if they want to 'stand' the mark or not?

Once a free kick is given the opposition players have to immmediately leave the vicinity. Hover around the mark and you'll be called to stand.

If the player stands the mark, why does the player with the ball NOT have to then kick OVER the mark?

Guy with the ball is allowed to play on.

It is blatantly unfair that a player is forced to stand on the mark, while the player with the ball runs to his side without 'play-on' being called.

Probably shouldn't have given away a free kick in the first place then.

Also when a free kick is paid, I thought the rule was that opposition players behind the ball need to remain 'outside 5'? Why is it that an opponent is allowed to run from behind the player with the ball to stand the mark? That should be an automatic 50-metre penalty.

You are allowed a reasonable amount of time to get to the mark. Otherwise yes you need to stay out.

 

[31550]

Guy with the ball is allowed to play on.

I am talking about when the player with the ball starts metres off the line and simply runs on one side of the mark and play on is not called. The rule is you must kick over the mark. That's why there is a 'mark'. Similarly for shots on goal the ball must be kicked over the mark. If the player with the ball is not kicking over the mark, why can't the man on the mark move to intercept?

Umpires are not setting the player with the ball up properly during time off. Play should not start until the player with the ball is set in line with the mark and the goals.

Probably shouldn't have given away a free kick in the first place then.

So every free kick is a double whammy now?

It's become Russian roulette. If the player wants to stand and the umpire deems it an 'outside 5' or if the player wants to get outside 5 and the umpire calls stand while he's exiting, it's 50 metres simply because the umpire has to guess the players intention.

 

[Balanced]

Horrible rule. Just go back to how it was. i.e. can move so long as you don't go over the mark.

The umpires take too long to call play on and the penalty is too severe. The umpires have enough on their plates as it is. They don't need to loose their voices as well yelling "Stand!" all game

 

[31550]

Horrible rule. Just go back to how it was. i.e. can move so long as you don't go over the mark.

The umpires take too long to call play on and the penalty is too severe. The umpires have enough on their plates as it is. They don't need to loose their voices as well yelling "Stand!" all game

I find the sibilant 'Outside 5' even more annoying than the 'Stand' call. It's inconsistent with a tough physical sport IMO.

 

[BF Tiger]

It might be a fine rule if it was adjudicated differently, but at the moment it is terrible and I'd prefer it gone. 50m penalties being handed out because the umpire doesn't see the correct player already standing. 50m penalties because someone is running in too late to stand the mark. 50m penalties because the man on the mark moved ever so slightly toward the kicker who has very clearly played on. It goes on, it goes on, it goes on.

 

[hawkman]

Good rule. Keep it.

I like it as well. There are adjustments that should be made though
They do need to police the player with the ball going back over the mark. It looks ridiculous when a player is called to stand and the player with the ball is 4 or 5 metres off the line.
Also have umpires stand behind players having a set shot and immediately call play on once they are off their line

 

[D-N-R]

My biggest gripe is that it is enforced only for the man on the mark. The man with the ball can be 3 metres off his line while the Motm has to stand. The man with the ball just wanders off and the motm can't do anything except watch.

Stand shouldn't be called until the ball carrier is behind the mark.

Also, with 4 umpires on the ground, one should be behind the ball carrier in sight of the motm and should call play on when he goes off his line.

 

[BomberManU]

You are allowed a reasonable amount of time to get to the mark. Otherwise yes you need to stay out.

This is one of the biggest problems with it - players are increasingly coming from behind the player with the free kick and replacing the player who was on the mark. Usually it's let go - for some reason?? - then they'll randomly pay a 50 for it.

 

[fusion]

I wish I could turn the umpires microphones off during the broadcast. I'm sick of hearing about "stand, stand, stand", "5 metres" and "endzone".

 

[eddiesmith]

It’s terribly hard to work out their interpretation this year.

Early on they let everything go, then a few weeks back they suddenly cracked down on it. Players 2-3m behind the mark would turn to run outside 5 and they’d suddenly call 50.

Then today a player 10-15m off the mark is called to stay outside 5, he runs 15m in so the umpire instead of paying 50 calls stand…

Was a lot of players gaining a good 3-4m when standing the mark and none of it was picked up.

Yet a Melbourne player took a mark on the 50m line and suddenly the umpire runs in and brings the man on the mark back 5m inside…

 

[31550]

Yet a Melbourne player took a mark on the 50m line and suddenly the umpire runs in and brings the man on the mark back 5m inside…

And if it's the one I'm thinking of, the kicker was never put on his line, and kicked from the side of the mark without play on being called.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

What's good about it?

It's the best rule change the AFL have introduced probably ever.

As usual though, the way umpires interpret it can be problematic.

Time wasting is illegal in AFL footy. The AFL have introduced all sorts of stuff to stop it from happening.

The Stand rule is great in this regard.

There is no logical reason why the opposition should legally be allowed to prevent the player that has won the contest from moving the ball on.


What is shit about it, is that for some reason Ch7 can't mute the umpire's mic when they yell "stand". If w didn't get subjected to that constantly, I doubt anyone would even notice the Stand rule other than the improved ball movement it facilitates.

 

[31550]

Stand rule has no effect on time wasting. Previous penalties were adequate if adjudicated correctly.
Player is still free to play on.
All we have is spurious 50m penalties because of different interpretations and time allowed to stand or outside 5.
A free kick should give the infringed player the option to play on, OR go back and kick over the mark. NOT a free roll of the dice to get a 50m, nor the option to kick from wherever he chooses without play-on being signalled.

 

[LOZWILDA]

The stand rule is there for the umpires to cheat and get their team across the line.
There is no hiding the fact that certain teams are allowed a second or two before the umpire calls play on. Even though they are not going back from the mark in a straight line from the goals at their end of the ground.
They also call play on when certain teams are going back in a straight line.
Umpiring is woeful as is! So detrimental to our once great game.
They also encourage head high diving or lowering of the knees to draw high tackle free kicks, putting the said player in danger of being concussed. Call play on and that will stop.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[TigerRoar]

Worst rule ever introduced, not just in this sport but in the history of all sport. Useless moron SHocking

 

[Boston tiger]

It's the best rule change the AFL have introduced probably ever.

As usual though, the way umpires interpret it can be problematic.

Time wasting is illegal in AFL footy. The AFL have introduced all sorts of stuff to stop it from happening.

The Stand rule is great in this regard.

There is no logical reason why the opposition should legally be allowed to prevent the player that has won the contest from moving the ball on.


What is shit about it, is that for some reason Ch7 can't mute the umpire's mic when they yell "stand". If w didn't get subjected to that constantly, I doubt anyone would even notice the Stand rule other than the improved ball movement it facilitates.

How did the player stop player from moving the ball on before the stand rule. You have never been able to by go over the mark.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

How did the player stop player from moving the ball on before the stand rule. You have never been able to by go over the mark.

Angles dude. Angles.

The sideways and 45 degree play on is the dangerous one in terms of ball movement. Teams were too good at using the Mark to block that.

Now they can't.

 

[tropicaltiger]

stupid rule players don't understand it, fans are confused, umps either don't know how to adjudicate it or are inconsistent and why am I seeing the man on the mark still doing star jumps when players are having a set shot 25m out.

 

[Boston tiger]

Angles dude. Angles.

The sideways and 45 degree play on is the dangerous one in terms of ball movement. Teams were too good at using the Mark to block that.

Now they can't.

Well I’m watching football on the weekend with out the stand rule and it’s glorious.

Then when I go watch my daughter at the netball and it’s like watching AFL. Nothing wrong with netball just very umpire controlled and technical.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Well I’m watching football on the weekend with out the stand rule and it’s glorious.

Then when I go watch my daughter at the netball and it’s like watching AFL. Nothing wrong with netball just very umpire controlled and technical.

FWIW, hearing the umpire yell 'Stand' is 99% of the problem with the rule.

The concept of a player having to stand on the Mark and not move isn't really that technical or complicated.

IMO the umpire shouldn't say anything. If the player goes over the Mark or moves laterally on the Mark, then it's 50m. Simple. Done.

But, if it's considered really important for some reason for the umpire to inform the player, then at least mute the mic so the rest of us don't have to hear it.

 

[The 747]

Good rule, although it is an obvious manipulation to make the game 18 v 17 for a short period of time.

Umpires yelling STAND sucks but IMO it has made for better football to watch.