Time to bounce the bounce

Remove this Banner Ad

Dont be a lemon

Dont be a lemon

Brownlow Medallist
Suspended
Veteran 10k Posts
Jun 2, 2006
17,805
3,526
Party time all the time
AFL Club
Essendon
I see no reason why field umpires should continue to bounce the ball at ball-ups. The rate of errant bounces is too high; I've seen the umpires this year at least a dozen times call the ball back to throw it up.

Is "it's tradition" really the only reason for still having the bounce? Time to ditch it I say.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I had always been a big advocate for the bounce and had considered it heresy to do away with it. In recent years though I've changed my thinking and am glad that my comp has gotten rid of it. Aside from adding to potential uneven ruck contests, it actually flies against everything else we hear in the workplace regarding manual handling and "bend the knees, not the back". I know that I'll get more life out of my back by getting rid of the bounce.
Out of interest, the question gets bandied around our leagues forum every now and then and I reckon opinion is split about 50/50 about keeping it or not. The thing I've found though are that the players who are keen to keep the bounce are also the first to complain if it doesn't go their way!!!
 
True True.

I like the bounce, just from an enjoyment of bouncing point of view but it does take its toll on your back.

Our league the BDAFL, took the bounce out and have re-introduced it in centre bounces only for people that want to bounce. You also have to pass a bounce test in order to do it in games.
 
I think the AFL has totally half-assed this with their "we'll do the bounce, but only if it's a good one... or an OK one... but not a bad one" rule.

Either bounce the ball and take it as it comes, good, bad or ugly, or do away with it and throw it up all the time.

I hate half-assed rules.
 
Greetings Viewers

Is our sport the only one in the world where the match offcials have to attempt and complete a physical skill?

Throw it up I say, the bounce will be consigned to history, just like the place and drop kicks.

Regards

Dicko
 
The Teacher said:
Greetings Viewers

Is our sport the only one in the world where the match offcials have to attempt and complete a physical skill?

Throw it up I say, the bounce will be consigned to history, just like the place and drop kicks.

Regards

Dicko
Click to expand...


I tend to agree. Even though I am a bit of a sentimentalist, it is too great a skill for the purpose it serves and is only keeping good umpires out of officiating at the top level. More emphasis on decision-making talent, and promoting umpires who can earn players' confidence and respect with the way they go about their job than how high they can bounce the bloody ball!
 
I've been keen on getting rid of the bounce for yonks. If we're all for the umps having minimal impact on a game then why ask them to do something so difficult? And if good decision makers aren't getting a game because they're dodgy bouncers, well, that's simply ridiculous. The 'tradition' call doesn't wash either - so many other traditions have gone by the wayside anyway.
 
Footy originally started in the middle with a throw-up. It wasn't until the early 1890s that the VFA changed the rules to require that the field umpire bounce the ball instead.

I wonder why? Any ideas? Does anyone have access to old memos/newspaper articles or something?

It would be interesting to know the rationale to see whether it still applies to the modern game.

I guessing it was to make the start of play less predictable. Ruckmen didn't have the same role as they do now. Looking at the archival footage from the early 1900s, bounces only went about 2-3 metres in the air. Umpires either slammed the ball into the ground with one hand or fisted the ball into the ground - and obviously A LOT less accurate. It wasn't until the 1930s/40s that the modern technique for bouncing came along.

Given the new rule for recalling this year, it probably goes against why bouncing was introduced in the first place. The start of play isn't just all about the ruckmen.
 
Keep it. The unpredictability of the bounce ensures that there is a point for the ruck contests.

To me, it seems that if the ball is thrown straight up in the air, you can be pretty certain that, just like the jump ball in basketball, the taller player will win the ball virtually every single time. It's the reason they got rid of it in so many competitions.

Can the umpires here who advocate getting rid of it explain how this situation would be avoided? If the flight of the ball is perfectly predictable, surely a bloke like Sandilands is going to have no problems winning every one.
 
Another case of umpires wanting to control the game and having zero understanding of the history of our game. Because they are too lazy or disinterested in obtaining one of the most important skills in their job. How is it that umpires in the good old days had no issues with the bounce, yet now that umpires are treated like Gods and are paid a small fortune they can't be bothered with it? Just learn how to bounce the ball and stop whinging.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

greenred said:
Another case of umpires wanting to control the game and having zero understanding of the history of our game. Because they are too lazy or disinterested in obtaining one of the most important skills in their job. How is it that umpires in the good old days had no issues with the bounce, yet now that umpires are treated like Gods and are paid a small fortune they can't be bothered with it? Just learn how to bounce the ball and stop whinging.
Click to expand...

I think you'll find that they're actually more accurate these days, but they've got better conditions.
 
J_Moore said:
Keep it. The unpredictability of the bounce ensures that there is a point for the ruck contests.

To me, it seems that if the ball is thrown straight up in the air, you can be pretty certain that, just like the jump ball in basketball, the taller player will win the ball virtually every single time. It's the reason they got rid of it in so many competitions.

Can the umpires here who advocate getting rid of it explain how this situation would be avoided? If the flight of the ball is perfectly predictable, surely a bloke like Sandilands is going to have no problems winning every one.
Click to expand...

That "unpredictability" will go down a treat when a dodgy bounce costs a team a flag.
 
Strawbs said:
That "unpredictability" will go down a treat when a dodgy bounce costs a team a flag.
Click to expand...

I don't think it has yet, after 150 years...

There's many dodgy cricket pitches that have cost teams matches, but there aren't any calls for matches to be played on concrete pitches with a tennis ball. Perhaps it's a little but different, but I think you get the point.

Elements in different sports are designed to add unpredictability. If we went to throw-ups, it might not have an immediate impact, but after a couple of years, I think we would all start to notice a difference in ruck contests at the top level.

We often don't notice what impact something has until it is changed for a couple of years.
 
Bob_vic said:
I don't think it has yet, after 150 years...

There's many dodgy cricket pitches that have cost teams matches, but there aren't any calls for matches to be played on concrete pitches with a tennis ball. Perhaps it's a little but different, but I think you get the point.

Elements in different sports are designed to add unpredictability. If we went to throw-ups, it might not have an immediate impact, but after a couple of years, I think we would all start to notice a difference in ruck contests at the top level.

We often don't notice what impact something has until it is changed for a couple of years.
Click to expand...

Better to be reactive and wait until it does cost a team a flag you reckon Bob? That sounds like the AFL to me.

That's fine by me if it means they will be contests.
 
greenred said:
There is unpredictability and there is bad bounces. If the umpires understood the game they would know the difference and call the bad ones back.
Click to expand...

Yeah but it seems pointless to me to do that when they could toss it up all the time and the game doesn't get held up.
 
An old ruckman (ie. no longer plays) said to me on Saturday, "I used to like rucking to bounces better because the ball floats in the air for longer."

There's a whole art of reading the bounce of the ball that's gradually being lost. Sam Newman is one that's always advocted that the ball should be bounced. With throw-ups, the ruckman knows where the ball is going every single time; therefore, he doesn't need to have a variety of strategies, especially if he is taller than his opponent. I tend to find that the ruckmen who lack the variety of rucking skills and intuition will be the ones who will complain, even if a bounce is even slightly off-line. In my experience, I've found that the ruckmen that play in higher grades tend to want the ball to be bounced rather than thrown up.

The good teams will pick up if an umpire is having a bad day bouncing and will implement other strategies in order to win the football from the bounce. Even if there's only the odd bad bounce, the good teams will always have those stategies in place as a back-up. The one-dimensional teams will sook as soon as there is a bounce that isn't perfectly straight. Where there are wet conditions and the ball is thrown-up, there there are other stategies teams need to employ to combat the conditions. All these differences make the game more interesting, IMHO. It's much like the different cricket pitches and different surfaces for tennis. Different conditions produce different stategies.

You could have a ball-up 15m inside the boundary, but we have boundary throw-ins instead. A boundary throw-in requires a different skill in rucking than at a bounce or throw-up.

Btw, I don't think a bad bounce will never cost a team a flag in the AFL, even without the new "recall" rule. Bad bounces don't seem to occur in the last quarter of grand finals when the score is close. You'd be hard pressed to find bad bounces in grand finals at all these days. It's human nature to find that "bit extra" concentration when the pressure is really on.

In the days where there was more one-on-one play, if there was a bad bounce, 99% of the time, there would be still a contest, whether it was the ruck-rovers, rovers or centremen. But these days, players can be playing away from their opponents, meaning that a player can be standing by himself; therefore, if the ball goes straight to him, it seems unfair.

I do get your points, but I don't think this is really a "right" or "wrong" debate. It's more about what people prefer. One person prefers a pizza, another, a meat pie.

I'd rather see more strategy than just running and jumping, and seeing highest jumper or the tallest player always win the hit-out. Bouncing requires that the ruckmen have a greater skill in reading the flight of the ball.

There's equally valid arguments on both sides of the debate.

All polls that have been taken seem to show that the bounce still has the majority support, but the throw-up seems to be gaining ground everytime the debate comes up every 2 or 3 years.
 
The first half of yesterday's Dogs v Carlton game was terrible. So many call backs, some for reasons unknown (the bounce appeared to go straight up)

Each time it happened, the crowd booed and bronx cheered and it took away from the spectacle of watching the big men fly and as other posters have said, the unpredictability.

If it continues like this, the AFL might as well drop it all together and add another netball rule by giving each team the ball back in the centre circle after each goal on alternating turns. Quite frankly, the game is turning to s*** and I never thought I would say that. Get your act together AFL & umps - you are not the game
 
greenred said:
Another case of umpires wanting to control the game and having zero understanding of the history of our game. Because they are too lazy or disinterested in obtaining one of the most important skills in their job. How is it that umpires in the good old days had no issues with the bounce, yet now that umpires are treated like Gods and are paid a small fortune they can't be bothered with it? Just learn how to bounce the ball and stop whinging.
There is unpredictability and there is bad bounces. If the umpires understood the game they would know the difference and call the bad ones back.
Click to expand...

Firstly, I agree that it should not be umpires controlling the game. Let's make that clear. Is it them leading the call to either ditch or retain the bounce anyway?

Secondly, I really don't believe laziness has anything to do with their inability to bounce well. Perhaps, correctly, their emphasis lies in getting other parts of the game right - such as decision-making! Their fitness certainly cannot be questioned.

In "the good old days", the ump's still had the same issues. It's just that wonky bounces were more tolerated. Plus, they didn't bounce as high. When the bounce was at its best, they had those rubber disks in the centre to aid them.

Another thing, they ARE calling the bad ones back, Greenred. That is what all the fuss is about. What's your point?

Finally, if ump forums are where threads go to die, can we draw the conclusion that you are at a low point in your BigFooty career and scraping the barrel in order to get anyone to listen to you?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Time to bounce the bounce

Similar threads

G
Honeysuckles AFL 9's strategy leaked - Rumours of potential rift between key coaching staff Richardson and Travers. Travers to the Pudds?
Replies
1
Views
2K
J_Moore
J_Moore
Cdog71
Coaching Footy Drills to develop not being beaten 1v1 for 13-16 yr olds
Replies
5
Views
2K
Underdog
Underdog
The Majestic
Skills Is it too late to get into some footy?
Replies
20
Views
2K
The Majestic
The Majestic
J
How do I get into the midfield?
Replies
11
Views
1K
jjsuper
J

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top