Rules Today's Pathetic Kneejerk Reaction To The "Holding The Ball" Backlash

[LordLucifer]

Just watched the umpires boss Steve McBurney explain the revised ruling for holding the man/dropping the ball etc on AFL 360 tonight.

What an embarrassment that was !!

This minor rule tinker has done nothing to alleviate confusion and when they got McBurney to explain how the rules will work with in-game examples for him to adjudicate on, he came across as a complete & utter buffoon.

No wonder our game is in such disaray.

 

[Back One Out]

I found it very disturbing the way McBurney tried to rationalise the umpire's "no whistle" for the Mac Andrew tackle on Charlie Curnow

30

Charlie Curnow

Age

27

Ht

194cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.3

3star

K

9.7

4star

HB

3.6

3star

M

5.3

5star

T

2.2

4star

G

1.3

5star

No current season stats available

D

10.8

3star

K

6.4

3star

HB

4.4

4star

M

3.2

4star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.8

4star

by crapping on about how umpires are instructed to let it go if the ball hasn't been pinned by the tackle.

They are literally making shit up.

I've read the Laws of Australian Football from cover to cover and nowhere does it mention anything about the ball being pinned by the tackler. Same goes for the player in possession being spun around 360' by the tackler.

Why is McBurney making up his own rules? Who appointed him as the one-man rules committee?



The laws of the game supply this definition...

Legal Tackle or Legally Tackled: a tackle by a Player where:

(a) the Player being tackled is in possession of the football; and
(b) that Player is tackled below the shoulders and above the knees.

For the avoidance of doubt, a legal tackle may be executed by holding (either by the body or playing uniform) a player from the front, side or behind, provided that a player held from behind is not pushed in the back.


^^^
Mac Andrew legally tackled Curnow even if he merely grabbed a fistful of his guernsey. As we all saw, Andrew did WAY MORE than that. He wrapped Curnow up with both arms and held onto him strongly while Charlie tried to shake him off and dispose of the ball.

 

[Back One Out]

Check out the written rules for holding the ball. It could not be any clearer. Bollocks to this sentiment that AFL umpires have such a difficult job and that it's "too hard" for them to get things right when it comes to HTB. The AFL and the umpires' advisors need to stop filling their heads up with bullshit and just let them umpire the fricken game.

18.6 HOLDING THE BALL


18.6.1 Spirit and Intention - The player who has possession of the ball will be provided an opportunity to dispose
of the ball before rewarding an opponent for a legal tackle.


18.6.2 Free Kick - HTB: Prior Opportunity
Where a player in possession of the ball has had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player does not correctly dispose of the ball immediately when they are legally tackled.


18.6.3 Free Kick - HTB: Incorrect Disposal
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player elects to incorrectly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


For the avoidance of doubt, a player does not elect to incorrectly dispose of the ball when:
(a) the player genuinely attempts to correctly dispose of the ball;
(b) the legal tackle causes the ball to be dislodged from the player’s possession.


18.6.4 Free Kick - HTB: No Genuine Attempt
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if the player is able to, but does not make a genuine attempt to correctly dispose of the ball within a reasonable time when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.4 ?!?


18.6.5 Free Kick - HTB: Diving on top of the ball
A field umpire shall award a free kick against a player who dives on top of or drags the ball underneath their body and fails to immediately knock clear or correctly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.5 ?!?

I heard about Sam Maclure's most recent article about umpire's wearing earpieces and receiving in-game coaching from ex-umpires sitting up the grandstand (or in the ARC bunker)... Turn that shit off!!! Stop filling their heads up with shit!!! Let them do their jobs and enforce the rules as they are written in the official Laws of the Australian Football.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Check out the written rules for holding the ball. It could not be any clearer. Bollocks to this sentiment that AFL umpires have such a difficult job and that it's "too hard" for them to get things right when it comes to HTB. The AFL and the umpires' advisors need to stop filling their heads up with bullshit and just let them umpire the fricken game.


18.6 HOLDING THE BALL


18.6.1 Spirit and Intention - The player who has possession of the ball will be provided an opportunity to dispose
of the ball before rewarding an opponent for a legal tackle.


18.6.2 Free Kick - HTB: Prior Opportunity
Where a player in possession of the ball has had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player does not correctly dispose of the ball immediately when they are legally tackled.


18.6.3 Free Kick - HTB: Incorrect Disposal
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player elects to incorrectly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


For the avoidance of doubt, a player does not elect to incorrectly dispose of the ball when:
(a) the player genuinely attempts to correctly dispose of the ball;
(b) the legal tackle causes the ball to be dislodged from the player’s possession.


18.6.4 Free Kick - HTB: No Genuine Attempt
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if the player is able to, but does not make a genuine attempt to correctly dispose of the ball within a reasonable time when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.4 ?!?


18.6.5 Free Kick - HTB: Diving on top of the ball
A field umpire shall award a free kick against a player who dives on top of or drags the ball underneath their body and fails to immediately knock clear or correctly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.5 ?!?

And yet you have also posted at virtually the same time that the umpires are maggots who make the rules up, don't know the rules, and should all be sacked. Now you say it's all McBurney.

Irrespective of how much you've gotten utterly wrong in the above posts (and there's plenty) how do you expect anyone to take your self-evidently inconsistent and overwrought emotional posts seriously in any way?

 

[Back One Out]

And yet you have also posted at virtually the same time that the umpires are maggots who make the rules up, don't know the rules, and should all be sacked. Now you say it's all McBurney.

Irrespective of how much you've gotten utterly wrong in the above posts (and there's plenty) how do you expect anyone to take your self-evidently inconsistent and overwrought emotional posts seriously in any way?

I was trying to be funny with my other post in the 'Clarko in strife' thread. You're a smart guy, Lance. You knew that. It was a little bit of a knee jerk reaction from me against all the hand-wringing over Clarkson letting a few expletives fly (and our shared frustration with the poor umpiring in 2024) - his angry outburst over the weekend is really just another symptom of the awful umpiring we are currently enduring.

I think there are way bigger issues with the current AFL season than Clarko's 4 letter words. He will probably get his whack from the AFL. Aside from all the Clarko-haters, who really cares whether he coaches North over the next few weeks or one of his assistants takes the reins? That entire club is just going through the motions. The less said about them, the better.



I'm deadly serious however with my posts in this thread. It's a great footy season: wide open with many top 4 chances and close finishes. But it has been completely marred by the idiot umpires ignoring the basic rules of the game.

I don't care if the AFL want to "keep the game moving". Rules are rules. Right now EVERYONE has lost faith in the umpires and in the AFL's management of the game. Players, coaches, media, ex-players, long-time fans and younger fans are all confused by what is happening. How can it get to this stage? It's a joke. Farcical. I have never seen the likes of it in all my years of following the footy (and I've been a football nuffy for a long, long time.)

What right do a handful of people within the AFL have to mess around with our great game like they have?
WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY DOING? No transparency. No consultation with clubs. They've just turned our game completely upside down and ignored the written laws of the game.

Please reply to my posts in this thread if you have any issue with them. I'm interested in your opinions.

 

[LordLucifer]

The thing that annoyed me was in one of the examples that McBurney commented on, the tackled player dropped the ball and because he had no 'previous', it was to be called "play on".

What a load of crap, if you drop the ball when tackled, you should be penalised regardless.

 

[Stottzy]

What I find astounding is that the same commentators and pundits who called Clarko a "sook" for raising the same issue years ago, are now jumping on the bandwagon. Leigh Matthews even said that "the ball carrier should be protected at all cost and given the benefit of the doubt" at the time. Honestly, the AFL media have the shortest memory spans in sport.

 

[skipper kelly]

Not paying the frees has resulted in sling tackles. Has been getting worse for years.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

I was trying to be funny with my other post in the 'Clarko in strife' thread. You're a smart guy, Lance. You knew that. It was a little bit of a knee jerk reaction from me against all the hand-wringing over Clarkson letting a few expletives fly (and our shared frustration with the poor umpiring in 2024) - his angry outburst over the weekend is really just another symptom of the awful umpiring we are currently enduring.

I think there are way bigger issues with the current AFL season than Clarko's 4 letter words. He will probably get his whack from the AFL. Aside from all the Clarko-haters, who really cares whether he coaches North over the next few weeks or one of his assistants takes the reins? That entire club is just going through the motions. The less said about them, the better.



I'm deadly serious however with my posts in this thread. It's a great footy season: wide open with many top 4 chances and close finishes. But it has been completely marred by the idiot umpires ignoring the basic rules of the game.

I don't care if the AFL want to "keep the game moving". Rules are rules. Right now EVERYONE has lost faith in the umpires and in the AFL's management of the game. Players, coaches, media, ex-players, long-time fans and younger fans are all confused by what is happening. How can it get to this stage? It's a joke. Farcical. I have never seen the likes of it in all my years of following the footy (and I've been a football nuffy for a long, long time.)

What right do a handful of people within the AFL have to mess around with our great game like they have?
WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY DOING? No transparency. No consultation with clubs. They've just turned our game completely upside down and ignored the written laws of the game.

Please reply to my posts in this thread if you have any issue with them. I'm interested in your opinions.

fair enough.

But they are not ignoring any rules. That's just not the case. (Although they do obviously make mistakes.) They are interpreting them. These changes announced are a change to the way the rules are interpreted.

In my mind, a lot of the drama around this arises from people simply not understanding the rules you've quoted.

If you don't have prior opportunity, then all you need to do is attempt to dispose of the ball. If you do have prior, then once you are tackled it is holding the ball. The rules are explicitly written to include one of the rewards of the tackle is that the ball has spilled free - if there's been no prior opportunity. That is the intended reward, as opposed to any free kick for making a tackle.

People seem to think that, irrespective of prior opportunity, that it should be holding the ball if a tackle is made. This is not the case.

Now, I'm no fan of the way many of the rules are interpreted (although I recognise my own chronic confirmation bias when I'm watching Essendon games) but our game is all about interpretation.

I think it's a good move to tighten the interpretation to reduce the amount of time that is considered "reasonable" when attempting to dispose of the ball if you haven't had prior opportunity. I also think there should be a firmer distinction drawn between the ball being knocked out in the tackle, and players simply dropping the ball.

Nothing steams my dimmies more than when a player drops the ball, and the tackler is then penalised for the tackle lasting too long when that is the fault of the player who dropped the ball.

So there's improvements to be made, but these are all, quite appropriately, adjustments to interpretations of how the rules are applied, not changes to the rules themselves and it's simply not right to claim umpires are ignoring rules or making them up

 

[Beerfish]

his angry outburst over the weekend is really just another symptom of the awful umpiring we are currently enduring.

It's actually a symptom of something else far more serious.

 

[Rustica]

The thing that annoyed me was in one of the examples that McBurney commented on, the tackled player dropped the ball and because he had no 'previous', it was to be called "play on".

What a load of crap, if you drop the ball when tackled, you should be penalised regardless.

This so much

Once you have clear possession of the ball and get tackled. If you dont dispose of it properly, it should be incorrect disposal. It is safer to lock the ball in than try to dispose of it in an immediate tackle.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

I found it very disturbing the way McBurney tried to rationalise the umpire's "no whistle" for the Mac Andrew tackle on Charlie Curnow by crapping on about how umpires are instructed to let it go if the ball hasn't been pinned by the tackle.

They are literally making shit up.

I've read the Laws of Australian Football from cover to cover and nowhere does it mention anything about the ball being pinned by the tackler. Same goes for the player in possession being spun around 360' by the tackler.

Why is McBurney making up his own rules? Who appointed him as the one-man rules committee?



The laws of the game supply this definition...

Legal Tackle or Legally Tackled: a tackle by a Player where:

(a) the Player being tackled is in possession of the football; and
(b) that Player is tackled below the shoulders and above the knees.

For the avoidance of doubt, a legal tackle may be executed by holding (either by the body or playing uniform) a player from the front, side or behind, provided that a player held from behind is not pushed in the back.


^^^
Mac Andrew legally tackled Curnow even if he merely grabbed a fistful of his guernsey. As we all saw, Andrew did WAY MORE than that. He wrapped Curnow up with both arms and held onto him strongly while Charlie tried to shake him off and dispose of the ball.

You say they're making things up and that you've read the rules and that there's nothing about umpires being instructed to let it go, then in your next post, you post the rules that show exactly this.
18.6.1 - spirit and intention covers this.
A player in possession will be afforded the opportunity to dispose of the ball.

When you couple that with 18.6.4 where a player with no prior has to make a genuine attempt within a reasonable amount of time, the Curnow incident was umpired correctly (ignoring the blatant push in the back by Mac prior to this contest).

The only grey area comes with the definition of reasonable time. Was it Richo during the telecast who said they put the stopwatch on it and it was 2.2 seconds or something?
2 seconds isn't a lot of time. That seems reasonable.

If a player is being tackled to the point where they can still stand up and have an arm free, I'd rather see play continue for a little bit. You can't blow the whistle until an actual infringement has occurred, or it's a stalemate with no chance of play continuing.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

It’s all so stupid.

All of the features of modern football can be tied back to the misguided decision to introduce the “prior opportunity” rule in the 1990s.

It was the perfect storm for a misguided decision: one of those decisions that feels so “right” and “logical” yet does not stand up in reality because of unintended consequences.

Get rid of it and watch the game flourish.

If you have the footy and you’re tackled, get rid of it. If you don’t, it’s holding the ball. Simple.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

The thing that annoyed me was in one of the examples that McBurney commented on, the tackled player dropped the ball and because he had no 'previous', it was to be called "play on".

What a load of crap, if you drop the ball when tackled, you should be penalised regardless.

The biggest problem with this part of the rule is that if you've had no prior and the ball is knocked out in the tackle, it's play on.
Yes, if the player being tackled just lets go of the ball when tackled, then regardless of prior, that should be HTB - incorrect disposal.
It can be very hard to tell when a ball has been knocked out, or dropped, so the umpires just always give the benefit of the doubt to the player with the ball when there's been no prior and to the tackler when there is prior.
So a player knows if he hasn't had prior and gets tackled, he can just let go of it and will get the play on call.

 

[HalloweenJack]

I've been watching (and playing in my younger days) footy since the early 1960's and HTB has always been a problem.

However, and as Back One Out has clearly stated, the AFL mainly under Gil's watch and now continuing under the current regime, footy is being ruined by this nonsense about keeping the game moving and not paying a free kick for clear HTBs. This direction has caused other issues such as sling tackles and throwing.

Now we learn that field umpires are being coached during the game whilst trying to officiate the play. The AFL now tell us that this "coaching" is merely encouraging comments. No sane person believes this explanation. The NRL will be having a field day with this revelation.

Despite the outrageous salaries that the AFL executives command they are hopeless. They pat themselves on the back for the TV rights negotiations but I dare say that most people who have limited negoation skills could achieve a similar outcome. Its a no- brainer.

The AFL should not be the guardians of the game which from memory was self-appointed (someone correct me if this is wrong). The AFL executive needs to be reviewed and the excess (of which there is much) needs to be excised and trimmed of its fat. The AFL Commission also go missing more often than not. So questions need to be asked about their role.

The first domino to fall needs to be McBurney. He was a very ordinary umpire and his performance and explanation of what has happened clearly demonstrates that he is out of his depth.

 

[Bluelegs]

I don't understand how players can be told not to pin arms or take players to ground while umpires are instructed not to blow the whistle unless the ball is pinned.

The AFL have created a mess for themselves here.

 

[LordLucifer]

If a player is tackled and both players go to ground, then a teammate of the tackled player with the ball jumps on top of the two of them in an attempt to force a ball-up, it should be an automatic free kick to the tackler, not a ball-up !!

 

[Tiger2709]

The thing that annoyed me was in one of the examples that McBurney commented on, the tackled player dropped the ball and because he had no 'previous', it was to be called "play on".

What a load of crap, if you drop the ball when tackled, you should be penalised regardless.

They seem to have forgotten incorrect disposal, its embarrassing listening to these clowns explain away their incompetence.

Why not just have a set time to dispose of the ball if you have had prior, the AFL makes the Umps job so much harder bringing in knee jerk reaction rules every 5 minutes, that idiot Shocking has a lot to answer for in ruining our game.

 

[lordbob]

Check out the written rules for holding the ball. It could not be any clearer. Bollocks to this sentiment that AFL umpires have such a difficult job and that it's "too hard" for them to get things right when it comes to HTB. The AFL and the umpires' advisors need to stop filling their heads up with bullshit and just let them umpire the fricken game.

18.6 HOLDING THE BALL


18.6.1 Spirit and Intention - The player who has possession of the ball will be provided an opportunity to dispose
of the ball before rewarding an opponent for a legal tackle.


18.6.2 Free Kick - HTB: Prior Opportunity
Where a player in possession of the ball has had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player does not correctly dispose of the ball immediately when they are legally tackled.


18.6.3 Free Kick - HTB: Incorrect Disposal
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player elects to incorrectly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


For the avoidance of doubt, a player does not elect to incorrectly dispose of the ball when:
(a) the player genuinely attempts to correctly dispose of the ball;
(b) the legal tackle causes the ball to be dislodged from the player’s possession.


18.6.4 Free Kick - HTB: No Genuine Attempt
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if the player is able to, but does not make a genuine attempt to correctly dispose of the ball within a reasonable time when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.4 ?!?


18.6.5 Free Kick - HTB: Diving on top of the ball
A field umpire shall award a free kick against a player who dives on top of or drags the ball underneath their body and fails to immediately knock clear or correctly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.5 ?!?

I heard about Sam Maclure's most recent article about umpire's wearing earpieces and receiving in-game coaching from ex-umpires sitting up the grandstand (or in the ARC bunker)... Turn that shit off!!! Stop filling their heads up with shit!!! Let them do their jobs and enforce the rules as they are written in the official Laws of the Australian Football.

In hawks brissy game, they ignored 18.6.5 in the first half then paid 2 frees against the hawks in the 3rd for this (though i think 1 was incorrectly adjudicated) and then they forgot about the rule for the rest of the game. This was a focus for the umps a couple years back but seems that it rarely gets paid these days.

 

[Skull Face]

Seen 2 examples of it tonight and both left me shaking my head, im going to lose my collective shit when one of these gets called with the game on the line it is stupid.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Check out the written rules for holding the ball. It could not be any clearer. Bollocks to this sentiment that AFL umpires have such a difficult job and that it's "too hard" for them to get things right when it comes to HTB. The AFL and the umpires' advisors need to stop filling their heads up with bullshit and just let them umpire the fricken game.

18.6 HOLDING THE BALL


18.6.1 Spirit and Intention - The player who has possession of the ball will be provided an opportunity to dispose
of the ball before rewarding an opponent for a legal tackle.


18.6.2 Free Kick - HTB: Prior Opportunity
Where a player in possession of the ball has had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player does not correctly dispose of the ball immediately when they are legally tackled.


18.6.3 Free Kick - HTB: Incorrect Disposal
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player elects to incorrectly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


For the avoidance of doubt, a player does not elect to incorrectly dispose of the ball when:
(a) the player genuinely attempts to correctly dispose of the ball;
(b) the legal tackle causes the ball to be dislodged from the player’s possession.


18.6.4 Free Kick - HTB: No Genuine Attempt
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if the player is able to, but does not make a genuine attempt to correctly dispose of the ball within a reasonable time when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.4 ?!?


18.6.5 Free Kick - HTB: Diving on top of the ball
A field umpire shall award a free kick against a player who dives on top of or drags the ball underneath their body and fails to immediately knock clear or correctly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.5 ?!?

I heard about Sam Maclure's most recent article about umpire's wearing earpieces and receiving in-game coaching from ex-umpires sitting up the grandstand (or in the ARC bunker)... Turn that shit off!!! Stop filling their heads up with shit!!! Let them do their jobs and enforce the rules as they are written in the official Laws of the Australian Football.

You need to fix the font colour dude.

But that aside, the most idiotic thing the AFL has done here is this bit:

For the avoidance of doubt, a player does not elect to incorrectly dispose of the ball when:
(a) the player genuinely attempts to correctly dispose of the ball;


Attempting to correctly dispose of it is not good enough. You need to reward the tackler in that scenario. That's just ludicrous.

 

[LordLucifer]

There was an improvement last night but it was not as consistent as it should have been.

This saga hasn't finished.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Couple of confusing calls last night. Last I heard, I thought you still needed prior opportunity.

The Walsh decision was a disgrace and example of the Umpires being too focussed on one thing. No prior opportunity and a blatant high tackle to boot - "holding the ball".

But other than a few howlers I thought it improved the state of play.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

18.6.1 Spirit and Intention - The player who has possession of the ball will be provided an opportunity to dispose
of the ball before rewarding an opponent for a legal tackle.


18.6.2 Free Kick - HTB: Prior Opportunity
Where a player in possession of the ball has had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player does not correctly dispose of the ball immediately when they are legally tackled.

The inherent contradiction between these two laws - provided an opportunity to dispose of the ball, yet must do so immediately - is a huge problem.
Someone up there said 2.2 seconds is not a long time to dispose of the ball - bollocks, that's a ****ing eternity in a football match.
Whether or not you had prior opportunity you should not have 2 and a half seconds to find a team mate once tackled. You need to get rid of it "immediately".

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Check out the written rules for holding the ball. It could not be any clearer. Bollocks to this sentiment that AFL umpires have such a difficult job and that it's "too hard" for them to get things right when it comes to HTB. The AFL and the umpires' advisors need to stop filling their heads up with bullshit and just let them umpire the fricken game.

18.6 HOLDING THE BALL


18.6.1 Spirit and Intention - The player who has possession of the ball will be provided an opportunity to dispose
of the ball before rewarding an opponent for a legal tackle.


18.6.2 Free Kick - HTB: Prior Opportunity
Where a player in possession of the ball has had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player does not correctly dispose of the ball immediately when they are legally tackled.


18.6.3 Free Kick - HTB: Incorrect Disposal
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if that player elects to incorrectly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


For the avoidance of doubt, a player does not elect to incorrectly dispose of the ball when:
(a) the player genuinely attempts to correctly dispose of the ball;
(b) the legal tackle causes the ball to be dislodged from the player’s possession.


18.6.4 Free Kick - HTB: No Genuine Attempt
Where a player in possession of the ball has not had prior opportunity, a field umpire shall award a free kick if the player is able to, but does not make a genuine attempt to correctly dispose of the ball within a reasonable time when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.4 ?!?


18.6.5 Free Kick - HTB: Diving on top of the ball
A field umpire shall award a free kick against a player who dives on top of or drags the ball underneath their body and fails to immediately knock clear or correctly dispose of the ball when legally tackled.


^^^ WHY ARE THE UMPIRES IGNORING RULE 18.6.5 ?!?

I heard about Sam Maclure's most recent article about umpire's wearing earpieces and receiving in-game coaching from ex-umpires sitting up the grandstand (or in the ARC bunker)... Turn that shit off!!! Stop filling their heads up with shit!!! Let them do their jobs and enforce the rules as they are written in the official Laws of the Australian Football.

It is obvious to anyone watching this season the umpires clearly got instructed to avoid at Al costs htb as they thought it would speed up the flow of the game… it hasn’t and it has back fired the publicity and frustration it has created for the game. For whatever reason the afl thought it would be received positively and it hasn’t been.