What are you looking forward to in 2023

[tigerdell]

You said originally that the ruckmen had to be separated from the other players. Quote: “The rules say that the ruckman must be separated from other players.”

It’s contact, not any distinct level of separation eg a defined level of space between them. The word separation isn’t used in the rule book.

think you're getting lost here and playing with words.
the nomination rule is a blight on the game.
Unfortunately professionalism and hyper-fitness has turned the game away so we no longer have the joys of seeing lumbering manikins with neurological disconnections such as James Manson and Justin Madden jerking into each other like giraffes undergoing electroshock therapy together.
Why dont they play that on the radio anymore?

Its like asking why young kids dont do the twist to the big bopper anymore?
Rucks gotta keep it separated.

And umps are going to wait for the long spuds to make it into position to hold up their hands in nomination, otherwise they'll be throwing the ball up for no one. its a twisted set of rules (that arent actually codified in the ahem rule book)

 

[HR]

It's not an elaborate blocking play, it's not even illegal. You're allowed to stand in front of someone or put some body on them.

If they dropped the nominations rule, then at every stoppage Nankervis would have a midfielder stand front left of him and engage him.

They would be watching the ball, in a position to rove it, and there would be nothing illegal about it.

Ummm yes there is a rule for it already, it's called, "blocking". Or whatever the vibe is these days.
Like every rule in our once uncomplicated game, pay the free kick early, pay it consistently and see how the coaches impact the game by getting their teams to stop doing it or accept the penalty.
This stuff just has to be made simple so that the umpires have a chance and we spectators do too.

 

[HR]

The nomination rule is horrible, truly horrible, but the problem is that something went wrong years ago which meant they had to do something.
But the Stand rule is even more of a blight, it has to go.
DS

Third man up was the vlight on the ruck contest, no third man up rule is all they needed to say, nominations is childish. We have rules in our game that are in,ace to deal with blocking.
Stand rule turn our once great game into netball, stand, stand, stand, stand, stand.

 

[momentai]

Jack will be better if Lynch can maintain fitness over the course of the year. But both prospects are a little doubtful.
I would like to see Ryan get some opportunities as a forward but unfortunately the (correct) decision to give Jack another year, will limit Ryan's chances.
Can see them sharing selection at least in the early part of the season.

Hopeful that a 4th tall will emerge as a HF, a position that maybe none of the above are athletically well suited too.
I know most will disagree but Balta has the ability to become a great in that position. The other possibility is Ben Miller.
Both are very good athletically, both have good disposal and also a still developing level of 'intuition'. Playing on with Jack will help.
Both can ruck and will share duties with Nank. Noah well ahead but Miller has improved his game each season, and there looks to be plenty left.

 

[TrialByVideo]

Scenario 1. Yes. If he chooses to do that he runs the risk of blocking. Free kick.

Scenario 2. This was brought up during the year because it’s exactly what’s been happening. Umpires giving time for someone a mile away to contest. Solution ? Throw it up straight away.

Scenario 3. Pretty simple. 3rd man up. Free kick.

Speaking of rucking scenarios...
Give it whatever number you want but hows about....
Hawkins and Balta compete in a forward line throw in.

Hawkins flings Noah aside taking front position,
Dangerfield attempts to block Soldo who is late to the party and as he lifts his forearm to protect himself.... KO,s Dangerfield who crashes back , propelling Balta into Hawkins who is twisting mid air and sadly.... does himself a mischief!
As Travis Cloke might say.... that'd be like killing 2 cats with 1 rock

 

[davidc0055]

Ummm yes there is a rule for it already, it's called, "blocking". Or whatever the vibe is these days.

There's no rule saying you can't stand in front of someone or put some body on them, except for ruckmen. What happens if it's not clear who is going to take the ruck? How can an umpire decide if a ruckman is being illegally blocked if they don't know who the ruckman is?

 

[DavidSSS]

There's no rule saying you can't stand in front of someone or put some body on them, except for ruckmen. What happens if it's not clear who is going to take the ruck? How can an umpire decide if a ruckman is being illegally blocked if they don't know who the ruckman is?

How do they know the player accused of blocking is not also contesting the ruck?

Certainly is a mess.

DS

 

[The Big Richo]

How do they know the player accused of blocking is not also contesting the ruck?

Because they nominate?

 

[The Big Richo]

I keep telling you, the same way they were before the nomination rule came in (2017) and you had any amount of different players going up in the ruck all over the ground.

That's why I'm interested to know when the third man was outlawed. Standing apart was likely a bit of a nothing rule while other players could then come and jump on the rucks regardless.

 

[Eddie from Elwood]

Speaking of rucking scenarios...
Give it whatever number you want but hows about....
Hawkins and Balta compete in a forward line throw in.

Hawkins flings Noah aside taking front position,
Dangerfield attempts to block Soldo who is late to the party and as he lifts his forearm to protect himself.... KO,s Dangerfield who crashes back , propelling Balta into Hawkins who is twisting mid air and sadly.... does himself a mischief!
As Travis Cloke might say.... that'd be like killing 2 cats with 1 rock

That's just smoke in the window........behind the shadows!

 

[davidc0055]

That's why I'm interested to know when the third man was outlawed. Standing apart was likely a bit of a nothing rule while other players could then come and jump on the rucks regardless.

2017

 

[HR]

There's no rule saying you can't stand in front of someone or put some body on them, except for ruckmen. What happens if it's not clear who is going to take the ruck? How can an umpire decide if a ruckman is being illegally blocked if they don't know who the ruckman is?

You are jumping at shadows.
It has never been a problem.
This is another typical stupid rule change knee jerk reaction that is synonymous with the AFL in the past decade.
It's our game, not the wankers the AFL over paid to *smile* with it. They just shouldn't have the ability to do what they have been doing.
The one and only area the wankers should look at is any issues that deal with health and safety of players. Third man up did this, telling the world that you are the ruck does sweet FA. Throw the ball up with no delay and 2 players go for it. May the bigger, stronger, fitter player win.

 

[davidc0055]

Throw the ball up with no delay and 2 players go for it. May the bigger, stronger, fitter player win.

When those 2 players go for the ball, should they be allowed to be blocked?

 

[RemoteTiger]

If the rules of our game were adjudicated correctly in that you cannot grab/tackle an opponent if they do not have the ball then the nomination rule is not needed. It all started when the two rucks were allowed to wrestle. Wrestling is grabbing an arm or jumper to put your ruck opponent off balance- that is tackling a man without the ball. I hate to say it but back in my day the two rucks jumped at the ball and were penalised if they tried to hold or wrestle their opponent. We allowed this wresting into the game and clever ruck rovers would then jump over the two wresting rucks to tap the ball to advantage thus becoming a 3rd man up. To stop the 3rd man up they brought in the nomination rule which to me is like watching junior footy.
If we stopped the wrestling like the rule book is written you stop the 3rd man up and the nomination rule is not needed as the umpires know who the rucks are, particularly at centre bounces and throw ins. Around the ground ball ups could present a problem and maybe the nominations could be asked then.
This power ruckman wrestling for the ballup is outside the rules of the game. Same can be said of wrestling for a mark - again it is holding the man without the ball. In the original marking contests you could only use your hip or shoulder to gain advantage to mark.
But
I know what you are all going to say, that was the old game not today's modern game. The answer to that is simple, today's modern game is *smile* because we don't adhere to the original rule book as we should......

End of rant

 

[snags]

If the rules of our game were adjudicated correctly in that you cannot grab/tackle an opponent if they do not have the ball then the nomination rule is not needed. It all started when the two rucks were allowed to wrestle. Wrestling is grabbing an arm or jumper to put your ruck opponent off balance- that is tackling a man without the ball. I hate to say it but back in my day the two rucks jumped at the ball and were penalised if they tried to hold or wrestle their opponent. We allowed this wresting into the game and clever ruck rovers would then jump over the two wresting rucks to tap the ball to advantage thus becoming a 3rd man up. To stop the 3rd man up they brought in the nomination rule which to me is like watching junior footy.
If we stopped the wrestling like the rule book is written you stop the 3rd man up and the nomination rule is not needed as the umpires know who the rucks are, particularly at centre bounces and throw ins. Around the ground ball ups could present a problem and maybe the nominations could be asked then.
This power ruckman wrestling for the ballup is outside the rules of the game. Same can be said of wrestling for a mark - again it is holding the man without the ball. In the original marking contests you could only use your hip or shoulder to gain advantage to mark.
But
I know what you are all going to say, that was the old game not today's modern game. The answer to that is simple, today's modern game is *smile* because we don't adhere to the original rule book as we should......

End of rant

I don't mind that interpretation. Eyes on ball and no holding. Sounds too simple to adjudicate for the AFL. They need layers of crapola rules or more umps.

 

[Leysy Days]

Not reading about ruck interpretations.

 

[eZyT]

Dustys aunty taking pictures of a middle aged bunch of obsessives drinking and singing tigerland on repeat in the london tavern, monday am after the premiership

 

[tigerdell]

How simple to say lets stop any scragging, tagging, wrestling, grabbing, body work, jostling, bumping between players. Sounds like netball rules


Fair dinkum Posters complain that the bump is dead and the next breath suggest that any minor interference is immediately a free kick.

We saw how that worked with the hands in the back interpretation. No push just hands near a back saw dubious free kicks. Simply making the rules too strict is not a solution

 

[tigerdell]

Attempts to get threads like this one back on track, that fail

 

[tigerman]

Looking for toward the likes of Ivy, Ryan, Bauer, Biggie, Juddy, Banksy etc kicking the door down and demanding a game.