So called 'new rules' | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

So called 'new rules'

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
26,581
19,359
They aren't, they are actually old rules, may be news to some commentators but the are called 'push in the Back', and 'holding the ball'. If I hear one more so-called expert winge and sook about 'oh it was only a very light touch' in relation to the in the back rule, or 'what is he supposed to do?' in relation to the holding the ball rule I will fair dinkum spew.

Its very simple. Don't place your hands in a players back, however lightly. I said years ago that Morecrofts mark of the Year, should not have been a mark, he used his hands on his opponents back to get the ride, free to his opponent, I don't care if he got to the top story of the Rialto. Only takes a slight touch to push someone under the ball at pace. A player's ability to get in front should be rewarded, as it always has, or should have been.

The holding the ball rule is also very simple, if you're caught, get rid of the ball. Don't flop around pretending to be trying to get the ball away when you are actually waiting for teamate support, we can see right through you, it looks ridiculous, and guess what? If a teamate is in support its amazing how a player is able to get the ball away. The rule is designed so the player has to get rid of the ball regardless. All these comentator winging about 'but we were tuaght to go in for the ball' still are you *smile*s, but you have to assess the situation and make the right decsion, tap it on, or take possession and be aware of the consequences if you take on you're opponent and lose.

This crap from the commentators is really sh!tting me off.

These so-called new rules are actually old rules that slipped out of the game gradually as it got quicker, while they are at it, they should bring back the strict throw rule.
 
One thing that gets me with the Umpires is when they are behind the play, sometimes they guess if it is holding the ball yet other times they seem to use the fact that they are unsighted as an excuse. All we want is consistency. The rules themselves are fine.
 
Protecting the player over the ball[inparticular the head] while this always should be the case.IMO the AFL have actually made the chances of someone being seriously injured more likely than not.
More players are putting their down knowingly they will get a free.
 
Harro12 said:
One thing that gets me with the Umpires is when they are behind the play, sometimes they guess if it is holding the ball yet other times they seem to use the fact that they are unsighted as an excuse. All we want is consistency. The rules themselves are fine.

Exactly. My most frequent comment at the footy is "Get into position you fool!" There are 3 of them, there is no excuse.
 
i think the umpires are running to fast and always worrying about there position...rather than concentrating on the play

they run around like idiots out there
 
The problem with holding the ball seems to be 2fold. The umpires aren't properly assessing when the 2nd player in holds the ball in to try and get the first player pinged; and there is also a problem with the way the umpires assess incorrect disposal.

I have no problem with the hands in the back rule except for the fact that the umpires are getting lax on it.
 
IanG said:
The problem with holding the ball seems to be 2fold. The umpires aren't properly assessing when the 2nd player in holds the ball in to try and get the first player pinged; and there is also a problem with the way the umpires assess incorrect disposal.

I actually reckon the first player allows the second player to hold the ball in to increase the chances of a ball up. If the umps started to consistently givt the benefit of the doubt to the tackling player when the ball doesn't come out, the ball would start coming out. As people have said, its a lot about consistency.
 
IanG said:
The umpires aren't properly assessing when the 2nd player in holds the ball in to try and get the first player pinged;

You mean when the player has laid an effective tackle that doesn't allow the player to dispose of the ball? ???
 
Amongst the disgraceful performance by the umpires on Saturday, I had to laugh at the irony when Richo was caught behind Glass (I think last qtr) and was penalised for chopping the arms. Richo cops this evertime he goes for the ball yet the umps turn a blind eye to it and pull it out when he's the one spoiling...ah the irony :hihi
 
BrisTiger24 said:
Amongst the disgraceful performance by the umpires on Saturday, I had to laugh at the irony when Richo was caught behind Glass (I think last qtr) and was penalised for chopping the arms. Richo cops this evertime he goes for the ball yet the umps turn a blind eye to it and pull it out when he's the one spoiling...ah the irony :hihi

Loved the way the Richmond crowd reacted to this...but I don't think irony is in the umpire handbook. ::)
 
meltiger said:
IanG said:
The umpires aren't properly assessing when the 2nd player in holds the ball in to try and get the first player pinged;

You mean when the player has laid an effective tackle that doesn't allow the player to dispose of the ball? ???

No, when the ball is on the ground and one player dives on it and a second player dives on him and is the one who holds it in.