The stand rule???

[RoarEmotion]

Marking contests are hard to adjudicate on. The one that still gets me (not sure I have a solution) is when an opposition player deliberately stands between a player and the contest so that player can’t compete properly and has no intent to contest the mark. That has been used against Jack for many years ( and i am sure others) especially when he was at his high flying best. Dylan Grimes is very good at it.

This is my “old man” moving screen play I run in basketball to create a lane to the basket for a guard. When you run backwards into the defence you never get called and just look at the guard with your arms out to receive a pass.

The defenders in afl shape as if to mark but are just setting a screen for the third man to float in front. I think technically it’s a shepherd outside of five metres but rarely called.

 

[larabee]

yeah, this should get rid of all the ambiguity of the Stand Rule...


players will no longer be awarded a 50-metre penalty by fooling an opponent with a fake handball to break the mark. Instead, when this occurs, the mark and stand will be reset. However, if the player seeming to fake a handball steps off their line, umpires will call “play-on”.

And in a bid to crack down on time-wasting, players will also be forced to make an immediate decision as to who stands the mark inside the protected area. A player having conceded a free kick, or lost a marking contest, must now immediately leave the protected area or stand the mark.

A player can no longer track backwards having initially shaped to stand the mark.

If a player enters the protected area after a mark is taken or free-kick given, they must remain there and stand the mark. If this player leaves the area, a 50-metre penalty will be awarded.

Fresh faces, new coaches, new rules: Your guide to the AFL pre-season

As we count down the days to Richmond and Carlton opening the 2023 season on March 16, here’s your guide to the action.

www.theage.com.au

our game is being managed by a bunch of arse clowns

 

[Brodders17]

However, if the player seeming to fake a handball steps off their line, umpires will call “play-on”.

Hasn't that always been the rule?

One of the reasons I don't like this rule is that it doesn't 'fix' anything, but just creates issues that now need to be 'fixed'.

 

[YeOldeTiger]

Hasn't that always been the rule?

One of the reasons I don't like this rule is that it doesn't 'fix' anything, but just creates issues that now need to be 'fixed'.

Exactly right. They're now trying to fix all the new problems caused by adding rules that were never needed.

Surely this is the new definition of insanity.

 

[larabee]

Hasn't that always been the rule?

One of the reasons I don't like this rule is that it doesn't 'fix' anything, but just creates issues that now need to be 'fixed'.

You would have thought so, but in true AFL fashion they’ve decided to muddy the waters by adding to a shitty rule that’s not required instead of applying an already existing rule.

It seems the only thing the stand rule fixed was Geelong not winning a flag.

 

[Quickdraw]

our game is being managed by a bunch of arse clowns

High praise indeed there Larabee!

Corrupt and inept are their strong points

 

[CarnTheTiges]

Exactly right. They're now trying to fix all the new problems caused by adding rules that were never needed.

Surely this is the new definition of insanity.

Yet they do it over and over again. This has been happening ever since they formed the rules committee.

 

[YeOldeTiger]

Yet they do it over and over again. This has been happening ever since they formed the rules committee.

Yep, as I said earlier, the rule book has gone from 15 pages in the 1980s to 220 pages now. They've taken a simple and brilliant game and tried turning into AFLX by stealth. Throw them all out and start again.

 

[larabee]

Yet they do it over and over again. This has been happening ever since they formed the rules committee.

I don't think the Laws of the Game Committee have much say these days.
Peggy was on the committee when Hocking walked in, told them about the stand rule, no discussion, that was it.

It used to be Hocking, then Scott had a go (umpire abuse?), don't know who it is now. Wouldn't be surprised if it was this guy

 

[CarnTheTiges]

I don't think the Laws of the Game Committee have much say these days.
Peggy was on the committee when Hocking walked in, told them about the stand rule, no discussion, that was it.

It used to be Hocking, then Scott had a go (umpire abuse?), don't know who it is now. Wouldn't be surprised if it was this guy

He looks way too competent. Think he may be the guy who runs the arc.

 

[larabee]

He looks way too competent. Think he may be the guy who runs the arc.

Nah, that’s this bloke

 

[DavidSSS]

I remember saying the very same things said above, as did many others. If they are going to force the player on the mark to be stationary then they must call play on the split second the player with the ball goes off their line or motions to dispose of the ball in any way. Did they do this? Of course not, they're incompetent.

But the AFL shills will come out and applaud the tweaking of such a visionary rule introduced by the geniuses who run the show.

What a joke.

DS

 

[RoarEmotion]

I remember saying the very same things said above, as did many others. If they are going to force the player on the mark to be stationary then they must call play on the split second the player with the ball goes off their line or motions to dispose of the ball in any way. Did they do this? Of course not, they're incompetent.

But the AFL shills will come out and applaud the tweaking of such a visionary rule introduced by the geniuses who run the show.

What a joke.

DS

They need to be able to just make the a play on motion signal. Aah wtf *smile* rule on top of *smile* rule just get rid of the original *smile* rule and we won’t need any of these other ones.

 

[craig]

our game is being managed by a bunch of arse clowns

Truth

 

[Butch67]

With 4 umpires surely one of them should be in line with the player on the mark and the player with the ball so 'play on' can be called as soon as they go off the line, in stead of guessing or calling play on late.

 

[eZyT]

They call play on if a tiger players retina twitches,

While a Geelong player can dance the nutbush, and end up with 50m

 

[Brodders17]

I don't think the Laws of the Game Committee have much say these days.
Peggy was on the committee when Hocking walked in, told them about the stand rule, no discussion, that was it.

It used to be Hocking, then Scott had a go (umpire abuse?), don't know who it is now. Wouldn't be surprised if it was this guy

I thought it was still Hocking? Maybe Joel Selwood has taken on the role?

 

[Quickdraw]

They call play on if a tiger players retina twitches,

While a Geelong player can dance the nutbush, and end up with 50m

Gold, Easy!

 

[The Big Richo]

They need to be able to just make the a play on motion signal. Aah wtf *smile* rule on top of *smile* rule just get rid of the original *smile* rule and we won’t need any of these other ones.

I think they should remove the delay altogether and let the player on the mark follow the player with the ball.

If they play on the umpire calls it but if they are happy the player on the mark only moved once the ball player went then it doesn't matter if the call was out yet or not.

 

[Brodders17]

I think they should remove the delay altogether and let the player on the mark follow the player with the ball.

If they play on the umpire calls it but if they are happy the player on the mark only moved once the ball player went then it doesn't matter if the call was out yet or not.

so change another rule to fix the problems caused by this stupid rule- no longer do the umpires decide when it is play on now the man on the mark does?