The stand rule???

[RoarEmotion]

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.

This is basically like rebounding in basketball. You aren't allowed to cross the line to start to rebound until the ball leaves the players hand. You make the call as a player and if the ump disagrees with what you do there are consequences.

The main downside with this is it's a high risk manoeuvre to think that the player has left his mark and has played on - as it costs you 50m if the umpire doesn't agree with you.

No doubt under this interpretation we will get pinged for 50m where the opposition has run past our man on the mark and then our player decides to give chase but the ump wasn't 100% convinced that the laws of space time applied due to triangulation from the arc and the voices in their ear asking for a penalty to be applied. We then roll our eyes in disgust and its 100m for insubordination/disrespect.

 

[Nico]

There's a lot of suggestions here about how to improve a really bad rule which was brought in for no apparent reason, untested and not ratified by the rules committee.

Many leagues (senior and junior) haven't implemented the stand rule and good on them for flipping the bird at HQ by saying it's a sh!te rule and we won't use it.

Ever tried to get a excited 9yo to not move on a footy field? It's simply not a robust rule if various leagues don't implement it. They understand how difficult it is to attract junior umpires, and adding more complex and time-consuming rules isn't the best way to go about it. Simplification of the rules would attract more umpires.

It's a tough game and I applaud tweaks to protect the head, like being penalised/reported for dangerous tackles etc. That was brought in as head injuries/brain damage are $%^#ing serious business. What was the stand rule trying to fix? Anyone? Can anyone recall discussions here or elsewhere that manning the mark needs to be looked at? You can legally iron someone out, but move a foot when you're manning the mark and it's 50. FFS.

Would there be any harm in reverting back to the old rule? ie. you can move sideways and backwards, you can jump on the spot but if you cross the mark before the ump calls play on it's a 50.

Man up AFL, put your big boy pants on and say we've tried it for a couple of years, it's not working out, we're going to revert to the old rule. Our bad.

 

[BT Tiger]

There's a lot of suggestions here about how to improve a really bad rule which was brought in for no apparent reason, untested and not ratified by the rules committee.

Many leagues (senior and junior) haven't implemented the stand rule and good on them for flipping the bird at HQ by saying it's a sh!te rule and we won't use it.

Ever tried to get a excited 9yo to not move on a footy field? It's simply not a robust rule if various leagues don't implement it. They understand how difficult it is to attract junior umpires, and adding more complex and time-consuming rules isn't the best way to go about it. Simplification of the rules would attract more umpires.

It's a tough game and I applaud tweaks to protect the head, like being penalised/reported for dangerous tackles etc. That was brought in as head injuries/brain damage are $%^#ing serious business. What was the stand rule trying to fix? Anyone? Can anyone recall discussions here or elsewhere that manning the mark needs to be looked at? You can legally iron someone out, but move a foot when you're manning the mark and it's 50. FFS.

Would there be any harm in reverting back to the old rule? ie. you can move sideways and backwards, you can jump on the spot but if you cross the mark before the ump calls play on it's a 50.

Man up AFL, put your big boy pants on and say we've tried it for a couple of years, it's not working out, we're going to revert to the old rule. Our bad.

AFL admit fault? Bwahaha

The stand rule was a solution seeking a problem. According to the article Tigertim posted it's made the game faster but i don't see how that can be measured.

 

[Nico]

AFL admit fault? Bwahaha

The stand rule was a solution seeking a problem. According to the article Tigertim posted it's made the game faster but i don't see how that can be measured.

The AFL are more like the CCP everyday. Can't lose face. Xi would rather millions of Chinese people die from COVID, than admit their vaccines were sh!te and accept vaccines from other countries. The AFL would rather polish a *smile* than revert to a perfectly good manning the mark interpretation.

If the game has got faster, I think it's not because of the stand rule (how can you isolate this from other rule changes anyway) but because most teams now run and gun.

 

[The Big Richo]

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?

I think that rule should have been changed years ago, it's always been an issue with players running around to kick set shots on goal.

The umpire is still deciding play on, but if they see the man on the mark moves after the player has played on then it is fine, even if the umpire's call takes a split second longer to get out.

In the same spirit I don't think they should blow the whistle for a free kick when they see an advantage is on.

I have no issue with changing rules, 'leave the game alone' is the second worst used term in the game behind 'ball'.

When you look at the history of the game the rule changes have a positive impact on the game a huge majority of the time and almost never have a detrimental effect.

 

[RoarEmotion]

I think that rule should have been changed years ago, it's always been an issue with players running around to kick set shots on goal.

The umpire is still deciding play on, but if they see the man on the mark moves after the player has played on then it is fine, even if the umpire's call takes a split second longer to get out.

In the same spirit I don't think they should blow the whistle for a free kick when they see an advantage is on.

I have no issue with changing rules, 'leave the game alone' is the second worst used term in the game behind 'ball'.

When you look at the history of the game the rule changes have a positive impact on the game a huge majority of the time and almost never have a detrimental effect.

Agree that rule changes can help.

Out on the full is a rule I’ve only ever know but wasn’t always the case and is perhaps the first step towards what we see now in terms of frees when balls go out of bounds.

There is no way you can state rule changes always have a positive effect on the game. An immeasurable thing to start with and we don’t have two alternate universes to compare what happens in each of them - although we do have before the rule change and after the rule change. You can of course state in your opinion ….

I would agree people tend to remember the things they don’t like much more than the ones they do so any positive rule change effects we are more likely to dismiss.

 

[DavidSSS]

Rule changes used to happen a lot less often. Out of Bounds on the full was a big change, the centre diamond followed by square took a few more years to appear. I don't know how much debate happened before the changes but I suspect a lot more than springing the rule on the competition with no discussion not long before the season. The centre square was famously tried out by Carlton and Fitzroy a few years before they brought it in.

It is the constant fiddling with the rules that p!sses everyone off. Plus, the minutae of the new rules, which is why we end up with a 220 page rule book. Not to mention the rules are badly written and damned near impossible to adjudicate and the massive inconsistencies in the way rules are adjudicated.

It has become a farce.

DS

 

[eZyT]

This latest tweek,

Reset the mark if the mark stander moves in response to a feigned handball

(Thats the easiest way to put it!)

Is peak farce i reckon

So this is a No 50m penalty rule?

Should they reset play when a player's intent is ambiguous for deliberate out of bounds?
How would you explain it to a foreigner?

'That bloke cant move, unless that bloke pretends to handball it, and if he does, they do it again. watch the replay of the replay'

'Huh?'

We'll see a 5 or 6 reset, with the ump yelling 'it wasnt a real handball!',

And the rule rechanged by round 3.

Clowns

Do they not workshop options, scenarios and perspectives?

 

[momentai]

Those who thought the stand rule was going to disappear anytime soon are going to be disappointed.
It is a terrible rule, introduced at the last moment and without general discussion, or pre season game trials.
It has caused a momentous change to the way the game is played and had a particularly severe impact on our chaos ball movement.

(Moving past our last two years of relative failure I get a sense that after dipping his toe into other game styles, Dimma has re armed with some greater skill and particularly disposal accuracy now coming through. I expect players like Sonsie, Miller, Cumberland and Clarke to be given every chance this year. Added to our new midfield I reckon these sort of players can put us back on top).

Anyway as to the stand rule and rule change generally, can’t the game just prohibit change unless there is acceptance across the board.

Something like a proposed change announced by the AFL with a 6 month gap before (possible) implementation, which final decision must be announced say at a minimum of a month prior to the commencement of that years Draft?

 

[The Big Richo]

Those who thought the stand rule was going to disappear anytime soon are going to be disappointed.
It is a terrible rule, introduced at the last moment and without general discussion, or pre season game trials.
It has caused a momentous change to the way the game is played and had a particularly severe impact on our chaos ball movement.

(Moving past our last two years of relative failure I get a sense that after dipping his toe into other game styles, Dimma has re armed with some greater skill and particularly disposal accuracy now coming through. I expect players like Sonsie, Miller, Cumberland and Clarke to be given every chance this year. Added to our new midfield I reckon these sort of players can put us back on top).

Anyway as to the stand rule and rule change generally, can’t the game just prohibit change unless there is acceptance across the board.

Something like a proposed change announced by the AFL with a 6 month gap before (possible) implementation, which final decision must be announced say at a minimum of a month prior to the commencement of that years Draft?

You're wrong about how the stand rule was implemented, it was pretty much exactly as you described.

Clubs were briefed on it midway through 2020, and were trialling it at training late in the season. It was publicly announced by November and clubs had the full preseason to use it in scratchies.

 

[Little Ziggyadee]

We were the highest again in giving away 50's.
And that was in a practice match against ourselves.
Get ready for reamings from the kokheads

 

[Brodders17]

I think that rule should have been changed years ago, it's always been an issue with players running around to kick set shots on goal.

The umpire is still deciding play on, but if they see the man on the mark moves after the player has played on then it is fine, even if the umpire's call takes a split second longer to get out.

In the same spirit I don't think they should blow the whistle for a free kick when they see an advantage is on.

I have no issue with changing rules, 'leave the game alone' is the second worst used term in the game behind 'ball'.

When you look at the history of the game the rule changes have a positive impact on the game a huge majority of the time and almost never have a detrimental effect.

Fair enough, i read your post as applying to the "stand" rule.

 

[momentai]

You're wrong about how the stand rule was implemented, it was pretty much exactly as you described.

Clubs were briefed on it midway through 2020, and were trialling it at training late in the season. It was publicly announced by November and clubs had the full preseason to use it in scratchies.

I am not sure what your first paragraph means.
In regard to implementation, that was announced only days before round 1, which meant that teams didn’t have an opportunity to recruit or draft having regard to how its’ implementation would impact the game and what skills may become particularly important under the new rules.

 

[Willo]

The “stand” rule, sHocking and kCornes sh!t, sh!t sh!t. all need to be flushed down the sewer.
If you like any of the above I suggest you need to make a doctor’s appointment asap or get back on your medication

 

[The Big Richo]

I am not sure what your first paragraph means.
In regard to implementation, that was announced only days before round 1, which meant that teams didn’t have an opportunity to recruit or draft having regard to how its’ implementation would impact the game and what skills may become particularly important under the new rules.

I mean your understanding of how the stand rule was introduced is incorrect and it was introduced in the manner you said rules should be.

The stand rule was presented to clubs mid 2020 so they could start to plan for it, and officially announced in November so clubs had the entire preseason to work with it.

I think you are mixing it up with the medical sub rule which was introduced on season eve after a request from the coaches.

 

[momentai]

I mean your understanding of how the stand rule was introduced is incorrect and it was introduced in the manner you said rules should be.

The stand rule was presented to clubs mid 2020 so they could start to plan for it, and officially announced in November so clubs had the entire preseason to work with it.

I think you are mixing it up with the medical sub rule which was introduced on season eve after a request from the coaches.

TBR, note that you have always been a supporter of the idea that the stand rule introduction has been a great invention and has done no harm to the way we play.
I have long disagreed with that view.

I have been looking to see exactly when the AFL announced that it was to be introduced but can’t find a definitive answer to that question.
Lots of criticism of its timing and purpose however… see for example entry’s 18-20 above, on page 1 of this file.

I thought it was on the eve of our first round match v Carlton 2021, but you say not,
- so at this point I am unsure. The actual point in time of the introduction seemingly is not available in wiki or the afl rules themselves.

Can you point me in the direction of the correct answer?

 

[larabee]

TBR, note that you have always been a supporter of the idea that the stand rule introduction has been a great invention and has done no harm to the way we play.
I have long disagreed with that view.

I have been looking to see exactly when the AFL announced that it was to be introduced but can’t find a definitive answer to that question.
Lots of criticism of its timing and purpose however… see for example entry’s 18-20 above, on page 1 of this file.

I thought it was on the eve of our first round match v Carlton 2021, but you say not,
- so at this point I am unsure. The actual point in time of the introduction seemingly is not available in wiki or the afl rules themselves.

Can you point me in the direction of the correct answer?

The article below has this statement:

Just hours before the season opener in 2021, then football operations boss Steve Hocking unveiled the new rule, which forces playing to stay stationary on the mark until an umpire calls ‘stand’

The rule Brad Scott resisted changing before Round 1

"The last thing last people need is more change."

www.sen.com.au

Although this article mentions the rule being trialed in 2021 pre season scratch matches. It didn't get off to a good start...

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/footage-of-afls-newlyintroduced-stand-rule-sparks-fierce-debate/news-story/47076aacc795f59f6b71538542197458

Doesn't really matter exactly when it was announced. It was short notice, not run past the Laws of the Game Committee, was never trialed properly, and hasn't added anything positive to the game

 

[AngryAnt]

It's not based on that at all though TM, that's the common misconception.

All the umpire does is see the ball go over the line and ask if there was a team mate close by it was going to, or if you were trying to score. If the answer to those two questions is no then a free is paid.

The ones people go off on are the miskicks off the side of the boot, or the ones when they are under pressure. If the umpires were reading players behaviour they wouldn't be free kicks but they are just judging what the end result is so they are paid.

that may be true BR but the umps screaming "insufficient intent" when giving the free kick tends to make one think they really are trying to mind read the intention of the player.

 

[tigersnake]

Another new rule to alleviate the unintended negative impacts of a new rule that was never needed in the first place. Fantastic. Razor sharp operators the AFL.

 

[The Big Richo]

TBR, note that you have always been a supporter of the idea that the stand rule introduction has been a great invention and has done no harm to the way we play.
I have long disagreed with that view.

I have been looking to see exactly when the AFL announced that it was to be introduced but can’t find a definitive answer to that question.
Lots of criticism of its timing and purpose however… see for example entry’s 18-20 above, on page 1 of this file.

I thought it was on the eve of our first round match v Carlton 2021, but you say not,
- so at this point I am unsure. The actual point in time of the introduction seemingly is not available in wiki or the afl rules themselves.

Can you point me in the direction of the correct answer?

I've never been a supporter that the stand rule was a great invention, my position used to be that it did very little and wasn't worth the effort of officiating it.

I must admit though towards the end of last season I did start to come around to the idea that there are some positives impacts on the game, I'm not totally convinced yet but am open minded.

Just from a quick google here is an article dated January 2021 which refers to the rule being announced in November.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl...-tweak-changing-the-game-20210129-p56xv0.html

I can also tell you with first hand knowledge that the AFL conducted a game between two VFL squads in about July which was videoed and distributed to the clubs and clubs started tinkering with it after that time at training.

I remember watching us play Melbourne at Casey in a pre-season scratch match when it was used as well.

I'm absolutely certain you are confusing the timing with the medical sub.

that may be true BR but the umps screaming "insufficient intent" when giving the free kick tends to make one think they really are trying to mind read the intention of the player.

You can judge a person's intent from their actions though, which is what happens in football all the time.

If the ball goes over the line it is almost impossible to have shown sufficient intent to keep it in when you think about it.