if you are on the ground and take possession (drag it in) you must get it out. that is the rule. that is why tacklers always hold the ball in packs.I'm with Leon on that one with Graham. It was not possible for Graham to be holding the ball since it was the WCE player, and not Graham, who was in possession of the ball when the free was called. The WCE player didn't just hold it in, he grabbed the ball and stayed there. Not sure if it would work but Graham should have flung his arms out to show he didn't have possession or tackled the WCE player who did have possession of the ball at the time.
Not sure how you are supposed to dispose of a ball you do not possess.
DS
Has Dan Richardson had his press conference to admit the mistake? Or do they only apologise to teams that aren't Richmond?Expecting the umps to give an apology and admit the ryan pass didn't go 15m. Similar to what was given after the geelong sydney game.
if you are on the ground and take possession (drag it in) you must get it out. that is the rule. that is why tacklers always hold the ball in packs.
you can call it a bad rule/interpretation, but they are consistent (as much as any umpiring is consistent) on paying HTB in that situation.
How Ironic not a even mention by the AFL by no means we lost it ourselves, but that goal sealed it nothing else to call it but cheating how many games has poor decisions cost teams this year umpires are protected species by the afl.In soccer referees a questioned and sceptical to criticism not here always BS there's not enough umpires , they have a hard job etc load of crap.Has Dan Richardson had his press conference to admit the mistake? Or do they only apologise to teams that aren't Richmond?
Thought so.........................
I always thought playing the game that if you didn't either get a kick or a handball away that it was incorrect disposal.
It seems for a week they tighten the ruling up on it only for a week later to relax the interpretation of it.
I don't know how you deal with this.
Restrict tackling to Man on Man only. Third person into a tackle gives away a freekick. Less congestion. Less locking the ball up. Should be easier to get a disposal away, how ever bad, and should make it a lot easier for an Ump to spot an infringement.
In many ways it's bringing the game back to the days when the game was played with to players competing against for the whole game.
Happened a few times. Jake Aarts is always judged to have had a prior it seems. There was one where the player was already being held before he took possession but still got pinged for HTB. West Coast were almost always given the benefit of no-prior. We weren't. It is a consistent double standard that we have to overcome in any game.My understanding of the holding the ball rule is that if there is no prior, then an attempt to dispose is okay, ie it doesn't matter if the ball doesnt hit your foot, or the handball isn't legit, ie no contact from fits, so long as you make an attempt.
If you have prior and get caught, then you have to legitimately dispose of the ball, unless of course the tackler is in black and yellow in which case anything goes.
Imagine if Clayton Oliver was umpired the way Dylan Grimes was on Saturday night! At least Grimes actually handballed it. Clayton Oliver and half the WB team need an extra column in their disposal stats, because half of what they do isn't handballing.
Yeah, also there’s a difference between “taking possession “ of the ball and “dragging it in” and you see too many occasions where a players takes possession (usually when on his knees) but gets swamped by opponents and is then penalised.The one part that i dont understand with the 'dragging the ball in' htb decisions is the opposition can do whatever they like to the 'dragger' i.e fall down on them, high or in the back and those aspects seem to be ignored, particularly when high bumps & contact seem to be highlighted in other areas. Does the htb take precedent?
Problem with this is in congestion multiple players lay tackles simultaneously.Restrict tackling to Man on Man only. Third person into a tackle gives away a freekick. Less congestion. Less locking the ball up. Should be easier to get a disposal away, how ever bad, and should make it a lot easier for an Ump to spot an infringement.
In many ways it's bringing the game back to the days when the game was played with to players competing against for the whole game.
Think the apology will come out today sometime Rids.Has Dan Richardson had his press conference to admit the mistake? Or do they only apologise to teams that aren't Richmond?
Thought so.........................
Waiting with bated breath...............................Think the apology will come out today sometime Rids.
Easy to solve really. 3 of one team 2 of another in a tackle. The team of 2 get the free kick. Won't be long until they are coached to not commit.Problem with this is in congestion multiple players lay tackles simultaneously.
You can't coach players not to commit. We're talking about a milisecond it takes a player to gather and dispose.Easy to solve really. 3 of one team 2 of another in a tackle. The team of 2 get the free kick. Won't be long until they are coached to not commit.
Or just change the rules so rolling mauls are allowed. At least we'll have movement.
Sure you can. Rugby Union, a game of tackling, has some very strict rules about tackling, when you can join, when you can't, what direction you can join a tackle from, when you must release a tackle and start again etc etc.You can't coach players not to commit. We're talking about a milisecond it takes a player to gather and dispose.