One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on February 27, 2007, 03:33:33 AM
-
A one off while Gas adjusts to the new rule or a concern?
Herald-Sun
Mark Robinson
27 February 2007
.... lost was Darren Gaspar. He gave away four free kicks -- three in a quarter -- and yesterday was disillusioned with a game he's played at the highest level for 14 years.
Another system -- the new rules -- has ruined Gaspar's understanding of the game.
The veteran backman yesterday sat with Tigers football director Greg Miller and reviewed the free kicks paid against him on Saturday.
Three came in nine minutes in the third quarter for pushing in the back against Brad Ottens.
Either Gaspar hasn't got the new rule or the new rule has got Gaspar.
He's entitled to be worried. Defenders of his size will be phased out of the game.
Asked his opinion of the rule, Tigers coach Terry Wallace said the power forward was back in the game.
Many would argue that's sensational for a sport gone too sterile. Many, but not all.
West Coast champion Glen Jakovich yesterday labelled it blatantly wrong. The frustration continues.
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,21293420%255E19742,00.html
-
Gaspar has struggled with most aspects of the game as it stood in the last couple of years. These changes remove whatever 'tricks' Gaspar had left in his @rsenal, he won't be able to niggle, shove, or hold his opponent, these changes will signify the end of his career IMO.
Having said that the 4th free kick paid against him on Sunday was a disgrace.
-
Actually I thought the first of the three paid against him in the 3rd quarter was the worst. Ottens dives for a mark with Gas having his chest on Brad's shoulder as the dive and a perfect fist sends the ball 15 metres away to the boundary. That's actually a skill. A skill to be valued. Sitting in the forward pocket with about 100 Geelong fans, everybody thought (Geelong fans were probably more vocal than the RFC fans) that that decision was wrong.
If that skill is taken from the game then the game is poorer for it.
Note: It was one umpire, a very short man, Heath Ryan, who paid all three free kicks against Gas. I would suggest that Heath Ryan has absolutely NFI.
-
Agree HKT. The one where Gas got his fists in should not have been a free.
At training today, Rawlings and some bloke I didn't recognise in casuals had about a dozen or so players practising their one-on-one contests both from in front and behind focussing on the new hands in the back rule. Getting them to use their hips, shoulders and forearms to hold their ground instead of their hands when behind and to twist their bodies slightly when in front.
-
Actually I thought the first of the three paid against him in the 3rd quarter was the worst. Ottens dives for a mark with Gas having his chest on Brad's shoulder as the dive and a perfect fist sends the ball 15 metres away to the boundary. That's actually a skill. A skill to be valued. Sitting in the forward pocket with about 100 Geelong fans, everybody thought (Geelong fans were probably more vocal than the RFC fans) that that decision was wrong.
If that skill is taken from the game then the game is poorer for it.
Great post HKT :clapping
The thing that I think is really scary with this rule is (and it happened on Sunday) if the umpire is in a bad position and a bloke falls to the ground the umpire seems to guess and/or assume there was contact - this isn't always the case.
There was one incident in the final qtr where the free was paid for the hands in the back rule but the actual infringement was a chopping of the arms - now in the end it had no bearing and the right team got the free but struth umpires let's not guess what happens, lets at least try and get the decision right
-
In the Herald-Sun tomorrow, Wallace says he wants the hands in the back rule reassessed after the NAB Cup. On the hand, Wayne Carey is all for the new interpretation.
-
Two more coaches join hit list
28 February 2007 Herald-Sun
Mark Robinson
KEVIN Sheedy and Terry Wallace have turned up the heat on the AFL over the hands-in-the-back rule, demanding it be reassessed after the NAB Cup.
The Essendon and Richmond bosses join counterparts Rodney Eade, Mick Malthouse and Paul Roos in questioning the controversial rule change.
The concerns range from the rule's immediate introduction to a fear smaller defenders might be phased from the game.
"I honestly believe we should look at it through the NAB Cup and reassess it at the end of the NAB Cup," Sheedy said yesterday. "It needs more time for the fans and for the players. At this stage I'd say the judges are watching."
Wallace saw no evidence the rule would improve football and, like Sheedy, subtly slapped the league for its immediate introduction without trial.
"I actually haven't heard anyone who brought it in say, 'Gee, I think it's fantastic and working well'," Wallace said.
He argued most rules had been trialled for at least 12 months in the pre-season competition before being rejected or approved for the season proper.
"But this was taken to the degree without knowing the consequences and without going through a process like the ruck rule did," Wallace said.
"This was, 'we don't like it' -- and I still don't know who "we" are but -- 'we don't like it, but it's coming in'.
"I'd like to know if the same "we" liked the first week (of matches) because I didn't.
"I went to have a look at the Carlton-Essendon game and the decisions given in that game I thought the players were bewildered. I thought it impacted on the game and I thought the officials were having a greater impact than they've ever had before."
Introduced for the 2007 season, the rule -- which doesn't allow a player's hand to touch the back of an opponent in a marking contest -- has received a luke-warm response at best.
The AFL said on Monday the rule interpretation worked smoothly, a stance which was yesterday supported by Kangaroos coach Dean Laidley, Power and Crows coaches Mark Williams and Neil Craig and Brisbane's Leigh Matthews.
The Tigers had umpires coach Rowan Sawers at Punt Rd training yesterday, with emphasis on body contact in marking contests.
Wallace is as frustrated as his defender Darren Gaspar, who on Sunday gave away three free kicks in nine minutes to Geelong big man Brad Ottens.
"Who will survive? Athletic backmen, but players who can adapt their game," he said.
"I feel sorry . . . there's Darren, Mal Michael, James Clement, players who are 10 years into their careers who have been teaching other players how to play the game and the nuances of defensive play.
"It's very difficult for guys in their last couple of years, to say to them everything you've done, everything you've learnt is washed out the door."
Sheedy argued any new rule needed time.
"I'm not saying I'm totally against it, I want to see a proper trial over the NAB Cup and then we can assess it," he said. "The only thing I would suggest is use it in the NAB Cup again next year and then after two years assess it."
Wallace said the AFL should look at it in the NAB Cup and then make a decision.
"If it was just in for the NAB Cup, then we could reflect on how the rule went and I would have no issue because that's what the NAB Cup is for."
Laidley yesterday had just one concern: the forward pushing back or stopping on the running defender, an issue raised by playing and coaching great Malcolm Blight.
"Human reaction is hands in the back and I think that might be the part that has to be looked at," Laidley said. "The rest of it seemed to work OK."
Williams told the Herald Sun last night: "I'm fine with it, I'm certainly not going to worry about it."
Neil Craig said: "In our games so far it has had no effect, but I'm very interested in how it is interpreted as the season progresses."
Leigh Matthews said: "It encourages a player to play in front, so I'm happy with it."
However Eade was adamant on Monday it had to be reviewed. "I don't agree with it, it's going to cause a lot of angst," he said.
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,21299312%255E19742,00.html
-
Duck backs hands in back rule
Herald-Sun
February 28, 2007
WAYNE Carey can't see the problem with the new AFL rule disallowing players to have their hands in the back of an opponent in a marking contest.
"It's pretty simple isn't it? If the hands are in the back, you're pinged," the former star player said.
"It's a free kick. That's not technical, it just means keep the hands out of the back.
"I'm all for the rule. I think it's pretty simple: you use your forearm, or your hips or your shoulder.
"It's always been the rule and, if anything, I think it goes back to ... it's knowing how to use your body correctly, and that's with the forearm, which you are allowed to use, and also with the hips.
"It's a real skill that I think has been lost because guys have got away with using their hands over the years."
Full article at: http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,21299610-23211,00.html
-
This rule will change all our future recruiting tactics. Whilst this ridiculous rule is in place we should only be recruiting from the Italian World Cup Soccer squad as being able to dive will be a key skill requirement. :banghead :banghead
I can just see the draft camp adding a new criteria
Agility test
shuttle run
Repeat sprints
20m sprint
3km time trial
vertical jump
Horizontal dive :banghead :banghead
-
This rule will change all our future recruiting tactics. Whilst this ridiculous rule is in place we should only be recruiting from the Italian World Cup Soccer squad as being able to dive will be a key skill requirement. :banghead :banghead
Lloyd and Didak going to love this rule then. Two biggest divers in footy ::).
-
if i recall correctly, in that italy v australia game, it was an aussie player who faked a beautiful dive which bluffed the ref and forced him to red card an italian player!!!!!
its not just the italian team that dives is it. how unfortunate that aussies kep sooking when they dived , forced their opponent to play 1 man down for half a game, and they still could not win!!!!!!!!!
australia did not deserve it pure and simple
-
Better get the Full Back Plan B ready...
Oh that's right we don't have one. :P
-
Better get the Full Back Plan B ready...
Oh that's right we don't have one. :P
We did but he did his knee just as he giving Nick Riewoldt as bath :(.
As for somebody other than Thursty taking over from Gas :help. McGuane ... ah no. Razor ... please no. Polak maybe but more a CHB. Schulz... nup. Clever ... nup. Riewoldt ... nup. Richo shouldn't step one foot past the centreline lol. Thank you Spud for not recruiting one key defender in your whole 5 years as coach :banghead.
-
Lloyd and Didak going to love this rule then. Two biggest divers in footy ::).
Every team in the AFL is going to want to trade for Lloyd and Divedak not not their footy abilities but their world championship ability to dive :thumbsup ;D
-
Lloyd and Didak going to love this rule then. Two biggest divers in footy ::).
Every team in the AFL is going to want to trade for Lloyd and Divedak not not their footy abilities but their world championship ability to dive :thumbsup ;D
Pettifer is probably our best diver and pleader to the ump :whistle.
-
Time to back off, says frustrated Roos
05 March 2007 Herald-Sun
Tim Morrissey
PAUL Roos says he has had a gutful of the contentious no-hands-in-the-back rule and is calling on AFL coaches to take a united stand.
The Swans coach said the AFL Coaches' Association executive should demand the interpretation be immediately scrapped when it meets with the AFL on March 20.
Richmond coach Terry Wallace, another staunch critic of the interpretation, turned up the heat on the AFL again, maintaining it was clear the change was not working after two trial games.
"I saw nothing to change my mind at all," Wallace said. "I don't like the rule."
The AFL Coaches' Association executive will have a chance to officially present its case to the AFL for the interpretation to be dropped after the NAB Cup grand final.
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,21323831%255E19742,00.html
-
I hope they band together and get it removed. Worst rule I can ever remember and increases confusion for everyone. The fact you can use fists in the back to fend off an opponent defies logic to me. The NAB Cup should be its trial and proof it's a failure.
-
The only new rule over the past 5 years that has improved the game is the outer centre circle for centre bounce ruck contests as it has prevented knee injuries. The rest should be scrapped and the umps allowed to ignore incidental contact.
-
What's the point of bringing in the new push in the back rule if a clown in green wearing No. 41 yesterday couldn't see 5 metres in front of him what the crowd and another ump 50m away saw ::). The other two umps had good games but this guy was an idiot :scream.
-
What's the point of bringing in the new push in the back rule if a clown in green wearing No. 41 yesterday couldn't see 5 metres in front of him what the crowd and another ump 50m away saw ::). The other two umps had good games but this guy was an idiot :scream.
You're too kind.
What was the real concern from green number 41 - was not paying the frees for head high contact. IIRC 2 palyers got rubbed out last week for the very similar things and this moron flapped his arms and said "play on" :banghead :banghead
And they wonder why the fans are ticked off!
-
You're too kind.
;D
I promise not to do that with the umpiring from now on lol
We can add the holding the ball decisions to the trifecta of rules this moron didn't have a clue about :banghead.