One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on November 05, 2021, 04:58:14 PM
-
AUDIO: https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode?id=924573
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I THINK IT WAS A MISS”: VETERAN TIGER NOT A FAN OF KEY RULE CHANGE
By Laurence Rosen
SEN
5 November 2021
Champion Richmond forward Jack Riewoldt says the AFL’s new stand rule was a “miss” in its first season.
On the eve of Round 1 this year, the AFL unveiled the new rule, which saw players unable to deviate from the mark once an umpire has called ‘stand’.
While it resulted in more attacking football during earlier rounds, games tightened up defensively as the season progressed and teams had more time to work out how to adjust their respective game plans.
Riewoldt said the rule “caught a lot of teams on the hop”, saying teams opted to defend more as a result of the rule.
“I was a bit worried early on when this one was announced,” he said on SEN Hobart.
“I thought there would be 50m penalties left, right and centre but players adjusted to it fairly well. What it did create was this panic when the game was so free-flowing and I think that was quite evident to people watching the footy over the first four or five rounds.
“It probably caught a lot of teams on the hop in terms of how to defend it and play the rule, but ultimately it did probably lead to a bit more flooding and sides maybe not pressing up as strongly defensively and (they) were sitting back a bit more.
“I think it was a miss that one, I’m not big on the standing the mark rule.”
The stand rule will make its debut in both the AFLW and SANFL next season, after initially not being used in both competitions.
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2021/11/05/i-think-it-was-a-miss-veteran-tiger-not-a-fan-of-key-rule-change/
-
Can't believe it's being introduced to other comps.
Should be stopped, removed, killed never to be seen again
-
Over governed , people trying to make themselves relevant as unelected custodians of our game. terrible rule that didn’t achieve anything in the end but over complicate the game and allow the slime/ maggots to be in the spot light more often
-
Simply implemented to help geelong win a flag lol
-
So true
-
The most stupid thing about this, is, it is arse about. Implement it in the seconds and the women's comp first to see how it runs before you do a massive unnecessary head transplant on the main game that nobody asked for in order to serve someone's methane inflated ego and attempt to win his favored team a granny.
-
The most stupid thing about this, is, it is arse about. Implement it in the seconds and the women's comp first to see how it runs before you do a massive unnecessary head transplant on the main game that nobody asked for in order to serve someone's methane inflated ego and attempt to win his favored team a granny.
Or trial it in the pre-season and analyse what the impact is
But no, SHOCKING used his absolute power to bring in a rule without any consultation with anyone even bypassed the weak as water rules committee. And even worse than that was Gil and the commission let him.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FDnnhQbUUAAWC65?format=jpg&name=large)
Source: HeraldSun.
:clapping
-
Here's Benny Gale's full comments on the Stand rule:
Richmond CEO Brendon Gale slams ‘stand’ rule
HeraldSun
8 November 2021
Tom Lynch kicked just 35 goals in 2021, and Richmond’s CEO says a decision at AFL House is partly to blame. But he insists the Tigers’ flag window is still open.
Richmond chief executive Brendon Gale says the AFL’s new stand rule will be judged as a failure that promoted uncontested “circle-work” and was a factor in Tom Lynch’s 35-goal season.
Gale told the Herald Sun the new rule was “unedifying” as defenders stood passively on the mark in what should be a contested, in-your-face game.
The AFL brought in its new rules, including the stand rule, after closely monitoring Richmond’s brilliant efforts to guard the corridor while on the mark in the club’s successful 2020 premiership defence.
But scoring went down from 80.7 points a game in 2019 to 79.7 points in 2021 (2020 involved shorter games) even if teams could move the ball from defensive 50 to inside 50 more smoothly.
Richmond also had its frenetic tackling game blunted as rivals chipped the ball around and denied the Tigers the chance to apply their trademark pressure.
“With the man on the mark rule, teams rather than defend proactively in the middle of the ground and up the ground, they just folded back,” 244-game Tigers veteran Gale said.
“So, as a result, scoring has gone down again. It’s harder to score as teams fall back.
“If the stated objective was to get the ball in motion, then the ball was in motion. But I saw a lot of games this year which were simply keepings off. If the stated objective was to score, well, it hasn’t worked.
“Teams want to control the ball because defences were flooding back. So the ball is in motion but it’s keepings off. Teams aren’t scoring.
“I just think the mere sight of players standing passively on the mark is unedifying. When you think of the nature of our game, it’s an active, on-your-toes, aggressive game, so I think it was unedifying. Teams fold back and don’t defend the ground. Melbourne conceded a score from 35 per cent of entries and it was the lowest of all time.”
Gale admits the league is unlikely to revert from its stand rule, with new football operations boss Brad Scott making clear he saw no need for intervention.
“It’s a personal view. If they want the ball in continuous motion, so be it, but I think we like scoring and there isn’t a correlation between that rule and high scores.”
Gale said Richmond’s form had contributed to Tom Lynch’s quieter season, but added the new rules didn’t help.
“As a team, we were very inconsistent. Very unbalanced between the defensive and offensive and there were a whole bunch of reasons behind that, and we have done a lot of analysis. But at the end of the day, I don’t think our forward line got a lot of good looks.
“It’s harder to score in general as teams fall back and with the way we performed as a team, but Tom can play and he will respond accordingly.”
Former AFL football boss Steve Hocking made clear he believed the changes had worked after a remarkable Grand Final that saw key momentum swings between Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs.
“I look to the Grand Final and I think you have a look at 10 minutes to go in third quarter, the Dogs are 19 points up (and Melbourne won),” he said last month.
“If any of you needed to understand what my vision was for the game, that game captured it. It was really about the best players being able to demonstrate their high level of skills.”
Source: HeraldSun (https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-offseason-richmond-ceo-brendon-gale-slams-stand-rule-says-tigers-can-challenge-again-in-2022/news-story/3c229d500297d22fe36fc9bb79978272).
-
AFL rotten to its stuffen core. Scumbags.
Really glad the club has finally come out and called a spade a stuffen shovel. Well done Benny.
I was very specific in my feedback on the end of year survey that the club needs to stick up for itself more publicly
-
Is he seriously saying HIS vision for the game and presenting that lay down misere granny as an example ? So his vision is to hand the ball to individual players and shoo everyone else away so they can go unhindered to perform a solo uncontested gymnastics routine or something? Is he insane?
-
AFL rotten to its stuffen core. Scumbags.
Really glad the club has finally come out and called a spade a stuffen shovel. Well done Benny.
I was very specific in my feedback on the end of year survey that the club needs to stick up for itself more publicly
Youll find the club probably got a lot of feedback on the stand rule and that our members wanted the club to do more about it and how it was implemented.
-
This is such a flog, no wonder his own brother dislikes him
How much skill does it take to run around a lamp post
Didn’t Melbourne just blast it out of the middle, nothing to do with standing on the mark helped them win.
-
They did camboon, true that
-
Brad Scott said the stand rule is staying.
https://twitter.com/7NewsMelbourne/status/1461603942006079488
:thumbsdown
-
Is he seriously saying HIS vision for the game and presenting that lay down misere granny as an example ? So his vision is to hand the ball to individual players and shoo everyone else away so they can go unhindered to perform a solo uncontested gymnastics routine or something? Is he insane?
That is the most ridiculous comment I’ve heard from a senior official if any sport at any time ever.
WTF????
-
Hocking 2 , keeping a rule that is biased
-
Should be renamed Statue Rule.
-
Stoppages, tackling down, leaving radical AFL rule changes unlikely in 2022
By Jon Pierik and Peter Ryan
The Age
November 23, 2021
A drop in contested possessions, tackles and stoppages has backed Brad Scott’s declaration that 2022 will be a year of consolidation around the game, following the radical shifts in rules during Steve Hocking’s time as the AFL’s head of football.
Scott said the league had begun to seek feedback from coaches on the game’s biggest issues, and any changes would be communicated to clubs before the Christmas break.
Scott, who was appointed to the football management role in September, reporting to AFL executive Andrew Dillon, said conversations around the stand rule, match review decisions, and the medical sub, with one suggestion being for teams to be able to use their sub in the final term regardless of injury, were ongoing but he did not envisage radical change.
“We have had a lot of feedback from coaches in particular, and we will take all of those on board and then firm up a position before Christmas,” Scott said.
“[The] overarching view is that 2022 will be one of consolidation, but we always reserve the right to tweak around the edges.”
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/other/AgeStatsontheStandRule1.png)
The competition committee will meet again on Tuesday with the expanded body now including a representative from all but two clubs as they discuss big picture issues confronting the game.
Sources said there has not been an agenda set with pre-reading material with the expectation being that the meeting will lay a foundation for future discussion.
However, important data on how the game was played this year will encourage the 21-member committee.
Sources close to the committee say there is regular debate around striking the right balance between high scoring and the desire for close results, but the priority has been to ease congestion, with the league determined to open up play.
The stand rule for the man on the mark introduced last season, which has encouraged the player with the ball - when at half-back or on a wing - to look more for the 45-degree kick into the centre corridor, has been seen by some observers as a reason for play appearing to open up.
Statistics provided to The Age by Champion Data highlight a more flowing game, with the contested possession rate 37.8 per cent since 2017. The average tackles per team was 57.4, more than 12 less than 2016, and almost six less than 2020 when matches were shortened as a result of the pandemic. However, one reason for the drop in tackles could be that players, at times, were reluctant to be first to the ball, given a free kick could be paid quickly - depending on the interpretation of holding the ball.
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/other/AgeStatsontheStandRule2.png)
Senior coaches Damien Hardwick, Brett Ratten (after his side won only three free kicks from 86 tackles against Geelong) and Chris Fagan, and Port Adelaide veteran player Travis Boak were among those throughout the season who said prior opportunity was causing too much confusion and suggested it be scrapped.
The average combined numbers of throw-ins and ball-ups per game (59.8 ) was almost five less than last year, while secondary stoppages also slipped.
What should also please the AFL - and broadcasters Seven and Foxtel - is that there was an increase in the number of close matches this season. While the number of matches decided by 10 points or less returned to 2019 levels (22.7 per cent) when matches were also at full length, the number of results decided between 11-20 points increased to 38.2 per cent, up by 1.2 per cent. This meant there was a decrease in matches decided 30-50 points.
For those coaches and supporters in favour of reduced game time, their argument could be strengthened in that the number of results in 2020 decided by up to 10 points was 23.5 per cent.
Richmond chief executive Brendon Gale has already made his view on the contentious stand rule clear, with the Tigers keen to have it scrapped. However, there is a view inside the AFL that, although scoring did not increase, games were more attractive in 2021 and the ball flowed more freely.
The average score this year was 79.7, compared with 75.8 in shortened quarters last season, and, perhaps worryingly, 80.2 in 2019.
The competition committee, as part of its remit, also has fixturing, game analysis and the industry workforce model, the latter attempting to help keep costs under control.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/stoppages-tackling-down-leaving-radical-afl-rule-changes-unlikely-in-2022-20211120-p59alu.html
-
Brad Scott is the 2nd coming of Shocking. Tiger hater and Gilligan sycophant. Can’t stand the prick
-
Brad Scott is the 2nd coming of Shocking. Tiger hater and Gilligan sycophant. Can’t stand the prick
That's the afl for you gave him a job last year after being sacked and roos had to pay him out more however the afl , and they took him in a role now this role lol and that brothel of a club claim they a depth free I wonder why.
-
Brad Scott warning crackdown on time wasters and high contact
https://www.afl.com.au/video/688882/scott-warning-crackdown-coming-on-time-wasters-high-contact?videoId=688882&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1637645222001
- No rule changes for 2022 but there will be changes in umpire interpretations.
- Crackdown on players slowing down the play handing the ball back to opponents or preventing an ump balling up the footy at stoppages.
- Stricter on head high bumps.
-
Brad Scott warning crackdown on time wasters and high contact
https://www.afl.com.au/video/688882/scott-warning-crackdown-coming-on-time-wasters-high-contact?videoId=688882&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1637645222001
- No rule changes for 2022 but there will be changes in umpire interpretations.
- Crackdown on players slowing down the play handing the ball back to opponents or preventing an ump balling up the footy at stoppages.
- Stricter on head high bumps.
Good changes (and they are changes, stop insulting us AFL).
The time wasting is infuriating…..
-
Stricter on head high bumps how? Pay the obvious ones that's enough.
How about stricter on blokes drawing high contact?
Holding the ball?
-
Welcome to the contradictory AFL rules under SHocking and now Scott:
1. AFL introduces a rule that umpires have to wait at stoppages to ask for the ruckmen to nominate rather than the ump just bouncing the ball quickly to keep the game moving.
2. AFL complains about time wasting.
:huh3 :stupid
-
Who appointed this dud, him, hocking and Christian full of themselves and this new dud full of preconceived bias taking over, how do we vote them out
-
Who appointed this dud, him, hocking and Christian full of themselves and this new dud full of preconceived bias taking over, how do we vote them out
Pathetic a joke another yes man got the job as roos had to pay him out.
-
Wish the AFL would follow.
(https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/attachments/417c1381-b374-4d5d-ae64-823860e22774-jpeg.1557041/)
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/localfooty/efl/efnl-2022-stand-rule-scrapped-in-eastern-league-for-2023-among-host-of-changes/news-story/d2d4bca9a105420d0444a9b3754fa9d6
-
Stupid, non-sensical rule.
-
Fan engagement!
Except where the rules and spectacle are concerned.
Instead we get more themed rounds...yay...
-
Fan engagement!
Except where the rules and spectacle are concerned.
Instead we get more themed rounds...yay...
:clapping :clapping
-
Every other league in Australia should dump this ridiculous rule
Well done to this league for being the first
-
They are not interested in anyone over 35. As long as more kids are watching and playing than those disenfranchised older supporters walking away from the game then nothing will change.
-
AFL stand rule crack down coming
https://twitter.com/ClarkyHeraldSun/status/1618119259762339841
-------------------
Change to ‘stand’ rule cracks down on fake handballers
Players who try to milk 50m penalties by faking a handball have been called out by the AFL in a change to the controversial ‘stand’ rule.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-news-stand-rule-change-to-protect-man-on-mark-from-fake-handballs/news-story/652da9be7e7434e15a55071685a83748
-
Another tin of worms, just scrap the stupid rule
-
It’s the Geelong rule, with the help of Hocking and other AFL toadies they sure had the game plan ready to go when this rule started
-
No 50m penalties for fake handballs among rule tweaks
The AFL has made tweaks to three rule interpretations ahead of the 2023 season
By Sarah Black
afl.com.au
27 January 2022
A 50m penalty will no longer be paid if a player fakes a handball while behind the mark, drawing their opponent off their position.
It's one of three tweaks to rule interpretations that have been made ahead of the 2023 Toyota AFL Premiership Season, with the League aiming to simplify the game for officiating, minimising delays and reducing player exploitation of rules.
The modification expected to have the greatest impact on games is around drawing a 50m penalty with a fake handball, a move used by players last season, when they would goad their opponent into moving off the mark before play on was called.
Additionally, players have to make an immediate decision regarding the 5m protected area. When a player is penalised for giving away a free kick or loses a marking contest, they must stand the mark or immediately leave the protected area.
The third change will see players no longer given an alert by umpires at the 15-second mark of their set shot, instead receiving just a warning at 25 seconds. Players are allowed 30 seconds to start their set-shot approach.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/873433/no-50m-penalties-for-fake-handballs-among-rule-tweaks
-
Here we go with the 🎪 begin and screw us over.
-
No 50m penalties for fake handballs among rule tweaks
The AFL has made tweaks to three rule interpretations ahead of the 2023 season
By Sarah Black
afl.com.au
27 January 2022
A 50m penalty will no longer be paid if a player fakes a handball while behind the mark, drawing their opponent off their position.
It's one of three tweaks to rule interpretations that have been made ahead of the 2023 Toyota AFL Premiership Season, with the League aiming to simplify the game for officiating, minimising delays and reducing player exploitation of rules.
The modification expected to have the greatest impact on games is around drawing a 50m penalty with a fake handball, a move used by players last season, when they would goad their opponent into moving off the mark before play on was called.
Additionally, players have to make an immediate decision regarding the 5m protected area. When a player is penalised for giving away a free kick or loses a marking contest, they must stand the mark or immediately leave the protected area.
The third change will see players no longer given an alert by umpires at the 15-second mark of their set shot, instead receiving just a warning at 25 seconds. Players are allowed 30 seconds to start their set-shot approach.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/873433/no-50m-penalties-for-fake-handballs-among-rule-tweaks
So aka Ben brown a player could sprint back 30 meters and start a slow approach that coul take 2 minutes?? Stupid rule
-
The rule should always have been if you fake a handball the umpire calls play on! Stupid rule getting stupider ... ::)
-
How about as soon as a player moves off the line of the mark by a centimetre anywhere on the field its play on and it is enforced
Now it just another form of basketball. The stand rule is another rule being made by unelected faceless people abusing their power
-
Am I dreaming but I remember reading somewhere how Hocking (when at AFL) and Chris Scott collaborated to work out how to stop Richmonds dominance after 2020.
Is it just a rumour? Is this actually true? Is there any proof anywhere?
It would be great if anyone can shed any light on this
-
You dreamt it.
-
Am I dreaming but I remember reading somewhere how Hocking (when at AFL) and Chris Scott collaborated to work out how to stop Richmonds dominance after 2020.
Is it just a rumour? Is this actually true? Is there any proof anywhere?
It would be great if anyone can shed any light on this
Yes it was Hocking. Was discussed on a footy talk show once.
Can't remember where but I had a screenshot of it somewhere.
He became increasingly annoyed seeing Richmond players defend the mark horizontally to prevent ball movement vs Geelong in 2020.
-
Am I dreaming but I remember reading somewhere how Hocking (when at AFL) and Chris Scott collaborated to work out how to stop Richmonds dominance after 2020.
Is it just a rumour? Is this actually true? Is there any proof anywhere?
It would be great if anyone can shed any light on this
Yes it was Hocking. Was discussed on a footy talk show once.
Can't remember where but I had a screenshot of it somewhere.
He became increasingly annoyed seeing Richmond players defend the mark horizontally to prevent ball movement vs Geelong in 2020.
This rings a bell. Thanks mate.
-
Am I dreaming but I remember reading somewhere how Hocking (when at AFL) and Chris Scott collaborated to work out how to stop Richmonds dominance after 2020.
Is it just a rumour? Is this actually true? Is there any proof anywhere?
It would be great if anyone can shed any light on this
Yes it was Hocking. Was discussed on a footy talk show once.
Can't remember where but I had a screenshot of it somewhere.
He became increasingly annoyed seeing Richmond players defend the mark horizontally to prevent ball movement vs Geelong in 2020.
Yep. It was in the HeraldSun. Scott Gullan IIRC wrote the article. I think it's this one but it's behind a paywall. There was a screenshot doing the rounds, but I can't find it.
Did AFL footy boss Steve Hocking order man-on-the-mark rule change?
Captain Trent Cotchin is said to have been the No. 1 culprit, or expert depending on which way you look at, when it came to shutting down the corridor by encroaching on the mark.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-rules-2021-did-afl-footy-boss-steve-hocking-order-manonthemark-rule-change/news-story/5bfd3cb5621aceb115cb44207d08afcb
-
Thanks MT :cheers
Can anyone open it?
-
Football coaches have always devised team plans to achieve a desired result. Its a natural thing to adopt a tactic to win games.
Carlton went handball happy in the 1970 GF to run Collingwood off their feet & won a flag doing it. Did the VFL (then) change the rules to prevent it? No.
Hawthorn honed their footskills to retain possession & work the ball up the field & won 3 flags doing it. Did anybody change the rules to stop them? No!
Every tactic has its day & every tactic is met with a counter-tactic, coaches make careers out of this tactic/counter game, its a natural & fascinating aspect of our game.
There was never any need for the AFL/VFL to intervene in the past, but one day SHocking got into Gil's ear & whinged about Richmond 'guarding the corridor'. Gil agreed that it was preventing sides from going down the middle & approved a plan to change the rules to prevent the man on the mark from 'guarding the corridor'. He instructed SHocking to devise a rule change, and thus the Stand rule was born.
Why intervene at all when tactics have always been countered naturally?
I could easily put it to Gil that tackling is a blight on the game & whinge hard enough to get the tackle banned! Wouldn't that be wonderful?
All we can say to administrators like Gil & SHocking (& keep saying it to them) is to - LEAVE THE GAME ALONE! :scream
-
This year , there are many low scoring games which was the reported reason why we had to suffer this rule. Do the AFL bring in a new rule , any suggestions or just get rid of this bad rule
-
The forefathers of the game brought in the extra smaller posts and the 'behind' to encourage attacking play and reward more scoring attempts. The new rules have now made that teams prefer to aim for a forward contest or stoppage than going for a long goal and missing because it's now harder than ever to defend after kicking a point.
-
Football coaches have always devised team plans to achieve a desired result. Its a natural thing to adopt a tactic to win games.
Carlton went handball happy in the 1970 GF to run Collingwood off their feet & won a flag doing it. Did the VFL (then) change the rules to prevent it? No.
Hawthorn honed their footskills to retain possession & work the ball up the field & won 3 flags doing it. Did anybody change the rules to stop them? No!
Every tactic has its day & every tactic is met with a counter-tactic, coaches make careers out of this tactic/counter game, its a natural & fascinating aspect of our game.
There was never any need for the AFL/VFL to intervene in the past, but one day SHocking got into Gil's ear & whinged about Richmond 'guarding the corridor'. Gil agreed that it was preventing sides from going down the middle & approved a plan to change the rules to prevent the man on the mark from 'guarding the corridor'. He instructed SHocking to devise a rule change, and thus the Stand rule was born.
Why intervene at all when tactics have always been countered naturally?
I could easily put it to Gil that tackling is a blight on the game & whinge hard enough to get the tackle banned! Wouldn't that be wonderful?
All we can say to administrators like Gil & SHocking (& keep saying it to them) is to - LEAVE THE GAME ALONE! :scream
Agree with this 1000000%
The 6-6-6 rule, the extended distance the man on the mark has to stand after a behind and worst of all the stand rule are all idiotic ideas created by the afl to open up scoring because they think it’s what the fans want. Problem is there was no fan engagement as far as I know and even worse with the stand rule they didn’t even trial it or consult the coaches.
They’ve made such an effort to increase scoring but without even looking at the numbers I’d be fairly certain that the season on season avgs for total points scored per match has increased very little if anything at all. On top of that, these rules don’t make any sense, make the players look like traffic cones or netball players and have actively made the game worse to watch given it’s just made more rules for umpires to interpret inconsistently.
Like you said the game evolves in cycles. Coaches adapt and team strategies are countered. Taking all the fun out of it by trying to force teams hands. Also give me a close game decided by single digits with the total score by both teams under 100 over a comfortable 5 goal victory with the total score around 200 any day of the weeeeeek.
-
Malthouse wants the Stand Rule abolished.
Mick Malthouse urges AFL to change dissent and stand-on-the-mark rules
The stop-start nature of these umpiring calls goes directly against the grain of a fast free-flowing contest. And Mick Malthouse believes it is killing the game.
Mick Malthouse
HeraldSun
April 10, 2023
I’ll tell you what’s wrong: inconsistency. Because it leads to doubt and distrust.
Already there is heightening resentment over the stand-on-the-mark rule. It is loathed by the clubs, and the supporters, as the most useless and demeaning action in football.
The rule was introduced in the 2021 season apparently “to give the player with the ball more opportunity to attack and go through the corridor, in the hope of boosting scoring”.
Based on this reasoning the rule is flawed.
Have a look at the Collingwood team of 2010 and 2011. It was a running machine that played on around the moving man on the mark. Alastair Clarkson’s Hawthorn, three-peat premiers, dissected the opposition with super efficient kicking, even with a moving man on the mark.
Richmond’s play-on-at-all-costs game was never affected by the man on the mark.
All outstanding, successful football teams. All big scorers.
If we’re looking at the bottom teams to find out why they can’t score, it’s not a reason to change the rules. Particularly one that has little bearing on scoring.
No umpire has yet to get it right at calling play-on fast enough for the man on the mark to re-join the action. Umpires are very late because players have become experts at disguising the play on.
In many instances the player with the ball runs past the man on the mark and by the time the ump calls play on, the ball has been kicked and the lamppost defender is chasing from 2m behind.
If the AFL thinks this is fair mindedness and part of the game, ask the supporters what they think when their team is disadvantaged by a pole stuck on the spot, and then penalised for another player who moves across the man on the mark.
If the league persists with this rule, and really, why should they? Then the umpire must have the whistle at the ready to use the instant the player with the ball moves to take a step off the mark. That is hard to do.
Because what we want to do is eliminate the prospect of another 50m penalty.
There’s already too many and it’s killing the game. The stop-start nature of the result of those calls goes directly against the grain of a fast free-flowing game.
AFL umpires do a wonderful job. They officiate the game within the rules to the best of their ability. But it takes time to gain the experience for the speed at which things happen at the top level, and to have the tolerance to understand when a player is posing a question out of frustration, compared to being outright disrespectful.
Let them umpire, as opposed to adjudicating. Games can be won and lost on good and bad decisions. That’s enough. To lose a game because an umpire is offended – that’s a whole other ball game.
https://www.codesports.com.au/afl/mick-malthouse-urges-afl-to-change-dissent-and-standonthemark-rules/news-story/bbe4da488920aceea5ab67e7c5540353
-
It would be laughable if not so sad.
I love (not) hearing umpires screaming “stand stand” throughout the game.
What on earth are they thinking…..???
Scrap it as a rule that didn’t work.
-
I didn't watch all of Footy Classified last evening but Brad Scott was the guest.
Did they bother to ask him now that he is back in the coach's box what he thinks of the stupid stand rule? The rule that he could have got rid of but didn't?
-
Every single person in the media routinely lauds the rule and how much it has opened up the game. It’s like it’s an order from AFL house that it has to be praised at any opportunity.
-
A blight on the game. A ridiculous rule.
-
Like watching netball
-
It took my Mum half a season to realise the umps were saying 'stand' not Stan.
This came from her asking "Ge how many players are called Stan in the AFL? Fairly uncommon name but there are heaps."
Gets a good chuckle every time.
-
The next time some idiot in the media says the Stand rule has improved the look of the game just point to tonight's game. 14 goals combined in perfect conditions :P.
All the Stand rule has done is create uber defensive flooding inside both teams F50s and lower scoring than ever in most games :boredom. But hey, it nobbled Richmond so all is good ::).
-
Welcome to the Stand Rule:
Player runs to stand on the mark.
Ump yells out to player to "Stand!".
Player stands.
Umps calls same player to take a step back as the player happens to be standing a metre over mark.
Players knows under the Stand rule that if he moves after standing, it's a 50m penalty. So, he continues to stand.
Ump pays 50 for being over the mark.
Thanks to SHocking for this stupidity! :facepalm :lol
-
The most obvious and easiest rule change that would help open the game up is increasing the minimum marking distance to 20 metres...maybe even 25 metres.....would at least get rid of the short chipping keepings off shyte if nothing else...also no more than 12 metres kicks getting paid as marks which makes the game look like the sort of easy peasy joke sport that PE teachers make up so the fat & unco kids can participate.....they'll still award marks for short kicks half the time but 17.5 metres at least looks better than 12.5 metres... :shh
-
I can’t stand these flick hand passes of no distance.
Would never happen but make handpass has to be 3 metres??
-
I’m on the KB train and I’m convinced that he is 100% correct.
Reduce interchange to 0 / Each team has up to 4 substitutes that can be used strategically or if there is injury.
Players tire and it opens up the game thus more goals are scored.
I would also get rid of the stupid stand rule and the even stupider prior opportunity rule which is by far the worst rule ever implemented as it’s brought in too much grey area to adjudication and it promotes stoppages.
-
THE AFL has warned clubs that it will crack down on players infringing on the standing the mark rule across the final month of the season, issuing a memo to teams on Wednesday regarding the strict enforcement of the existing rule.
The League wrote to clubs following an increase of instances where players had infringed on the mark when told to 'stand' by umpires, particularly when the defending team marked deep inside the 50m arc.
A series of examples was sent to clubs where umpires had been forced to remind players that they needed to go "back to the nine" when a mark was paid to a defending player standing inside the goalsquare.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/992768/clubs-warned-over-late-season-standing-mark-crackdown
Get ready for us to cop this on Friday night :help.
-
What about “The Stand” being enforced when players are shooting for goal on the boundary line? As soon as the player kicking moves - in any direction - opposition just surges forward before play on is called. It’s infuriating.
-
Ok, ok ok. We all know about the Stand Rule. Most of us absolutely hate it, but its a rule that will be adjudicated in AFL matches.
We have all lived with the stupid rule for nearly 2 years now, so can the umpires please stop yelling 'Stand' repeatedly while the kicker comes in? It trashes the broadcast from a watchers' point of view to continually hear 'Stand' 3-4 times a minute for over 2 hours!
Every player on the ground knows the rule by now, so if the man on the mark doesn't 'Stand' & dares to move pull the trigger & pay the 50!!
But please, pleassseee stop yelling 'Stand' all game long!!! :scream
Now they are going to join the 'Stand' rule to the 9mtr zone rule , so if you 'Stand' when you should be getting 'Back to the 9', you are going to cop 50. So really 'Stand' now actually means 'Stand Over Here On the Happy Side of an Invisible & Arbitrary Line When Only I Know Where That Is Or Its 50!'
Oh, good grief ... :help
Yep, this is just perfect for us to be the guinea pig/test pilots of a rule against the Burpdogs on Friday night on the cusp of the finals ... ohhh maannn ... ::)
-
Another thing they constantly yell is outside 5. I don’t really get this. Is it now a rule that if you aren’t standing the mark within a few second of the mark/free kick being paid, that you have to stand a minimum of 5m further back? If that’s the case then that is another stupid rule the afl has implemented.
-
Another thing they constantly yell is outside 5. I don’t really get this. Is it now a rule that if you aren’t standing the mark within a few second of the mark/free kick being paid, that you have to stand a minimum of 5m further back? If that’s the case then that is another stupid rule the afl has implemented.
Yep, the outside 5 situation (cos its not actually a rule) was born when a few clubs found a work around to the 'Stand' rule. If you don't man the mark you can't be made to 'Stand'. So a defending team can avoid standing on the mark & prevent themselves from coughing up a 50 for a misplaced toenail, but then they can't get to within 5mtrs of the actual mark (another imaginary line). But by being 5mtrs back the defenders can move around laterally & potentially block a short pass, all of which which the 'Stand' rule was designed to prevent in the first place.
The cure being worse than the disease ... as usual from the AFL.
The patch over the original patch is now leaking & will soon require an even bigger patch to patch it ....
Monty Python would have a field day with the AFL Rules Committee ...
-
Biggest indictment on our ga,e os the stand rule
Embarrassing to hear "stand" over and over.
And thank you JP Tiger for explaining the "outside 5" nonsense
They should call that the "Clayton's rule" being the rule you have when you don't actually have a rule. Heaven help us
-
The most obvious and easiest rule change that would help open the game up is increasing the minimum marking distance to 20 metres...maybe even 25 metres.....would at least get rid of the short chipping keepings off shyte if nothing else...also no more than 12 metres kicks getting paid as marks which makes the game look like the sort of easy peasy joke sport that PE teachers make up so the fat & unco kids can participate.....they'll still award marks for short kicks half the time but 17.5 metres at least looks better than 12.5 metres... :shh
Yes and you can’t throw…er handball over your head.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F2gv0V8bEAAe9ar?format=jpg&name=medium)
https://twitter.com/hasumpstuffedup/status/1686650641874386944
-
The most idiotic rule ever brought in on display once again :facepalm. The only good thing is it was against Carlton.
https://twitter.com/outbreezyWC/status/1784144614477504899
-
The most idiotic rule ever brought in on display once again :facepalm. The only good thing is it was against Carlton.
https://twitter.com/outbreezyWC/status/1784144614477504899
With this rule...
If you don't do this :lol
You just end up doing this :'(
It is farcical, always hasbeen always will be
-
An idiotic, poorly thought out law with unintended consequences that anyone with even half a clue could've foreseen conceived out of spite by a vindictive loser to bring down their morally superior and more successful betters ...Shocking really should start a left wing political party.. :shh
-
An idiotic, poorly thought out law with unintended consequences that anyone with even half a clue could've foreseen conceived out of spite by a vindictive loser to bring down their morally superior and more successful betters ...Shocking really should start a left wing political party.. :shh
Succinctly stated
-
The AFL will be too arrogant to admit they got it wrong and the rule will stand- pun intended, sorry
-
The stand rule laws seem to have been relaxed quite a bit.
-
The stand rule laws seem to have been relaxed quite a bit.
Not for the Tigers >:(
-
The stand rule laws seem to have been relaxed quite a bit.
Not for the Tigers >:(
True dat