Bounce won't stop us rushing
Mark Stevens | December 05, 2008
RICHMOND coach Terry Wallace has backed the AFL's push to trial a free kick against players who deliberately rush behinds.
Wallace yesterday said a bounce-down 25m from goal would not be enough to deter clubs blatantly rushing behinds in the final minutes of close games.
He said if such a rule was introduced the Tigers would still rush a behind and then swamp the resulting ball-up with players, making it a scrap and killing time.
"If they balled it up 25m out, we would step the ball through the goal-line and we would have all 18 players come inside the back half," Wallace said.
"We just reckon that would look ugly.
"They would have brought in a rule and it wouldn't have changed what we would do.
"The free-kick rule would change what we would do.
"If you put it through the goals under the same circumstances, you're going to give the opposition a shot a goal."
Wallace was in the coaches' box last year when Joel Bowden cleverly rushed two behinds to ice the clock and ensure the Tigers defeated Essendon by four points.
AFL legend Leigh Matthews has backed a bounce-down 25m out to put an end to such tactics, but the contentious free-kick rule appears certain to be tested in the NAB Cup instead.
There is a strong chance it will be introduced into next year's home-and-away season if the trial is uneventful.
The free kick will be taken where the ball crosses the goal-line, meaning a blatant rushed behind will almost certainly result in a goal to the opposition.
Some clubs believe the rule is too extreme, but Wallace strongly supports the trial.
The issue came to a head in the Grand Final when Hawthorn rushed a record 11 behinds. Of those, 10 would have resulted in free-kicks to Geelong under the proposed rule.
The trial rule, put forward by the AFL Laws of the Game Committee, is up for discussion at the December 15 AFL Commission meeting.
But there is a feeling it is a done deal, at least in trial form.
It has the strong support of Adelaide coach Neil Craig.
He has argued that if a free kick is paid around the ground for deliberate out-of-bounds, it should also be paid if the ball is deliberately taken over the goal-line.
But there are mixed feelings among other clubs, with some saying the penalty does not fit the crime.
One club official said: "It's like being sent to jail for stealing a loaf of bread."
Recently retired full-back Mal Michael, the cornerstone of the Brisbane Lions' defence in three successive premierships, yesterday said the free kick rule would be an over-reaction.
"It's a bit extreme, that rule," Michael said.
Michael says an offending team should not have to hand possession of the ball to the opposition.
"They should go 30m out, where you would have a white dot, and bounce it there," Michael said.
AFL umpires director Jeff Gieschen has been visiting clubs, reviewing this season and looking ahead.
Gieschen has been answering questions about the looming new rule and briefing them on how it might work.
Wallace praised the AFL for its transparency and said the Tigers were happy to have a look at the rule during the pre-season.
"More particularly, we'll wait and see how it's adjudicated. The adjudication is going to be the big thing," he said.
"If it is an obvious rush through (that's OK), but if it's just a defensive spoil or attempt and they start giving free kicks, obviously we wouldn't like that too much."
Wallace said he was surprised the league was considering going as far as paying a free kick.
"But this is a trial period. I don't have any issue with a trial. That's what these games are all about."
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,24753259-19742,00.html
