Continued rule changes are unruly Paul Roos
From: Herald Sun
September 03, 2011 AS A coach I was never a fan of many of the rule changes. I felt they were unnecessary and knee-jerk reactions to trends in the game.
Equally, many didn't achieve their objectives and without question they made umpiring our game an incredibly difficult job.
While coaching, however, I was never 100 per cent certain if my objections were somewhat self-serving and partly due to club allegiances with the Swans. It was hard to know whether I could be truly impartial if I had a vested interest in what the rule changes would mean to my team.
At the end of my first season as an impartial observer, though, I am more concerned than ever.
I have always said that the umpires are the ones who cop the brunt of the fan, player and coach frustrations, even though they are simply there to adjudicate an increasingly confusing set of rules.
Having spoken to several umpires over the years, some are equally frustrated but clearly they cannot speak out publicly.
Place yourself in the umpires' position to understand how complex decision-making has become and examine directly the impact of some of the new interpretations and changes.
I have outlined the five free-kick categories that I believe cause the most problems.
1. Holding the ball, incorrect disposalAn umpire watches the player pick up the ball and then he needs to determine: a) if he is tackled high or is pushed in the back; b) does he have prior opportunity; c) when tackled is he making a legitimate attempt to get rid of the ball; d) if the ball spills out, how does it spill out; and, e) how long can he wait until it spills out before he calls for a ball-up.
If it does spill out now with so many players around the ball it is picked up by another player, who gets immediately tackled and the process starts all over again. Often this can occur three or four times in a row.
To give you an idea of how confusing it can be, midway through last season Swans skipper Brett Kirk approached me on behalf of the players, asking whether I could contact the AFL's umpiring department and get some clarity about the rule. It turns out that none of the Swans had any idea about where the interpretation of the rule stood.
2. Marking Contest/chopping the arms/hands in the backWhenever a marking contest occurs whether it be with two or more players he has to determine: a) are the players holding a jumper; b) do the players have eyes for the ball; c) are the players getting a free run at the ball; d) is there a chop of the arm in the contest; and, e) has any player put a hand in an opponent's back.
3. Deliberate out of boundsThis is a rule that has been around for many years, however the umpires have been recently asked to be more vigilant in policing it. We are asking umpires to interpret a player's intent. Did he deliberately kick or handpass the ball out of bounds? In my opinion it is completely unfair for the umpires to try to determine what a player's intent was when disposing of the football. Would any of us ever have thought that a player could kick our odd shaped ball 80-metres upfield from centre half-back and be pinged with a deliberate out of bounds?
4. Deliberate rushed behindIn 2008, Hawthorn would often deliberately walk the ball through the Geelong goals as a tactic in the Grand Final. Rather than see this as a one-off we have had an overreaction and brought in a new rule. Again putting more pressure on the umpires. The key to this rule is for the umpire to determine how much pressure the player is under when conceding a behind. Often an incredibly difficult thing for an umpire to do in the helter skelter of an AFL game. Therefore in Round 23 at the end of a long season we see two polar opposites: North's Jack Ziebell goes unpenalised for punching the ball through with nobody near him, while Richmond's Alex Rance gets pinged for fumbling the ball over the line under pressure.
5. Advantage ruleI think we would all agree this is a complete shambles, particularly around the stoppages. The umpire blows the whistle with as many as 20 players around the ball and as you were taught every player stops. If a smart player has the ball he takes the punt that it is his team's free kick and runs past opposition players into open space.
Clearly the only reason there is an advantage is because the umpire has blown the whistle and stopped the game. Under the new rule, though, the player must determine the advantage and is allowed to continue.
Bearing in mind an umpire has only a split second in a game in which to make all of his decisions as illustrated above it is clearly becoming an almost impossible task to get it right.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/continued-rule-changes-are-unruly/story-fn7si1vl-1226128401828
