Author Topic: Rule change trial --- Ball up 5m out after a deliberate rushed behind (afl site)  (Read 1472 times)

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 98225
    • One-Eyed Richmond
THE AFL will trial a new penalty for deliberately rushed behinds during the opening two rounds of the JLT Series as it plans to tighten up on players undertaking the practice during the premiership season.

Under the new penalty, a point will be awarded, before the ball is then thrown-up five metres in front of the goalsquare, rather than a free kick directly in front of goal as currently applies.

AFL football operations boss Mark Evans said the trial rule would only be formally introduced in the premiership season if it was deemed a success and there was strong support from clubs to make a change.

The AFL determined over the off-season that the players would be penalised for deliberately rushing behinds if they:

-       rushed a behind from beyond the goalsquare

-       had time and space to dispose of the ball

-       was not considered to be under pressure

-       a player in a ruck contest hit the ball on the full over the line

The 'third man up' ban will also be introduced this season with clubs expected to designate ruckmen to contest a ball-up or boundary throw-in.

No player other than the designated ruckmen will be allowed to contest the ball until it hits the ground and play-on is called, meaning players will concede a free kick if they grab an errant ball-up or throw-in unless they are a designated ruckman.

Players will not receive a free kick if a tackle is reasonable and their actions contribute to head high contact, while the protected area rule has been defined with the objective of giving players who inadvertently find themselves in the protected area a chance to leave that space.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-02-15/afl-to-trial-ballup-after-deliberate-rushed-behinds-in-jlt

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19427
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Should've been the rule from the start....now, how about introducing a new rule against introducing new rules every stuffing year?
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline Assange Tiger 😎

  • Founding member of the Fab 5
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3696
  • Leader Of AT's Outsiders
Quote
meaning players will concede a free kick if they grab an errant ball-up or throw-in unless they are a designated ruckman.

So players have to run away from the ball if some spud boundary umpire can't throw it in correctly. the game is dead
I work in Africa and they were taking the pee out of me for saving Africa.......
"Living the dream ,not as a slave to the system. If that makes me a tosser, then I'm a proud tosser... I have plenty of time to toss"

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19427
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Yeah but if we actually start holding AFL umpires to account then the kiddies won't want to become umpires and we'll eventually have no umpires.....or something...
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.