If they got rid of prior opportunity it would clarify the game a lot.
Also when a player is tackled and the ball goes oob then it is a throw in, I don’t understand this rule interpretation as the tackle is what causes the result.
Whatever way you look at it it is all very frustrating.
Just trying to understand what your saying here as you’ve previously referenced how it used to be interpreted and I was too young to remember that.
Would what your saying advocate the decision against Yeo from yesterday? I’ve gotta say imo that is a disgraceful decision. He’s tackled a player, the ball has come loose in the tackle, he’s then picked it up and been tackled straight away and been pinged holding the ball.
I fear for the game if that’s the direction we’re going in, where players genuinely attempting to play the ball are being penalised. Going to get to a stage where players are huddled around the ball scared to pick it up and instead are waiting for the oppo to do so, so they can then tackle and win holding the ball.
I'm a massive advocate for getting rid of prior opportunity (P.O) and getting rid of the gray of the game.
A player doesn't need to "possess" the ball. They can tap, punch or kick it off the ground hopefully to a free teammate, if a player "chooses" to possess the ball they must then disposal of the ball by either hand or foot.
This was how it was mostly adjudicated in the years prior to the introduction of P.O.
In the Yeo decision probably could've been a free kick in the first instance because it was arguably high contact. But in relation to him getting pinged for holding the ball then if there was no P.O then it would be holding the ball every time because P.O isn't a consideration at all. He chose to possess the ball and he now must dispose of the ball in a legal fashion when tackled.
Unlike now, priory to P.O, there wasn't a negation of play and an awareness of trying to force stoppage.
Yeo and all current players being brought up with footy knowing only P.O know if they possess the ball and are immediately tackled know they will get away with stoppage if they fain or even fake intent to dispose of the footy knowing that a stoppage will be called.
So with the current rule the questions are asked did he pick up the footy or did he drag it in under him or did he dive on it blah blah blah. Too many variables and all open to interpretation.
In the past before P.O. the player knows that he must dispose of the ball when tackled knowing beforehand it doesn't matter how quick he gets tackled after he gets it.
It's black and white for everyone, players and non-players alike all knew the rule.
Granted it was messy at times but the cream didn't look messy. Player like Paul Couch, Dean Kemp, Dale Weightman, Maurice Rioli snr and Deisel Williams were absolute guns at getting the ball and disposing of the ball to a teammate.
If the rule was removed then the most skillful players will adapt and be able to still win the footy and get the ball out. If they can't they will find other entertaining ways of giving themselves more space and separation and even teammates will shepherd more.
