PONTIUS the CRUCIFIER

[Smokey]

Just as bad as the hands in the back rule, it won't be long before there is so much stoping and starting in this game that it will be un watchable. These rule makers and enforcers are killing this game.

The two rules couldn't be further apart in my opinion WAT.  The hands in the back 're-interpretation' was the single best decision that has come from the hallowed halls of the numbskulls who decide on these issues.  The 5mt protection zone applied in the manner it was on Saturday night is nothing short of a disgrace and blight on our game.

[RollsRoyce]

While some Tiger fans were confused by why so many 50m penalties were awarded to the Hawks, the AFL yesterday revealed umpires had been instructed to be severe on any opponent encroaching within 5m of the player with the ball who is about to take his kick after being paid a mark or free.


AFL spokesman Patrick Keane said yesterday clubs had been warned of the clampdown on players who impeded the decision-making of the player who had the ball.

"The reason being is the guy who has the ball has the right to do what he likes," Keane said. "Simple, you can't be within 5m unless the player goes off his line.

"The umpires have been told to call play-on more quickly, but there will be zero leniency for going inside the protected area."

The 5m rule has long been a part of the rules, Keane said, but the Laws of the Game committee this year instructed umpires to police it severely.

"We will hit them with it in the NAB Cup to prepare them for the season," Keane said.

"It will take them a couple of games to get used to it, but instructions have been given to all clubs and to the media outlets and that's why the broadcasters were aware of it."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/tigers-caught-short-on-rule-change/story-e6frf9jf-1225830262414

Whenever Richmond cops the rough end of the pineapple with the umpires (which, let's face it, is about 90% of the time right?), the AFL apologists always wheel out some overpaid muppet to justify the anti-Tiger bias. In this case it's Patrick Keane trying to convince us that we copped our fair whack.
Well tell me this Patrick: If the 5m exclusion zone around a player is so sacrosanct, then why wasn't Alex Rance allowed to take his kick without the Hawthorn player cribbing on the mark to such an extent that he was able to smother the kick, then waltz into an open goal?
It seems to me that, as always, the umpires are there to maintain the status quo between the elite sides and the strugglers, and once again Richmond are playing to a different set of rules. 

[Jacosh]

i watched some parts of the Brisbane WB game and am sure that a player was warned to move out quickly after going towards the player who took the mark.

[Penelope]

That happened to a richmond player too. Hodge got a free at a stoppage at half back  and the bloke behind him looked like he went to move towards the mark and the ump warned him off, effectively allowing hodge to play on and deliver to franklin for their second goal

[WA Tiger]

Just as bad as the hands in the back rule, it won't be long before there is so much stoping and starting in this game that it will be un watchable. These rule makers and enforcers are killing this game.

The two rules couldn't be further apart in my opinion WAT.  The hands in the back 're-interpretation' was the single best decision that has come from the hallowed halls of the numbskulls who decide on these issues.  The 5mt protection zone applied in the manner it was on Saturday night is nothing short of a disgrace and blight on our game.

Sorry smokey can't agree both rules are the same do you know why, because the fools that we call umpires cannot interpret either rule consistently. How many hands in the back decisions have you seen not awarded when they have been blatent, the same goes for this 5mt rule. I watched the Lions and the Bulldogs on Sunday and the exact same thing happened. A player took a mark near the interchange and an opposition player ran on, straight past him and nothing, not a thing. Same as the hands in the back, how many times last year did you see a player held off in the side shoulder/arm region only to be judged as hands in the back.

These rules are not clearly defined and that leaves the way for how individual umpires pay free kicks, lets just leave the freaking rules as they have been. Stop start stop start stop start football is what we will be watching soon, throw in about 10 goals a game via 50mt penalties and thats our game stuffed IMO.

[smasha]

Tigers caught short on rule change
Mark Robinson
Herald Sun
February 15, 2010

THE 5m rule which angered Richmond supporters on Saturday night is a feature of an umpire crackdown on protected areas this season.

While some Tiger fans were confused by why so many 50m penalties were awarded to the Hawks, the AFL yesterday revealed umpires had been instructed to be severe on any opponent encroaching within 5m of the player with the ball who is about to take his kick after being paid a mark or free.

The rule will be policed through the 2010 season.

One free kick was paid on Friday night between Essendon and West Coast, reportedly two in the Adelaide-Port Adelaide game and up to 10 in the Tigers-Hawks game.

AFL spokesman Patrick Keane said yesterday clubs had been warned of the clampdown on players who impeded the decision-making of the player who had the ball.

"The reason being is the guy who has the ball has the right to do what he likes," Keane said. "Simple, you can't be within 5m unless the player goes off his line.

"The umpires have been told to call play-on more quickly, but there will be zero leniency for going inside the protected area."

The 5m rule has long been a part of the rules, Keane said, but the Laws of the Game committee this year instructed umpires to police it severely.

"We will hit them with it in the NAB Cup to prepare them for the season," Keane said.

"It will take them a couple of games to get used to it, but instructions have been given to all clubs and to the media outlets and that's why the broadcasters were aware of it."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/tigers-caught-short-on-rule-change/story-e6frf9jf-1225830262414

What sort of snake oil poo is that?

Patrick Keane you wanker of the highest order.

[Smokey]

Sorry smokey can't agree both rules are the same do you know why, because the fools that we call umpires cannot interpret either rule consistently. How many hands in the back decisions have you seen not awarded when they have been blatent, the same goes for this 5mt rule. I watched the Lions and the Bulldogs on Sunday and the exact same thing happened. A player took a mark near the interchange and an opposition player ran on, straight past him and nothing, not a thing. Same as the hands in the back, how many times last year did you see a player held off in the side shoulder/arm region only to be judged as hands in the back.

These rules are not clearly defined and that leaves the way for how individual umpires pay free kicks, lets just leave the freaking rules as they have been. Stop start stop start stop start football is what we will be watching soon, throw in about 10 goals a game via 50mt penalties and thats our game stuffed IMO.

That's just the thing WAT - the hands in the back rule has never changed.  Years ago (purists will tell you when football was football but that's a debate for another day) you could not push (or even touch hard) the opposition player in the back with your hands - free kick every single time and as a result you had a skill to master in positioning your body and timing your contact in order to get the best position possible to attempt a mark.  That all fell by the wayside during the 90's and early '00's and we were left with the eyesore of wrestling, players holding each other around the arms, shoulders and backs and taking away any aesthetically pleasing or skillful attributes of the marking contest.  It has evened our game back up and brought the smaller guy back into play rather then being subjected to gorilla-based 'wrestle offs'.  If I want wrestling I'll go to WWE or whatever the crap is called.

Now they have applied the same method to solving another issue - changing the interpretation of the 5mt protected zone - without changing the rule itself.  Unfortunately, by applying it the way it was on Saturday night, it has completely distanced itself from fair play and keeping within the spirit of the game.  Overkill like I didn't think possible from rational and sane people charged with looking after the interests of the game.  Did they need to address the issue?  Maybe, but I didn't see it as too great a problem.  Did they even come close to getting it right?  Couldn't have missed it by more if they tried.

And as for the umpires getting the hands in the back rule wrong?  I think they get that rule right more than most others in the game, certainly much more than holding the man/holding the ball.

[WA Tiger]

Smokey, as you said, the hands in the back rule has always been in place but never enforced (really) until a couple of years ago. From what I understand so has the 5mt rule and now they are enforcing it to the letter of the law same as hands in the back. I am not sure that they are interperating the rule differently they are just enforcing it, the same as the hands in the back. What other rules are there that are not enforced but free kicks are payed on interpretation??

I agree though the enforcement of the 5mt is a crock and IMO as you said it never was a problem.

[mightytiges]

So much for Adrian Anderson saying there'll be no rule changes  . The guy is a clown needing to justify his own existence with this crap  .

The 5m exclusion rule is farcical. If you have a player just a bit late to a contest where a mark is taken by the opposition then he is stuck within the 5m zone and a sitting duck for the new rule. As for pinging Lids when he was running off the ground to the bench and not involved in the play  . The game was bad enough to watch without the whistle being blown every 2 minutes for some inconsequential free to Hawthorn  

We all know what will happen now. They'll police the guts out of these new rules/interpretations for the first few rounds (I can't believe they are actually going with this in the season proper   ) turning nearly every game into a joke. It'll rightly cause outrage, Mike will write an article in the Hun telling us the obvious, and then behind the scenes to save face dopey AA and Geisch will tell the umps to go easy on the whistle in the second half of the year and let it go again. The same thing happened with the hands in the back rule. They hardly pay it anymore unless there's an obvious push or the hands in the back are blatant.

[smasha]

I reckon the arse bandits must collect Richmonds games on dvd and invent a new rule which will stuff us up.

The Hawks had literally 5 goals from that farker number 38.

[WA Tiger]

So much for Adrian Anderson saying there'll be no rule changes  . The guy is a clown needing to justify his own existence with this crap  .

The 5m exclusion rule is farcical. If you have a player just a bit late to a contest where a mark is taken by the opposition then he is stuck within the 5m zone and a sitting duck for the new rule. As for pinging Lids when he was running off the ground to the bench and not involved in the play  . The game was bad enough to watch without the whistle being blown every 2 minutes for some inconsequential free to Hawthorn  

We all know what will happen now. They'll police the guts out of these new rules/interpretations for the first few rounds (I can't believe they are actually going with this in the season proper   ) turning nearly every game into a joke. It'll rightly cause outrage, Mike will write an article in the Hun telling us the obvious, and then behind the scenes to save face dopey AA and Geisch will tell the umps to go easy on the whistle in the second half of the year and let it go again. The same thing happened with the hands in the back rule. They hardly pay it anymore unless there's an obvious push or the hands in the back are blatant.

Totally agree with your statement on the same thing happened with the hands in the back rule and this is where I am coming from. They do pay it now though MT, it just depends on how they feel at the time and against which club they feel like paying it against. It all comes down to how the fools interperate the rule at the time... fools, leave the freaking game alone!!!

[smasha]

So much for Adrian Anderson saying there'll be no rule changes  . The guy is a clown needing to justify his own existence with this crap  .

The 5m exclusion rule is farcical. If you have a player just a bit late to a contest where a mark is taken by the opposition then he is stuck within the 5m zone and a sitting duck for the new rule. As for pinging Lids when he was running off the ground to the bench and not involved in the play  . The game was bad enough to watch without the whistle being blown every 2 minutes for some inconsequential free to Hawthorn  

We all know what will happen now. They'll police the guts out of these new rules/interpretations for the first few rounds (I can't believe they are actually going with this in the season proper   ) turning nearly every game into a joke. It'll rightly cause outrage, Mike will write an article in the Hun telling us the obvious, and then behind the scenes to save face dopey AA and Geisch will tell the umps to go easy on the whistle in the second half of the year and let it go again. The same thing happened with the hands in the back rule. They hardly pay it anymore unless there's an obvious push or the hands in the back are blatant.

Totally agree with your statement on the same thing happened with the hands in the back rule and this is where I am coming from. They do pay it now though MT, it just depends on how they feel at the time and against which club they feel like paying it against. It all comes down to how the fools interperate the rule at the time... fools, leave the freaking game alone!!!

Hit the nail on the head.

They get away with it because they are right technically.Emotionally though(club bias),they aren't.

[RollsRoyce]

[quote author=RollsRoyce link=topic=10620.msg174117#msg174117

 Tell me this Patrick: If the 5m exclusion zone around a player is so sacrosanct, then why wasn't Alex Rance allowed to take his kick without the Hawthorn player cribbing on the mark to such an extent that he was able to smother the kick, then waltz into an open goal?
[/quote]

Does anyone remember this incident in the first qtr? Rance had taken a mark, and the Hawk player was cribbing the mark, jumping up and down, and windmilling his arms, til he eventually smothered the kick, then goaled. The way the bias against us was going that night, if it had been a Richmond player doing exactly the same thing, you can bet that pr!#%! no. 38 would have whistled him back fifty metres.   

[Penelope]

Yeah, you could actually see what was going to happen. He may have a cribbed a bit, but rance just didnt give himself enough space by backing back before kicking it.
That wasnt long after Deledio entered the 'protected space' when running to the interchange. It was only the hawks player with the ball running backwards that meant delidio entered the protected space. He actally took the space to deledio, not the other way around

[the claw]

i understand Richmond were rubbish last night but the umpires are a effing joke.

holding the ball when you are tackled as soon as it goes into your hands & the '5 meter protection' rule are no good.

Australian Rules Football is getting more shyte each year.

ive complained for many yrs about both sides of the holding the ball rule. currently the player going to get it has no opportunity time to get rid of it this is happening in the name of keeping the game moveing stoppages are anathema which is a joke.

ive seen the opposite as well we went thru a period where the bozoes interfered and good tackles were never being paid.

the key ingredient is prior opportunity. if the umps cant consistently judge what prior opportunity is bring in a 2 second rule or some thing. where a player picks the ball up and the umps count to two or three and after that the player is fair game.if a player hasnt had those couple of seconds grace its play on or a ball up but hey ball ups are anathema.
the game is more and more being tailored to skinny quick outside players who rarely put their head over a ball.
one other point if you have had your 2 or 3 seconds to get rid of it  you are tackled and you dont dispose correctly you penalised.