The AFL discussion paper
The AFL today sent a discussion paper to the 16 clubs, seeking feedback on a number of topics relating to the laws of the game.
* Deliberately-rushed behinds (NAB Cup trial, but possibly introduced for next year’s regular season)
Suggested rule changes:
- free kick from wherever the ball is rushed
- bouncing a certain distance from goal
- throw in or free kick at the behind post
- the player who rushed the behind cannot bring the ball into play, or the flags must be waved before play resumes
- free kick from the intersection of the 50m arc and the boundary line.
* Free after disposal (NAB Cup trial) – awarding a 50m penalty as well as the free kick.
* Interchange infringements – lessening the penalty.
- If the team at fault is in possession, they give away a free from where play has stopped
- If the opposition has possession, they gain a free and a 50m penalty from where play has stopped.
* Increasing the number of field umpires from three to four.
* Continuing to use four boundary umpires.
* Continuing the NAB Cup trial of a “no-go” zone for umpires at centre bounces and perhaps extending it to next year’s regular season.
* Recalling badly off-line bounces.
* Re-positioning the goal-line so it is level with the back of the padding, not the posts themselves.
* Introducing a free kick for “misconduct” – currently this is only a reportable offence (eg squirting a drink bottle into an opponent’s face or throwing objects during play).
* If a side has possession when a stretcher stops play, it will keep possession when play resumes.
* If a player shooting for goal tries to use the field umpire as a screen, the mark is re-set.
SPECIFIC NAB CUP PROPOSALS
* Legal kicking distance increased to 20m
* Removing several Cup-specific rules, including no mark for a backwards kick in defence, play on when the ball hits a post and boundary throw-ins from 10m inside the line.
* Clubs must name a certain number of under-23 players in the first two rounds – 13, including at least one rookie in round one; 11, including at least one rookie in round two.
Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
October 20th 2008 @ 8:16am
Michael C said | October 20th 2008 @ 8:16am | Report comment
The best thing is that they ARE NOT considering the 3 points for a rushed behind.
There are several variations on the theme worth consideration:
the bounce about 25m out – the least defendable position on the ground. THus, the ‘lure’ of a rushed behind is greatly reduced.
the removal of the quick play on capacity – either must await goal umpire flag wave – or, ensure that another player takes the kick.
One thing I do miss is the almost ‘specialty’ kick in person (used to be the full back) – and having filled that role locally – - there’s a fair bit that goes into NOT ‘exposing’ the team overly via the kick in.
October 21st 2008 @ 7:10pm
ren said | October 21st 2008 @ 7:10pm | Report comment
My preferred option for the rushed behind would be to delay the taking of the kick by making another play take the kick and making them wait until after the flag. It is too bigger penalty otherwise.
Could this possibly cause any confusion as to who rushed it, is it still rushed if the attacking team gets a partial smother on an attempted rushed behind? etc…
October 21st 2008 @ 7:47pm
Michael C said | October 21st 2008 @ 7:47pm | Report comment
ren -
I still reckon the present rushed behind situation is entirely the making of the rules committee -
a. the quicker kick out
b. the bucket of balls
c. the harsher calls on out of bound deliberate
all things considered……..where else has a defender got to go? To then effectively criticise the defender is crazy and they’ve entered down a domino path of rule ‘tinkering’.