The 30-second shot clock will again be displayed on scoreboards for the full quarter after the AFL changed its stance.
The countdown clock had been dropped for the final two minutes of each term.
However after discussion with senior coaches during Tuesday night’s dinner at AFL chief Gillon McLachlan’s house, it has now been reinstated.
If players are deemed to be deliberately running down the clock umpires will have the power to call ‘play on’.
In a statement released on Thursday, the AFL said it had changed its position to have more consistency for players lining up for goal and for officiating umpires.
Cat
Roar Guru
Who cares if they waste time? How is it any different to when players start chipping the ball backwards and switching sides back and forth towards the end of the game?
Cat
Roar Guru
Better yet why not just give the players the 30 seconds to do what ever the heck they want to do with it?
Daz
Roar Pro
So do the players have 30 seconds or not? It shouldn't matter how long they take to kick, what they do in the build-up, or how much time they waste prior to doing it. You give them 30 seconds max, that means they should be able to do whatever they like within that 30 seconds prior to kicking the ball. If the umpires deem the player is wasting time and they should call play on, then they don't really get 30 seconds, they get whatever the umpire determines. In that case, just remove the whole thing. It should be simple, why do we always have to over complicate things with exceptions and just in cases.
Cugel
Roar Rookie
Same thing in the NRL.. instead of being given the hurry up by the ref, teams always run out the clock, resulting in overall longer periods of inaction.
Craig
Guest
The clock encourages them to waste time, as much as possible anyway. If someone is glancing at the clock are umpires going to call play on? I highly doubt it. #scraptheclock
Goatmaster
Guest
So AFL- reversing the rule introduced to fix a non existent problem then make a problem then decide the fix is a problem as well.
Perry Bridge
Guest
The problem the AFL has is that they provide 30 seconds no matter what. The clock starts ticking from the moment the mark (in the case of Higgins - a free for high contact) is confirmed. In the case of Higgins he got up quite slowly - and the clock was ticking (perhaps time on should have been called?). Now - the contrast to a player who doesn't have the ball when the free is paid - he might be back in position for the kick when the ball is returned to him - and he's informed then that he has 30 seconds. This actually happened on Friday night with a 50 metre penalty - the player to take the kick was in position - received the ball and the umpire could be heard calling "You've got 30". Ridiculous - he doesn't even need 15 before he should start moving in. So - this whole 30 seconds is to much of a one size fits all solution. What was clear with the Higgins case is that if he was listening in to the nearest umpire (Donlon #1) for guidance - he was listening to the wrong man as the apparent umpire in control had called play on twice before umpire Donlon echoed it. Perhaps - if the umpires are wired up - the controlling umpire needed to indicate to the nearest umpire (Donlon) to call play on. As it was - the advantage lay with Stringer who out of the man on the mark and the man taking the kick - Stringer was the only one of the 3 able to focus on the controlling umpire to SEE his play on signals. So - it was a farce. North may well have lost the game as a result.
Macca
Guest
"If players are deemed to be deliberately running down the clock umpires will have the power to call ‘play on’." So what is the point of the shot clock? It was brought in to prevent players wasting time, now because players are using it to waste time we will keep it but umpires can call play on before it expires if they think players are wasting time. Why not just scrap the clock and have the umpires call play on if they think players are wasting time?