Sitting on the couch last Saturday watching the Adelaide Oval spectacle, it was an environment fuelled with gusto and frustration.
There was gusto for the yellow and black, frustration for the fluorescent green. The game we all live and breathe can be an emotional roller-coaster.
A set of rules have been introduced this season by the new ‘competition committee’ in the hope of combatting congestion and bringing back a traditional flavour to the game fans have yearned for.
The nine rules and new interpretations include:
- 6-6-6 starting positions;
- leaving the goal square on kick-ins;
- man on the mark brought back to the top of the goal square;
- no runners during live play;
- unnecessary umpire contact;
- the opposition player cannot interrupt the recipient of a 50-metre penalty;
- kicking a snap after the siren, however still remains on the line;
- no more ‘hands in the back’ rule; and
- rucks can elect to grab the ball from ball-up and throw in.
AFL journalist Nick Bowen has pinpointed the reasons why they were implemented – to “produce more free-flowing, instinctive football and more one-on-one contests”. I can understand these new rules and adjusted interpretations; however, are fans frustrated? Should some other rules be prioritised over others? Are there just too many new rules?
Connor Rozee of the Power (Chris Hyde/Getty Images)
There are definitely some grey areas the AFL need to recognise. First and foremost, the new competition committee needs to revise the controversial ‘contact below the knees’ rule. After a series of broken legs, the rule was fittingly introduced. However, players take advantage of the rule far too often and as a result get a free kick because apparently it is deemed dangerous to put your head over the ball.
The ball-winner in this situation is never rewarded and could subsequently change the manner in which a bullish midfielder attacks a ground ball. An outspoken Patrick Dangerfield on Twitter labelled the rule as an “absolute disgrace”. The Cats superstar and AFLPA president may need to sit down with fellow committee colleague Steve Hocking to address the issue and later fine-tune it at season’s end.
Moreover, the new runner rule, whereby a runner can enter the field of play only after a goal, is debatable. Was it Chad Cornes’s tactical antics as a Port Adelaide runner or Alex Woodward’s interference of play in last year’s grand final that spurred the committee to determine this outcome? If so, this is not conclusive enough to make it a rule change.
Runners are prized assets within footy clubs who deliver constructive feedback to players during games. The deteriorating absence of runners may place inexperienced teams at a disadvantage, especially Carlton, who are in dire need of help, having won three games in a season and a half. The new interchange boards have been a debacle and an ineffective system of communication, leaving players, coaches and administration staff confused.
As it is only Round 5, and time will tell whether these implemented rule changes are mandatory within the game or not. While progress has been made early in the season, the competition committee still has a lot to answer for.
The Regulator
Roar Rookie
A runner can run out and deliver a broad message, by yelling, to all players in the vicinity for someone to get on the goal line. Not just tell Mitch McGovern, he's not the only Carlton player who has the capability of standing on the goal line. Actually, I don't think I mentioned Mitch McGovern once in my initial comment, so thanks for your response, but it's out of context. Feel free to comment your own responses and opinions on articles, instead of replying to others with different points of view.
Jezza Jones
Guest
I think fluro pests in runners should be completely banned. Its a start with these live play rule restrictions. Unnecessary umpire contact is ridiculous when they appear to be getting in the play more often. The ruck rules are childishly stupid in having to nominate someone beforehand and the head over the ball or sliding rule has seen now too many free kicks in a game. I agree with number 8 rule change it was starting to get stupid with free kicks for body positioning during a marking contest. I'm pretty much undecided on 6-6-6 starting rule. 50 metre penalties should be reduced as too many are now being paid by umpires. If I was the AFL I would look at increasing kicking distance rules to say 20m for marks. It appears to be less than 15 metres is now being called for a mark.
Darren
Guest
He’d been on the ground for two minutes and ran straight to defence - he was obviously told to play the deepest defender. And he still couldn’t do it. A runner would have to have been right there as he wondered off the line to say Mitch remember on the line. Oh yeah says Mitch that’s right. A: Embarrassing an experienced player can’t remember that B: Runners were never aloud to stay on the ground and coach. They are supposed to pass on a message and leave. Coaches abused this for years - hence the backlash
Jon Catania
Roar Rookie
Well clearly he needed someone to remind him last Sunday!
Darren
Guest
I’m a Carlton supporter and I’d hope McGovern doesn’t need a runner to tell him to stay on the goal line
The Regulator
Roar Rookie
Firstly,Good read Jon. Out of the 9 'newly' introduced rules the changes that have resonated with me are the number 8 & ( in your list, as they are previous rule changes that have been scrapped. Abolishing the hands in the back rule and the ruck contest rule brings back some traditional values to the game. I also couldn't agree more with your statement regarding the runner rule. To use Carlton as an example again, in the dying stages of their loss to the Suns, the runner could have provided a message for players to get back on the goal line and potential save the game. With no timeouts in footy how are coaches expected to give timely messages to players without having to have them run off the ground. Unnecessary rule change.
Darren
Guest
Jon ‘the below the knees contact’ rule has not stopped players from ‘putting their head over the ball’. Keep your feet! It’s a golden rule of football. To quote the great Dennis Cometti, Dangerfield has a great ‘cork in the ocean’ ability to slide pick up the ball, rise to his feet and run. Great; but if other players are going for the ball, still standing and you make dangerous contact with their legs below the knees - free kick. I’ve got a simple solution to allowing runners on the ground more - kick more goals.
Jon Catania
Roar Rookie
The 6-6-6 rule isn’t necessary in local footy – no technology or cameras to identify it. Also, it makes an amateur umpire’s job that much harder.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Off-topic, but I will just say that the introduction of the 6-6-6 rule into masters footy is absolute pants and is already creating chaos at centre bounces. No idea why the bell ends running masters footy thought for a moment that what a competition for over 35's and over 45's really needed was a rule aimed at reducing congestion at the highest levels of the game involving elite athletes. Not like anyone playing our level has the fitness to run up and down the field and make it to every stoppage. As others have said the rules I hate are any rule involving free kicks blown from ruck contests, the below the knees rule is annoying, and the rules around protected areas. Couldn't really care about the holding the ball rule, the people complaining about that one are the dullards who haven't yet realised if a player doesn't have prior opportunity he can just drop the ball and not get pinged for it. As to what prior opportunity is - well, it's whatever the umpire decides. I'm also ok with that.