Judging by the title you may assume I’m another person about to complain about the AFL hubs.
Yes in a sense hubs have completely changed the overall landscape of the season, but it’s the only way for the season to continue. Plus with almost every team experiencing the hub life it hasn’t compromised the season as much as we all expected.
To me what’s altered the season is the current holding the ball interpretation.
When Hawthorn coach Alastair Clarkson called for a change, the umpires were quick to adjust and soon players were getting pinned just for taking possession.
Without any sort of official rule change, ‘prior opportunity’ suddenly went out the door and players were giving away free-kicks immediately if they weren’t seen to have a ‘genuine attempt’ to get rid of the footy.
The new interpretation is far too strict and players are getting pinned for holding the ball free kicks despite having no prior opportunity or a way of legally getting rid of the football.
This was brought in as the AFL’s way to clear congestion and move the ball a lot quicker. However this new rule has everyone questioning, do we want the players to take possession of the ball?
The way it was officiated over the last two rounds the answer has to be no.
The most concerning thing is it’s almost more beneficial to hack kick the footy on the ground to gain territory, as whenever anyone picked up the ball they were at risk of giving away a free-kick on the spot.
A sport that penalises players for picking up the ball has already been invented and although the AFL is constantly trying to globalise the game, turning it into soccer won’t do that.
Overall I have two major issues with how the new interpretation was used.
My first complaint is the fact that it lacks consistency.
I can’t even come close to understanding why in different games the umpires interpret the holding the ball rule in a completely different way.
During the games played between Thursday and Saturday it was clear the umpires were going to pay the free kick any chance they got and prior opportunity may as well have been non-existent.
(Photo by Michael Willson/AFL Photos via Getty Images)
However on Sunday the officiating was completely different and free kicks that were being paid less then 24 hours prior were no longer handed out.
Of course every game comes with a different set of umpires which means consistency with most of the rules is hard to come by.
That being said, the discrepancy between the Sunday games and the rest of the games was far too big, the point of having rules is so every team plays by the same guidelines.
Changing the way the rules are used each game doesn’t seem fair to me at all and it’s an issue that the AFL needs to fix immediately.
If this is the way the AFL wants the game to be played then so be it, I’m not a fan of it but I’ll learn to live with it. My only demand is that each game is officiated with similar interpretations.
My other issue is how the interpretation of the rule came about being changed.
It’s a rarity for any type of sport in the world that mid-season the league decides to change the rules.
So why does the AFL feel the need to change how the umpires officiate certain rules based on one coaches complaint?
I’m not a parent but from what I know, if a child is kicking and screaming in an attempt to get something they want the parents can’t give in, otherwise the kid will repeat their actions in order to get their way. If the parents never learn from their mistakes, unfortunately it will most likely lead to having a spoiled child.
Obliviously Alastair Clarkson is not a child, but if all he has to do is complain in a press conference in order for him to get his way and have a rule changed then he may as well be the AFL’s spoiled child.
You’ll be hard pressed to find another sport where if a coach complains they end up getting their way and it’s something the AFL needs to stop doing, otherwise the ‘A’ may as well stand for Alastair.
Overall the holding the ball rule left me confused and scratching my head over the weekend.
Quite frankly I think the only people who have enjoyed this new interpretation are my family, as I’ve stopped shouting “BALL!” at the TV simply because I have no idea how the umpire will call it.
The AFL either needs to go back to the old ruling or have consistency across the board, whichever they choose they need to do it fast before the rest of season is comprised.
RT
Roar Rookie
Hardly prophetic to predict the AFL will do something stupid.
Gyfox
Roar Rookie
:-)))))
Pope Paul VII
Roar Rookie
They could also bring back the 15 metre penalty. They are paying zero 50m penalties despite oppositions deliberately not delivering the ball back promptly. The 15 metre spurt might help break things up a bit. I'm not a big fan of the 50m but there was a time when they would pay it the instant a player from the opposition passed it to a team mate by hand or foot. Now they know the umps won't do anything so lots of team stuff around to give their comrades time down field.
J jones
Guest
AFL has gone downhill since the silly multiple interchange rules came into effect. Go back some decades to a game where players got tired, ruckmen had to rest in a forward pocket, followers rested in the back pocket etc. And the crazy “flooding” game didn’t happen because players got tired and couldn’t sprint all over the ground, so the congested stoppages didn’t exist. It was also a slower game where umpires could officiate according to the rules, not according to split second “interpretations”. And now there’s talk of going to six on the interchange bench.....Heaven Forbid!
DTM
Guest
A little off topic here but I think the 15m distance for a mark is too short. We should increase it to 25m. I think this will open the game up. It will force some players to improve their kicking skills and take out some of the stat collecting that players do. The 25m distance will be easier to judge than 15m. For example, the centre square is 50mx50m so a kick from one edge needs to get to the middle to be 25m. Also a ball kicked forward from the edge of the 50m arc would need to be marked by a player about half way to the goals to cover 25m. Worth a trial in pre season matches?
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
Yes Clarkson has way too much influence at the AFL but he is right in that the state of the game is dire. Those waiting for a miracle cycle to turn around to more positive footy have their heads embedded in concrete much less sand. Some now claim Carlton will lead us out of the defensive quagmire through their attacking footy and we will all have to catch up. Spare me. Reducing the players on the field will happen before 2022.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
This also speaks of Gillon's vacant stewardship of the game. He has ppl answerable. Why isn't he impelling his ppl to do what is needed? This is my gripe with him. What does he do to give the AFL value for money?
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Nicks
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
First, inconsistency of rule enforcement does not mean there is something inherently wrong the rule. The concern is consistency not the rule. ----- Second, AF is a game of territory, not possession. Let's make it a clear demarcation between AF and RL. Possession is overrated. That's why we get this constipated back-court basketball going. Let RL have their stodgy 'non-contest' of the ball. Let's make it completely about the ball. ---- As I've said before if you have it, even only 0.17 seconds, and you are tackled- handover.
DTM
Guest
That's right. The problem is it appears that the umpires changed the way they interpreted the rule after comments from Clarkson. The question is: "Was this a directive from the AFL or did they take this action themselves?"
RT
Roar Rookie
Without any sort of official rule change, ‘prior opportunity’ suddenly went out the door and players were giving away free-kicks immediately if they weren’t seen to have a ‘genuine attempt’ to get rid of the footy. No rule change was necessary because that was always the rule, they are just trying to properly adjudicate it now, rather than constantly ball it up. The problem is this is another case of rule of the week without any consideration to awarding other frees to the ball carrier, like too high, holding the man or in the back.
DTM
Guest
As someone who has umpired a lot of footy, I sympathize with the umpires. I think the question needs to be asked as to whether or not they got a directive from AFL before the apparent change of interpretation (please note - the rules were not changed mid season). If they were given a directive then we, the paying public, should be privvy to this directive. It raises questions as to why this directive was given mid season. Secondly, if some umpires changed their interpretations without an AFL directive perhaps they are being too sensitive to high profile coaches' comments. I'm not even sure who the Umpires Advisor is these days?
Gyfox
Roar Rookie
Get rid of all the coaches with an ego........& who is left?
The Dom is good
Roar Rookie
Clarkson needs to understand he's just another person he's nothing extra special , getting rid of the massive ego would be a good start.
Larrikin
Roar Rookie
Its the AFL's fault they bow down to self important Clarkson and this isnt the first time either. My other mention is why don't all the umps get in a room and don't come out until they all agree unanimously what the interpretations are for holding the ball and exactly how long is 15 meters. its astonishing play is called 15 meters from kick to kick when its clearly barely 10. holding the ball and the 15 meter marking - get it right, for the sake of the game please get it right !!!