Up until last year I could call a holding ball rule as it happened. I was rarely out of step with the umpiring decision. All was right with the world. I knew the rules, the players knew the rules and the umpires knew the rules. Now it's just gone horribly wrong. Keep the ball moving! Get rid of the packs! These new mantras ushered in harsher holding the ball calls. Ok great, I thought, but what did we actually get? There is now a random call from the umps everytime someone gets the ball. I challenge anyone to call them correctly before the ump decides. It can't be done more than half the time. "Prior opportunity" now only applies sometimes. A player can be instantly wrapped up and the ball pinned to him and it's holding the ball. It doesn't seem to matter if the holder is wriggling like a fish or motionless. It doesn't matter if a single player has him or there's a pack of 10 on top of him. You see identical situations moments apart: ball up this time, holding the ball the next. You can see the frustration in the players faces. Trust me that I am melting the walls at home with and R rated rant. And this applies to all games. It even annoys me when the Hawks get a free or not because random decisions are not good the game. Remember, what you let pass is what you accept. Who wants to see a GF decided by random calls rather than the best team on the field? The way we're going they will be.
"Holding the ball" is broken
- Thread starter Glenhope
- Start date
-
- Tags
- holding the ball
- Tagged users None
Crowbots are dead
Premiership Player
- Oct 11, 2012
- 3,516
- 4,708
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I've been having the same thoughts. Impossible to work out now.
Umpires have bowed to the pressure of the fans. Mainly because they listened to asinine thoughts that tackles 'deserve to be rewarded'. Rather than have the onus on giving players the opportunity to dispose.
Plus that ducking bullshit that they easily could have fixed with suspensions on those that did it rather than a complete rule change that makes the umpires job harder.
The fans seem to want HTB called no matter what in every tackle, which means that umpires are human and they will call it more when it's undeserved with no prior. Since in my experience the majority of fans don't actually know what prior opportunity and legitimate attempt is.
Plus that ducking bullshit that they easily could have fixed with suspensions on those that did it rather than a complete rule change that makes the umpires job harder.
The fans seem to want HTB called no matter what in every tackle, which means that umpires are human and they will call it more when it's undeserved with no prior. Since in my experience the majority of fans don't actually know what prior opportunity and legitimate attempt is.
The whole game is broken
Fixing it is simple though
Remove deliberate (both behinds and boundary)
The clock stops, so it isn't time wasting (why deliberate was originally paid)
If a team continues to do it, pay an "unsportsmanlike conduct" free
Really, a player should not be pinged for moving it 50m down the field and opening up the play
As for the behinds, remove the advantage by removing the quick kick in
This in turn would allow the league to reduce interchanges more
Holding the ball - the only reason players started going long to space (or even to the nearest boundary) was because they were getting pinged for holding it
If they are intent on keeping the deliberate call (or even making it more harsh) they should not be paying holding the ball when a player gets clean posession and is then instantly tackled
In turn, penalise incorrect disposal (rewarding the tackler, protecting the ball player)
The biggest issue though, is the blatant AFL directive to the media, to emphasise how great things arthe make Kim family appear democratic
And then on the flip side, the media, being held to the constant promotion of the game, create controversy over menial things, as it's the one thing the AFL can't micromanage
Fixing it is simple though
Remove deliberate (both behinds and boundary)
The clock stops, so it isn't time wasting (why deliberate was originally paid)
If a team continues to do it, pay an "unsportsmanlike conduct" free
Really, a player should not be pinged for moving it 50m down the field and opening up the play
As for the behinds, remove the advantage by removing the quick kick in
This in turn would allow the league to reduce interchanges more
Holding the ball - the only reason players started going long to space (or even to the nearest boundary) was because they were getting pinged for holding it
If they are intent on keeping the deliberate call (or even making it more harsh) they should not be paying holding the ball when a player gets clean posession and is then instantly tackled
In turn, penalise incorrect disposal (rewarding the tackler, protecting the ball player)
The biggest issue though, is the blatant AFL directive to the media, to emphasise how great things arthe make Kim family appear democratic
And then on the flip side, the media, being held to the constant promotion of the game, create controversy over menial things, as it's the one thing the AFL can't micromanage
Last edited:
Totally agree, it's a lottery at the moment. Blatant incorrect disposals are constantly ignored, then the umpires will award a free kick out of the blue..
It sounds like a cliche, but it's a blight on the game.
It sounds like a cliche, but it's a blight on the game.
Holding the ball, incorrect disposal, made an effort (wrapped in a tackle), made an attempt (tried to kick ball but didn't, ball usually dropped), no genuine attempt (holding the ball), no prior opportunity, prior opportunity, too high, ducked into the tackle...
There are just too many variables and the umpires can often justifiably argue that the call they made is correct, while others can justifiably argue that another interp is correct.
There are just too many variables and the umpires can often justifiably argue that the call they made is correct, while others can justifiably argue that another interp is correct.
- Jun 5, 2004
- 9,224
- 6,921
- AFL Club
- West Coast
It was broken years ago when players were allowed time to be swung and dispose of the ball. Sydney were masters of it in 2005.
Now players are taught to tackle to pin the arms which has encouraged ducking.
Now players are taught to tackle to pin the arms which has encouraged ducking.
I'm going to go against the grain here, but i think it is becoming clearer.
Diving on the football - A clear rule that is umpired well. Supporters have to be aware that there is a difference between diving on the football and being on the ground and picking up or receiving the ball.
Charging with your head down is now prior opportunity. Unsurprisingly, this one is less common now they don't give frees for it any more. They could add 'dropping at the knees' to prior opportunity too - free kick as long as the tackle stays fair and the player doesn't legally dispose.
There were adjustments made last year. Notably ...
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-02-18/two-rules-tweaked-for-2015
The first one is interesting, (the rest are fairly obvious). If a player has picked up the ball off the ground at speed and is still not quite upright when tackled, even if he has taken several steps, the umpires should call for a ball up if the ball is not released. Umpires will be very aware of these subtle differences while most fans aren't sure and will be wondering what was the difference between this one and another one.
The commentators could help by a) knowing the rules and b) explaining the decisions to the viewers. Failing point 'a' the commentators can't even get to point 'b'.
The way the rules are written don't help either. Most of these interpretations are left out of the official Laws of the Game so it makes it hard to point to a specific rule and say 'this is it'.
It's not perfect, but I think there has been some good, clear guidelines that have made HTB more predictable. Once these rules are left in place for several years, they will become more instinctive to umpires, players and fans.
Diving on the football - A clear rule that is umpired well. Supporters have to be aware that there is a difference between diving on the football and being on the ground and picking up or receiving the ball.
Charging with your head down is now prior opportunity. Unsurprisingly, this one is less common now they don't give frees for it any more. They could add 'dropping at the knees' to prior opportunity too - free kick as long as the tackle stays fair and the player doesn't legally dispose.
There were adjustments made last year. Notably ...
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-02-18/two-rules-tweaked-for-2015
The first one is interesting, (the rest are fairly obvious). If a player has picked up the ball off the ground at speed and is still not quite upright when tackled, even if he has taken several steps, the umpires should call for a ball up if the ball is not released. Umpires will be very aware of these subtle differences while most fans aren't sure and will be wondering what was the difference between this one and another one.
The commentators could help by a) knowing the rules and b) explaining the decisions to the viewers. Failing point 'a' the commentators can't even get to point 'b'.
The way the rules are written don't help either. Most of these interpretations are left out of the official Laws of the Game so it makes it hard to point to a specific rule and say 'this is it'.
It's not perfect, but I think there has been some good, clear guidelines that have made HTB more predictable. Once these rules are left in place for several years, they will become more instinctive to umpires, players and fans.
- Oct 6, 2012
- 13,781
- 27,935
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Apparently you can run with the ball, be tackled but if the ball spills out because of the tackle its play on.
However, if you pick it up and are set upon, unless you flop around like a dying fish its HTB.
#AFLLogic
However, if you pick it up and are set upon, unless you flop around like a dying fish its HTB.
#AFLLogic
In tight situations I want to see (Richmond) players to the ball first. Then I don't want them to take possession. They can make to look like they will, but don't. Opponents will tackle them and hopefully Richmond players will draw a free kick. I know it's not football the way it should be played, and I'd love it to cause uproar because then it might get the rule makers thinking about this.
Sometimes you can be tackled and it's "made an attempt to kick(at kicking)" and other times it's "incorrect disposal". Infuriating. But then I've never heard an umpire say "made an attempt" when it's a missed handball.
Hawthorn are taking advantage of this (their contested ball is lower this year iirc). But I don't agree the rule is broken - if a player takes possession and has a chance, however fleeting, to give it off and fails to do so and is then tackled, then ping him. This is in keeping with the underpinning mantra of reducing stoppages, as in the alternative, it becomes a ball-up.
Partially
We do wait, but we know play on will be called
You'll see our players sit back, wait for the ball to come free (even if it is disposed of illegally)
Our players then rush it forward
Simple and effective
I'll sort this one out.
If you pick up the ball and get tackled and can't get rid of it, the tackler receives possession and is marched to 25m out and has a set shot on goal.
Scores will increase. No need for interpretation as you are literally HTB.
If the ball spills out regardless of how, its simply waved play on.
Sure we'll have roughly 140 free kicks per game, but the positives are 15 goal quarters frequently and a real buzz at the set shot stage.
Win win?
If you pick up the ball and get tackled and can't get rid of it, the tackler receives possession and is marched to 25m out and has a set shot on goal.
Scores will increase. No need for interpretation as you are literally HTB.
If the ball spills out regardless of how, its simply waved play on.
Sure we'll have roughly 140 free kicks per game, but the positives are 15 goal quarters frequently and a real buzz at the set shot stage.
Win win?
Without the ball is broken! It is unbelievable how many players are man handled without having possession of the ball. Why are these free kicks not paid? If you pay them the coaches will instruct their players to stop doing it.
Being kind at least 10 obvious ones were not paid today in the Eagles v North game.
Being kind at least 10 obvious ones were not paid today in the Eagles v North game.
- Nov 27, 2012
- 2,335
- 2,828
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
The one that annoys me most is when a player is immediately wrapped up but gets pinned for not making an attempt, even though the player in possession can't possibly dispose of it they have to do the fake attempted handball motion to make it a ball up, I mean seriously get lost, happened to Carlton a few times today.
This is why Fremantle should never have been allowed into the competition.
What's against the grain is you are making sense.
Umpiring generally spot on.
Your team makes an error they can try to put it right. The opposition makes an error and your team can capitalize. Umpires make an error and there's nothing anyone can do.
But
Saw a great example Thursday night. Rioli drops a mark and the officiating umpire pays it. A non officiating umpire comes in and says no, he dropped it because he had a better view. Ball up. Replay shows he dropped the mark.
I would like to have seen another umpire step in on the Conca/Bont HTB and 50m. Conca was pinned so quick he clearly had no chance to dispose of it. What he failed to do was the fish out of water bit. So tough but it's HTB. But the 50...WOW. Surely another senior ump could have just come in and said no to the 50m.
No It's just more proof. They have to go.
- Aug 27, 2007
- 13,506
- 11,814
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Everton_East Freo_Atalanta_Tranmere
Too many rules that are open to interpretation and for the umpire to read a players mind re: intent.
Many other sports have rules that are pretty clear cut - football (soccer) for example, only really has a handful of rules that are used - no handball, the offside rule, get the ball first when you tackle, you can't drag someone/pull them etc., no foul-throws and no back-passes to the keeper. That's essentially all the rules - and any other rules they use stem from those original rules.
The AFL has just created a shit tonne of rules that are over complication the interpretation of the game - should strip the game back to a handful of rules and leave it at that. So much is down to the umpires interpretation and when there is 3 (4) on the field, who all each have a different interpretation, what is called holding the ball one part of the field, could be interpreted as play-on or a ball up in another area of the field.
Simpicity is the key
Many other sports have rules that are pretty clear cut - football (soccer) for example, only really has a handful of rules that are used - no handball, the offside rule, get the ball first when you tackle, you can't drag someone/pull them etc., no foul-throws and no back-passes to the keeper. That's essentially all the rules - and any other rules they use stem from those original rules.
The AFL has just created a shit tonne of rules that are over complication the interpretation of the game - should strip the game back to a handful of rules and leave it at that. So much is down to the umpires interpretation and when there is 3 (4) on the field, who all each have a different interpretation, what is called holding the ball one part of the field, could be interpreted as play-on or a ball up in another area of the field.
Simpicity is the key
I think it's quite a concern that week in, week out our country's premier sporting code is opening itself up to regular social commentary in both the public and private domain on the rules which govern its on-field play.
I don't watch many other team sports but I spent a couple of years in the UK and naturally watched the UPL football there and I can't remember ever sitting at a pub over there and discussions regarding the rules being a thing.
I think we as customers of the AFL, and supporters of the game and our clubs should be treated far better in terms of the product being offered.
I don't have the answers but I think commentators need to get back to basics - commentate the game. Umpires likewise need to be seen and not heard. Lastly speculative rule changes should be mooted behind closed doors, be minimal in effect and should be released a few weeks before the start of the season after consultation from the clubs.
Week to week 'focuses' on different rules are utterly confusing and only make me feel as though on the other 22 weeks that particular rule isn't being enforced correctly.
Who knows?
I don't watch many other team sports but I spent a couple of years in the UK and naturally watched the UPL football there and I can't remember ever sitting at a pub over there and discussions regarding the rules being a thing.
I think we as customers of the AFL, and supporters of the game and our clubs should be treated far better in terms of the product being offered.
I don't have the answers but I think commentators need to get back to basics - commentate the game. Umpires likewise need to be seen and not heard. Lastly speculative rule changes should be mooted behind closed doors, be minimal in effect and should be released a few weeks before the start of the season after consultation from the clubs.
Week to week 'focuses' on different rules are utterly confusing and only make me feel as though on the other 22 weeks that particular rule isn't being enforced correctly.
Who knows?
Using the con a incident as an example - it was immediately clear there was no prior opportunity to dispose, so with an effective tackle laid, there were only two potential outcomes - bot entirely dependent on how long the umpire waits to blow the whistle.
So often, a great tackle results in an almost instant whistle, then the next tackle is held for an inordinate amount of time before the umpires whistle.
If it's not instantly holding the ball, the passage of time should not change the umpires decision.
Prior opportunity = holding the ball unless clear disposal. (Get rid of the 'knocked out in the tackle' while we're at it).
No prior opportunity = play on or ball up unless incorrect disposal (ie throw).
So simple, so effective and stops the negative play, rewarding those that can win the hard ball.
So often, a great tackle results in an almost instant whistle, then the next tackle is held for an inordinate amount of time before the umpires whistle.
If it's not instantly holding the ball, the passage of time should not change the umpires decision.
Prior opportunity = holding the ball unless clear disposal. (Get rid of the 'knocked out in the tackle' while we're at it).
No prior opportunity = play on or ball up unless incorrect disposal (ie throw).
So simple, so effective and stops the negative play, rewarding those that can win the hard ball.
Similar threads
