Holding the ball...

Remove this Banner Ad

Re: Re: Re: Holding the ball...

Originally posted by ThePope
If it is not pinned, then you must attempt a disposal. simple.
Click to expand...

The problem is that this part of the rule is only applied sporadically. How many times do we see a guy (eg: Judd) try to burst through a pack, is unable to get clear so he just holds the ball to his chest. It happens all the time. It's the way the players are taught now.

The holding the ball rule is a farce and a blight on the game. They need to go back to the way it was.
 
On NIRS last night they said that all games were facing this crackdown.
Its good I say,you have to dispose of the ball if you have a chance,not holdon to it,until you can dispose of it to your advantage.I think it freed up the game a lot more,made for less ball ups.
 
If one arm is pinned, you can drop the ball with the other arm, and make contact with your foot.
Commonly called a "kick", and a legitimate disposal I'm led to beleive.

Grayham,

I agree, however it annoying when this happens and the players misses by foot and is done for dropping the ball. With regard to disposal and holding the ball, attempting to dispose and disposal should be grounds for a ball up or play on.

Afterall - the object of a tackle is to ****** your opponent and hopefully create a loose ball, if that is done then the umpire should put his whistle away.

Regards

S. Pete
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I noticed this on Friday night. There were a lot of iffy holding the ball decisions during that game (one of them gifted Lloyd a goal, IIRC). Already I thought 'directive from Gieschen.' Although according to him he doesn't do that.

Heard a bit of yesterday's game, and it was apparently happening there too. And again last night.

Anyone who saw the Burns decision simply could not argue he had prior opportunity. He collected the ball off balance, and it was less than a second before he was pinned and brought to the ground. For Grayham's benefit, the term 'pinned' means that the tackle holds the ball as well as the opponents arms into the body, making a kick (thanks for the explanation) impossible.

If that interpretation holds, it won't be long before players just hang off the ball waiting for someone to pick it up - knowing that any tackle they lay after it will score an easy free.

Appalling umpiring, and detrimental to the game.
 
What I put on the North board -

I saw three games yesterday, one live and two on tv, and I can conclude that the umpiring was a complete joke.
Gieschen must be sacked as there was a CLEAR and DRAMATIC change in interpretation yesterday. All of the sudden, in Round 17, the goalposts have been moved.
There were countless ridiculous holding the ball decisions, although most were at the MCG.
AS the commentators pondered, you do have to allow players the opportunity to attack the ball. Prior opportunity went out the window yesterday, taking possession was deemed as having had prior opportunity.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a blight on our game though, players dragging the ball under themselves and not knocking it free.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I agree, but what we saw yesterday was not player dragging the ball in, but players simply taking possession and then being buried...and then penalised.
It was farcical and reinforces my theory that the Giesch is as good a coach of umpires as he was of players.
 
The Burns decision last night was a shocker, as was one against the Bulldogs later, and the free against Voss (to Lloyd) was also terrible.

In each case the player was tackled as soon as they received the ball - in other rounds this is always a bounce, even if the player just holds the ball in.
 
Originally posted by grayham
If one arm is pinned, you can drop the ball with the other arm, and make contact with your foot.
Commonly called a "kick", and a legitimate disposal I'm led to beleive.
Click to expand...

What are you on about???

Goes without saying. I said ARMS (ie. plural) not ARM.

In a NO PRIOR OPP situation, if the player attempts to kick and misses, it's still play on, because all the player has to do is attempt.

Bob
 
Great to see the umpires ignore the prior opportunity rule. If you have the chance to grab the ball then you also have the chance to punch it on. there is your prior opportunity, if pinged with the ball - free kick. In particular any player who collects the ball while not on their feet should be pinged (if held in a tackle).

Now if they can start ignoring the rule that seperates players going for mark from those going the spoil. why is there a difference as long as the ball is the objective.
 
My concern is the changing interpretations. In the first half of Pies/Bulldogs they picked some scorching frees for holding the ball, real tiggy touchwood stuff, defensible under the rules as written but very extreme. In the second half it was play on all the way.

I felt it favoured Collingwood, and added to the Dogs woes. Very ordinary how the umps interpretations change week to week, between different umps and even for individual umps in the course of a game.

That looks like bad coaching. Bring back Schwab, at least they were more consistent.
 
Originally posted by Cyclops
My concern is the changing interpretations. In the first half of Pies/Bulldogs they picked some scorching frees for holding the ball, real tiggy touchwood stuff, defensible under the rules as written but very extreme. In the second half it was play on all the way.
Click to expand...
The game opened up after half time. There were fewer stoppages. Both sides, particularly Collingwood, moved the ball around rather than trying to crash through. Maybe the lesson was learned.
 
Originally posted by scottywiper
What I put on the North board -

I saw three games yesterday, one live and two on tv, and I can conclude that the umpiring was a complete joke.
Gieschen must be sacked as there was a CLEAR and DRAMATIC change in interpretation yesterday. All of the sudden, in Round 17, the goalposts have been moved.
There were countless ridiculous holding the ball decisions, although most were at the MCG.
Click to expand...

Excellent post - agree entirely. If Mr. Combover comes out this week and says there was no directive to be harsher on holding the ball he is an utter liar.

We aren't idiots - anyone who has watched a game this week knows that the umpires were RED HOT on anyone who made the effort to win contested footy. And there is no doubt players were getting pinged for things they weren't last week.

The Matty Ball and Drew Petrie ones yesterday were just laughable. Fortunately it had no effect on the game, but they were simply shocking decisions. Same with Burns last night.

I see grayham's point about wanting to break the game up, but you can't just suddenly change such an important interpretation after Round 17, and more importantly not inform people about it.

But if Mr. Combover denies there was a directive he should be stabbed.
 
The HTB rule is certainly umpired in bizarre fashions every weekend.

As an example: Bevan runs down a Richmond player from about 20m away. The player drops the ball during a tackle which pins both arms and takes him to the ground. Although he made no attempt to dispose of the ball, and did not dispose of it correctly, the tackle is not properly paid the free. Another Richmond player swwops up the ball and they kick a goal. So I ask: Why on earth would you bother to tackle a player?? Why make the game exciting by making the effort to run a player down??

Counter-example: Luke Ablett slides in to a contested ball on the ground. Milli-seconds later TWO Freo players pile on top of him. No free given for in -the-back or high tackle. But they manage to pluck a HTB out. Obviously because its the the "rule of the week"! There is no way a player with two other on top of him can be expected to correctly dispose of the ball, and there was no prior opportunity.

Maybe the AFL like to "spice is up" a little. Just when you thought you knew all the rules, they decide to change them to keep things interesting :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by dogsbody
There is a difference between a prior opportunity to dispose of the ball and a prior opportunity to dispose of it effectively or to the team advantage. Burns could have pushed the ball on, or handballed it clear but chose to hold it in the tackle because he could not be sure that he could get it to a team mate.
Click to expand...
I just happened to see this decision while i was flicking between this game and the brisbane demolition of adelaide..
At first, i thought the free kick was absolute crap, but with the replay, he had enough time to put his arm up to fend the player off, so he must also have had time to handball it off
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Originally posted by Schneiderman
The HTB rule is certainly umpired in bizarre fashions every weekend.

As an example: Bevan runs down a Richmond player from about 20m away. The player drops the ball during a tackle which pins both arms and takes him to the ground. Although he made no attempt to dispose of the ball, and did not dispose of it correctly, the tackle is not properly paid the free.

Counter-example: Luke Ablett slides in to a contested ball on the ground. Milli-seconds later TWO Freo players pile on top of him. No free given for in -the-back or high tackle. But they manage to pluck a HTB out. Obviously because its the the "rule of the week"! There is no way a player with two other on top of him can be expected to correctly dispose of the ball, and there was no prior opportunity.
Click to expand...

1. Did the player have a prior opportunity to dispose of the football? If no, the correct ruling is PLAY ON. Just because a player runs 20m to tackle, it has nothing to do with whether the player should be 'rewarded'.

15.2.4 Application – Specific instances where play shall continue
For the avoidance of doubt, the field Umpire shall allow play to continue when:-
(c) a Player’s arms are pinned to his or her side by an opponent which causes the Player to drop the football, unless the Player has had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of the football, in which case Law 15.2.3(a) shall apply;

2. The umpire obviously ruled the player dived on the football or dragged it in. (Whether he was right in the ruling is a totally different argument.) In this circumstance, the player must immediately knock the ball clear of his possession. If he can't, then that's just bad luck - HTB. Nothing to do with prior opp.

15.2.5 Diving on Top of the Football
Where a Player is in (sole) possession of the football by reason of diving on top of or dragging the football underneath his or her body, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if he or she does not immediately knock the football clear or Correctly Dispose of the football when Correctly Tackled.

Bob
 
Originally posted by Bob_vic
1. Did the player have a prior opportunity to dispose of the football? If no, the correct ruling is PLAY ON. Just because a player runs 20m to tackle, it has nothing to do with whether the player should be 'rewarded'.

15.2.4 Application – Specific instances where play shall continue
For the avoidance of doubt, the field Umpire shall allow play to continue when:-
(c) a Player’s arms are pinned to his or her side by an opponent which causes the Player to drop the football, unless the Player has had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of the football, in which case Law 15.2.3(a) shall apply;

2. The umpire obviously ruled the player dived on the football or dragged it in. (Whether he was right in the ruling is a totally different argument.) In this circumstance, the player must immediately knock the ball clear of his possession. If he can't, then that's just bad luck - HTB. Nothing to do with prior opp.

15.2.5 Diving on Top of the Football
Where a Player is in (sole) possession of the football by reason of diving on top of or dragging the football underneath his or her body, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if he or she does not immediately knock the football clear or Correctly Dispose of the football when Correctly Tackled.

Bob
Click to expand...
I agree here.
 
A player caught in possession of the ball must dispose of it immediately. If the player cannot dispose of it as when the ball is held to his body, he escapes penalty and the ball is bounced. If the player is unable to dispose of the ball but had an opportunity to dispose of it prior to the tackle, then he will be penalised. The players and the coaches know the rule. In practice, the rule is not observed by the players and their non-observance is often not penalised. Consequently 3 practices have arisen, the last 2 of which lead to ball up after ball up.

The players retains the ball in the tackle until swung in the direction of a team mate and then disposes of it – invariably by handballing it. Sometimes the swing is 180 – 270 degrees

The player holds onto the ball when tackled, goes to ground with it, the tackler and, usually, the player’s team mates then pile on top of the player

The player dives onto a ball on the ground and feigns attempts to punch it clear.

Everyone knows the rule. Umpires are lax in penalising breaches because of the mantra of not paying too many free kicks, of allowing the game to flow and not being seen to make mistakes in the application of the prior opportunity exception.

Over the weekend, a number of decisions were made where the umpires penalised players for breaking the rule. Some umpires tightened up their adjudication of the rule, that’s all. I don’t think there was any change in interpretation. The rule is there, why be surprised if it is enforced. Assuming that Geischen did instruct the umpires to apply the rule, you can hardly sack him for telling the umpires to do their job properly.
 
Originally posted by Bob_vic
No, where there is no prior opp, a player has a REASONABLE TIME / OPPORTUNITY to attempt to dispose of the football.

Bob
Click to expand...
Reasonable opportunity only, Bob. No mention of time. If the ball is held to the player, there is no reasonable opportunity. Otherwise, he must “correctly dispose or attempt to correctly dispose”. An umpire is entitled to ping a player who had no prior opportunity to dispose of it, is tackled and who could have disposed of the ball immediately but did not. That’s what I saw at the Footscray v Collingwood match in the cases of Burns and Gilbee.
 
Originally posted by Bob_vic
No, where there is no prior opp, a player has a REASONABLE TIME / OPPORTUNITY to attempt to dispose of the football.

Bob
Click to expand...
That's what the rule book says.
 
Originally posted by goaldrush
That's what the rule book says.
Click to expand...
The rule doesn't mention time, Goaldrush

15.2.3 Holding the Football – Prior Opportunity/No Prior Opportunity
Where the field Umpire is satisfied that a Player in possession of the football:
(a) has had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if the Player does not Kick or Handball the football immediately when he or she is Correctly Tackled; or
(b) has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if, upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not Correctly Dispose or attempt to Correctly Dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.
 
Originally posted by Zeke
The interpretation of the holding the ball rule is currently a disgrace.

I watched the Hawthorn V Kangaroos match today (no idea why) and some of the holding the ball decisions were unbelievable. There have already been a few tonight.

It will get to the stage where players will not want to take possession of the ball in traffic. Players are taught to put their head over the pill, but get penalised for it.

Very bad for football.
Click to expand...

Zeke you idiot...read the rule book

it is styraight forward and there should be NO INTERPRETATION..

there is no grey with the holding the ball rule

If tackeld (with no prior oppotunuty) you must ATTEMPT to dispose of the ball.

Just because the umps haven't been calling it it doesnt make them wrong now

It makes them wrong then but right now.
 
Originally posted by NorthBhoy
Get a look at the decision paid against Mat Ball in todays game.

Disgraceful. Petrie was actually laughing.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was.

The Sinclair one was the worst though, was swamped the second he got the footy by a couple of Hawks, and was penalised immediately - and was rightfully livid too.

What annoyed me more was the leniency seemed to change throughout the game. Not only was the interpretation facical, there was no consistent interpretation.
 
Originally posted by dogsbody
The rule doesn't mention time, Goaldrush

15.2.3 Holding the Football – Prior Opportunity/No Prior Opportunity
Where the field Umpire is satisfied that a Player in possession of the football:
(a) has had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if the Player does not Kick or Handball the football immediately when he or she is Correctly Tackled; or
(b) has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if, upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not Correctly Dispose or attempt to Correctly Dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.
Click to expand...

Reasonable opportunity = Reasonable time. Opportunity is mostly regarded in length of time.

It's just a matter of words. Older rule books say reasonable time. The application is the same.

Bob
 
Originally posted by dogsbody
Reasonable opportunity only, Bob. No mention of time. If the ball is held to the player, there is no reasonable opportunity. Otherwise, he must “correctly dispose or attempt to correctly dispose”. An umpire is entitled to ping a player who had no prior opportunity to dispose of it, is tackled and who could have disposed of the ball immediately but did not. That’s what I saw at the Footscray v Collingwood match in the cases of Burns and Gilbee.
Click to expand...

Read post above.

Ok guys. READ THE WHOLE RULE (and related rule interpretations) IN ITS ENTIRITY. Your understanding of the rule is skew if. Happy reading... (I bet most of the people on this board couldn't keep up their attention to read the whole thing!)

15.2.3 Holding the Football – Prior Opportunity/No Prior Opportunity
Where the field Umpire is satisfied that a Player in possession of the football:
(a) has had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if the Player does not Kick or Handball the football immediately when he or she is Correctly Tackled; or
(b) has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if, upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not Correctly Dispose or attempt to Correctly Dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.
(c) A player who takes possession of the football at a (straight) bounce or throw by a field umpire or at a boundary throw in, shall be regarded as having had prior opportunity.

15.2.4 Application – Specific instances where play shall continue
For the avoidance of doubt, the field Umpire shall allow play to continue when:-
(a) a Player is bumped and the football falls from the Player’s hands;
(b) a Player’s arm is knocked which causes the Player to lose possession of the football;
(c) a Player’s arms are pinned to his or her side by an opponent which causes the Player to drop the football, unless the Player has had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of the football, in which case Law 15.2.3(a) shall apply;
(d) a Player, whilst in the act of Kicking or Handballing, is swung off balance and does not make contact with the football by either foot or hand, unless the Player has had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of the football, in which case Law 15.2.3(a) shall apply; or
(e) a Player is pulled or swung by one arm which causes the football to fall from the Player’s hands, unless the Player has had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of the football, in which case Law 15.2.3(a) shall apply.

15.2.5 Diving on Top of the Football
Where a Player is in possession of the football by reason of diving on top of or dragging the football underneath his or her body, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if he or she does not immediately knock the football clear or Correctly Dispose of the football when Correctly Tackled.

15.2.6 Football held to the body of a Player
The field Umpire shall bounce the football when a Player, in the act of applying a Correct Tackle, holds the football to the body of the Player being Tackled or the football is otherwise pinned to the ground, unless the Player being Tackled has had a prior opportunity to Correctly Dispose of the football, in which case Law 15.2.3(a) shall apply.

15.3 FREE KICKS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF THE FOOTBALL
15.3.1 Correct Disposal
A Player Correctly disposes of the football if he or she Kicks or Handballs the football.

15.3.2 Incorrect Disposal and Payment of Free Kick
When the football is in play, a Free Kick shall be awarded against a Player who Throws the football or hands the football to another Player.

15.2 FREE KICKS RELATING TO POSSESSION OF THE FOOTBALL
15.2.1 In Possession of the Football
A Player is in possession of the football if, in the opinion of the field Umpire:-
(a) the Player is holding or otherwise has control of the football;
(b) the Player is in the act of bouncing the football; or
(c) the Player dives or lies on top of or drags the football underneath his or her body.

15.2.2 Remaining in Possession and Bouncing the Football
(a) A Player may remain in possession of the football for any length of time:
(i) unless the Player is Correctly Tackled by an opponent; or

11.3 BOUNCING THE FOOTBALL
11.3.1 Centre Square and Bouncing the Ball
The field Umpire shall bounce the football on the occasions and at the position on the Playing Surface as set out in the table below:-

Occasion-Position on Playing Surface
Where the football has become trapped as two or more opposing Players struggle for possession of the football.-Where the football becomes trapped.
When a Player, who has claimed to have taken a Mark which is not awarded by the field Umpire, is Correctly Tackled by an opponent, provided the field Umpire is of the opinion that the Player did not hear or see the field Umpire’s signal of "Touched Play On" or "Play On".-Where the player is correctly tackled.

15.4 FREE KICK –PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED PHYSICAL CONTACT
15.4.1 Correct Tackle or Correctly Tackled
(a) For the purposes of these Laws, a Player executes a tackle correctly if:-
(i) the Player being held is in possession of the ball; and
(ii) that Player is held (either by the body or playing uniform) below the shoulders and above the knees.
(b) For the avoidance of doubt, a tackle may be executed correctly by holding a Player from the front, side or behind, provided that a Player held from behind is not pushed in the back.

Spirit of the Law: Tackling (Player in Possession of the Ball)

"The player who has possession of the ball and is held by an opponent shall be given a reasonable time to kick or handball the ball."

All illegal tackles are to penalised.

Legal tackle or bump causes dispossession – play on.

A player forfeits the benefits afforded by the spirit of the law if he:

Elects to dive on the ball, or when on the ground, elects to drag the ball in, and he is tackled legally.

Bounces the ball prior to being tackled.

Has had prior opportunity to dispose of the ball before being tackled. In such cases the player in possession is penalised if he fails to legally dispose of the ball by either kick or handball.

Bob

P.S. Just another reminder. If the player has NO PRIOR OPP and has the ball trapped to his body or ground straight away, with no opportunity to attempt to dispose, IT IS A BOUNCE. This is the fundemental reason why a lot of the HTB decisions on the weekend were plain wrong.

About one of the only decisions that WAS right was Vozzo's decision on Friday night, where the ball was not trapped to the player's body or ground, and the player made no attempt to dispose when legally tackled. (Vozzo was also adimate that the player did see/hear his play on call for the attempted mark.)

THE PHILOSOPHY

PRIOR OPPORTUNITY: The player gets his reasonable time (opportunity) to dispose BEFORE the tackle. Therefore, when the player is tackled, he MUST dispose of the ball CORRECTLY, as IMMEDIATELY AS POSSIBLE.

NO PRIOR OPPORTUNITY: The player gets his reasonable time (opportunity) to ATTEMPT to dispose, AFTER he gets tackled. Therefore, any legitimate attempt or dislodging of the ball caused by the tackler, WITHIN THIS REASONABLE TIME, is a PLAY ON call. Of course, if the player holds onto the ball for more than a reasonable time, when the ball isn't held to the body of the player or the ground, it's HTB because the player has made no legitimate attempt (including faking) to kick or handball.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Holding the ball...

Similar threads

nut
Holding the ball decision
Replies
0
Views
298
nut
nut
LordLucifer
Rules Today's Pathetic Kneejerk Reaction To The "Holding The Ball" Backlash
2 3
Replies
54
Views
2K
Eshay187
Eshay187
Foxx
The old holding the ball rules were better.
Replies
12
Views
689
Stamos
Stamos
GoEaglesGoSGIO
Matt Rowell and holding the ball
Replies
14
Views
869
DocSholl
DocSholl
Always Ballin
Who is the best mark of the ball ever?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
3K
HairyO
HairyO
M
change the ball
Replies
6
Views
351
CURVE
CURVE
Bjo187
Slippery ball ruins the spectacle... again!
Replies
12
Views
726
Shane Heard
Shane Heard

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top