Rules Holding the ball

[standupand]

I'm convinced the HTB rule could be reduced to just 2 pretty simple rules of the game:

1. Incorrect disposal. A player who is in possession of the ball and has had a reasonable opportunity to dispose of the ball, must dispose of it either by kick or handball. If they dispose of it in any other way or if they are dispossesed in a legal tackle, a free-kick shall be paid to the other side.

2. Insufficient intent to keep the ball in play. A player who has possession of the ball and demonstrates insufficient intent to keep the ball in play (either by forcing it over the boundary or by holding or lying on the ball while tackled) shall be penalised by a free-kick to the other side.

That's all there is to it.

 

[richard parker]

Step 1. look closely to see if the ball carrier has prior opportunity

Step 2a. If there isn’t then it will most likely be play on or a ball up.

Step 2b. If there is prior opportunity then if the ball isn’t disposed of correctly then it is a free of some description (eg. Incorrect disposal, holding the ball, insufficient intent…)

Is that correct?

Surely the ball carrier should have as long as they want to dispose of the ball in the tackle if the tackle is a poor one or it doesn’t stick. If a player can break out of a tackle I think they should have every chance to do so even if they are swung around three times.

 

[Hoops]

Step 1. look closely to see if the ball carrier has prior opportunity

Step 2a. If there isn’t then it will most likely be play on or a ball up.

Step 2b. If there is prior opportunity then if the ball isn’t disposed of correctly then it is a free of some description (eg. Incorrect disposal, holding the ball, insufficient intent…)

Is that correct?

Surely the ball carrier should have as long as they want to dispose of the ball in the tackle if the tackle is a poor one or it doesn’t stick. If a player can break out of a tackle I think they should have every chance to do so even if they are swung around three times.

I agree with this if they have a harsher interpretation of prior opportunity

 

[Munga]

Where's the rule for diving for the ball and being tackled immediately (no prior), making a genuine attempt, but always being called "holding the ball"?

Hearing Scott on 360 tonight, I'm not a fan of giving the tackled player time to dispose (if they've had prior). Breaking tackles is great, so was the "bump" before it died, but many of the complaints in recent years have been because of umpires not calling holding the ball early enough, causing the player to be tackled harder to the ground (hello concussions).

If you want to allow more time to break tackles, you're allowing players to tackle harder and longer to prevent it. A contradiction, and I would've thought the AFL was on the side of preventing concussions.

 

[Munga]

I agree mate, it seems the AFL wants the best for both worlds. They know a fend and breaking tackles in an explosive way is entertaining but still want to allow for the player who does these things a chance to dispose of the ball after they've chosen to take on the tackler (had prior opportunity)

I'd be very interested in the hierarchy of decision making behind the scenes in the AFL.

I'm not sure what the optimal final result it, but a consistent holding the ball adjudication is where is should start.

I have no idea what holding the ball is anymore. Tonight I've seen players dive on the ball and tackled, or take on the tackler and get caught, but neither were paid. Then I see one player just receive the ball and get crunched immediately, but that is paid HTB.

NFI

 

[flyinghi64]

I have no idea what holding the ball is anymore. Tonight I've seen players dive on the ball and tackled, or take on the tackler and get caught, but neither were paid. Then I see one player just receive the ball and get crunched immediately, but that is paid HTB.

NFI

Could be different umpires, different interpretations, different grey area. The usual.

 

[Frank Hansen II]

So far it seems they've turned a temporary blind eye to incorrect disposal and just dropping the ball because of the new rule; similar to when they brought in the rule change in 2020 that you had to make a more genuine effort. Players throwing it often and just pushing it out when tackled and being allowed to get away with it.

 

[thedank]

It's always been a coin toss, but this year it's even more ridiculous

 

[Alesana]

Don't think it's been too bad compared to deliberate out of bounds and front on contact

 

[Munga]

Where's the rule for diving for the ball and being tackled immediately (no prior), making a genuine attempt, but always being called "holding the ball"?

Hearing Scott on 360 tonight, I'm not a fan of giving the tackled player time to dispose (if they've had prior). Breaking tackles is great, so was the "bump" before it died, but many of the complaints in recent years have been because of umpires not calling holding the ball early enough, causing the player to be tackled harder to the ground (hello concussions).

If you want to allow more time to break tackles, you're allowing players to tackle harder and longer to prevent it. A contradiction, and I would've thought the AFL was on the side of preventing concussions.

So Brad Scott said he like players trying to break tackles and the umpires will allow for that. Cue Mason Wood trying that same thing and getting a handball away, but the umpire pays holding the ball???!!! WTF are these people doing? NFI

 

[Bird Man]

still hasn't changed need to remove the prior opportunity interpretation

 

[SacksonvilleJags]

Last night’s bris v port game was one of the worst htb calls/ non-calls ever. The amount of players on both sides who were legitimately tackled and had an eternity to get rid of it, just dropping it cold when getting caught or missing the handball or kick that weren’t paid. Also, some tackled immediately without any prior and paid. It was just a shit show. I understand that it is tough to adjudicate but most were not 50/50 calls they straight up were wrong.

 

[Spirit Level]

The new interpretation is so dumb.

The tackler should have to force you to get rid of the ball in order for HTB to be called, if you're getting swung around by the guernsey with your arms still free to dispose to your choice of teammate you should not be pinged.

 

[Cactus_]

Ignoring the actual wording here are the different interpretations of the tackling (which leads to holding the ball) that I can think of...

• Holding the ball / not disposing of the ball quick enough after being tackled
• No prior opportunity / ball locked in after being tackled
• Incorrect disposal (throw / drop) when tackled
• Made a genuine attempt to kick / handball when tackled, but didn’t execute properly with the ball spilling free
• Didn’t make a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball when tackled
• Dragged the ball in prior to being tackled
• Ball knocked out in the tackle
• Correct disposal after being tackled

Have I forgotten any?

No wonder the rule is a mess.

There is one element of the prior opportunity interpretation that really irritates me.

If a player gains possession of the ball and is tackled immediately (and it is a well executed tackle), then no prior, and a ball up - fair enough.

But if a player gains possession of the ball and is tackled immediately (and the tackle is poorly executed, and the player with the ball is immediately tackled by another opposition player), then the first poorly executed tackle that didn’t stick is counted as the player in possession’s prior opportunity - even though they actually had no chance to dispose of the ball - and holding the ball is paid.

It doesn’t happen every game but you’d probably see one or two examples of it every weekend.

I hate it because it punishes the player who is actually playing the ball when they didn’t do anything wrong, and rewards the team of the player who couldn’t stick the first tackle successfully.

Happens to Dusty a fair bit which might be one of the reasons I started noticing it, but happens to lots of the other big bodies mids who can “stand up” in a tackle as well.

Dusty (for example) gets tackled with no prior, half breaks the tackle because of his physical strength, gets claimed by another tackler way before there is a chance to get boot to ball. Free kick against Dusty. The interpretation is basically punishing him for being strong and breaking the tackle. And objectively there has been no prior opportunity . Stoopid umps.