Its the "No Nic Nat Paddy Wack Rule"
Its the "No Nic Nat Paddy Wack Rule"
CIA Agent to Policeman: "Have you ever had anti-terrorist training?"
Policeman: "Yes, I was married once."
Originally Posted by Matimbo
He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)
Thanks Dennis
Loose translation from the Latin is - I am tall, so I hit out.
for that one!
Mumford will have some difficulties with this...you may see Starling play round 1
Staying ahead of the game...
It is going to have no effect on centre square bounces, which is where the primary tactic our rucks applied against the West Coast had an effect, There is already no contact at centre square bounces between rucks before the ball is bounced.
Other rule changes:
The following rule interpretations have also been tightened to help alleviate congestion and encourage quick ball movement and genuine marking contests:
?Stricter enforcement of protected area around the player with the ball - a) if in protected area, opposition player must remain passive and b) can only enter protected area if within two metres of opponent (amended from five metres);
?Protect ball player by awarding a free kick for 'in the back?'or 'high contact' against a player who sits or lies on top of a tackled opponent (having an arm across is permitted);
?Stricter interpretation of holding the ball where a player is tackled but doesn?t make a genuine attempt to kick or handball (including throwing/dropping/placing the ball);
?Free kick against a player for dragging or pushing the ball back under their opponent (as per previous NAB Cup trials);
?Paying free kicks for blocking infringements that interfere with marking contests and umpires to review their positioning to achieve a better balance between detecting infringements at stoppages and infringements occurring within the end zones;
?Reduce time allowed for kick ins to 5-6 seconds (from when flags are waved) to be consistent with kicks around the ground.
Nothing like a good light bulb moment.
Some of the these rule changes on their own look quite good, but I am still confused about the overall strategy of the AFL and the Laws of the Game Committee. What game are they trying to reproduce exactly? Did it ever exist? Was there a time when all games played were of the standard that they think can be reintroduced or reinvented?
I remember Kevin Bartlett once saying that in order to create more contests (not stoppages, but one-on-one contests) the game needed to be slowed down - and the best way to slow the game down was to speed it up. I was confused then, and I am confused now.
This is one area of the AFL that really frustrates me. Why can't they just let the game evolve naturally. Every decade since the game began (over 150 years ago) has been played a little bit differently.
Half the rules in the list above are not really changes to the laws of the game anyway, they are just directions for their enforcement, which essentially means that there are always two forces at work in any given AFL game: the rules of football as written in the Laws of the Game - and how umpires are directed to apply them. No wonder fans get frustrated.
The most important rule change is the new 10 meter Big AL exclusion zone around the Powerade girl.....
The most important rule change is the new 10 meter Big AL exclusion zone around the Powerade girl.....
I would like them to have a look at one additional aspect of the ruck contests. That is the third man up . LRT was attempting to be the third man up in the last 1/4 of the GF and almost every time a Hawthorn player (Isaac Smith) was blocking his run
Being 3rd man up is totally legal...but you shouldnt be able to block that player if your intention is not to also go for the ruck contest.
As for the Rules Committee...I have so little time for Kevin Bartlett...who complains about the number of stoppages in the GF and how it detracts from the game (makes it like Under 9 football...the same game that has been lauded by many as one of the greatest GFs of all time
Red and white till I die
All true. One wonders whether the "Laws of the Game" Committee's existence isn't the primary necessity for fiddling with the "Laws of the Game." It wouldn't be the first committee to justify it's existence in such a way.
And frankly having Bartlett making pronouncements on contested football is a little like asking a fish about it's opinion of bicycles.
Loose translation from the Latin is - I am tall, so I hit out.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks