For those that watched the Wiz Cup GF

[Sanecow]

That mark Fevola took when he kicked his opponent in the nuts - is that really allowed? The commentators said "he has to be allowed to defend himself"! It doesn't seem right that you can't lay a hand on an opponent's shoulder to take a mark but you can kick his balls off?

[ScottH]

Kicking the Ball is the main part of the game!! What is wrong with that.

Where does it define "ball" in the rules?

[j s]

That would be OK as long as he was careful to only kick ONE. I'm sure multiple balls are against the rules.

[j s]

Originally posted by Sanecow
That mark Fevola took when he kicked his opponent in the nuts - is that really allowed? The commentators said "he has to be allowed to defend himself"! It doesn't seem right that you can't lay a hand on an opponent's shoulder to take a mark but you can kick his balls off?

Being (a bit more) serious, I think Cow is right. While there is probably no specific rule against it (the rule commonly called "Kicking in danger" maybe) I would think it would come under dangerous play.

[Sanecow]

It really looked to me like the incoming defender was just wanting to punch the ball, but Fevola's intention with the boot had nothing to do with the incoming footy. It is up to the umpires to award a free kick if the spoiler interferes, not up to the player taking the mark to choose to kick the opposition IMHO. Free kick against Fevola is how I saw it, and I wanted the Blues to win.

[NMWBloods]

I think it should be wrong, but it's a standard tactic and it is allowed - I have seen on a number of occasionns players deliberately put their boot into a guy running at them and then take the mark.

[ScottH]

I don't think the intent was to kick him in the nuts. It was to fend off the incoming tackler, to make it more difficult for him to spoil/tackle.

Therefore it is a mark to Fevola.

[Sanecow]

Is it also OK to punch or grab the genitals to fend off an opponent?

[penga]

fevola had eyes for the ball (not balls :)), the intention wasnt too kick him IMO, it was more to get a leg up, which he did effectively. i thought it was well played. FWIW, i like glass and fevola.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Sanecow
Is it also OK to punch or grab the genitals to fend off an opponent?

No - that's using hands. You can pretty much do anything with your legs as long as it looks like you are trying to go for the ball with your hands.

[BonBon]

Originally posted by Sanecow
Is it also OK to punch or grab the genitals to fend off an opponent?
Was that a serious question?

[Sanecow]

fevola had eyes for the ball

It doesn't matter where he was looking - if you kick your opponent, then you kick him - could a striking charge be dropped if you are watching the ball when you hit someone?!? The whole kicking at your opponent thing is going to cause a serious injury to someone unless the AFL does something about it. You heard it here first.

[Tooth Fairy]

Originally posted by Sanecow
It doesn't matter where he was looking - if you kick your opponent, then you kick him - could a striking charge be dropped if you are watching the ball when you hit someone?!? The whole kicking at your opponent thing is going to cause a serious injury to someone unless the AFL does something about it. You heard it here first. Oh FFS! He didn't "kick" anyone. But your concerns are duly noted and we can all now log off and get some sleep.

[Sanecow]

Not a kick?!? Time to cut down the sleeping tablets.

[Tooth Fairy]

Yep. Not a kick.

[Sanecow]

A "controlled leg extension"?

[Rod_]

This is part of the game / rules that I don't like.

A fend with the foot as part of elevation for a mark.... Even if the player has eyes only for the ball I feel it is wrong! I don't know how you would police any changes. But I feel that we don't need this in footy.

The young kids see this and we have a heaps of juniors thinking it is acceptable. (It did intimidate me as a 12 Y/O playing under 15's - big speckies over little kids - not on!) This is something that should be penalised. Free against at least. A defender running in to spoil and gets a gut full of stops - Nah not on!

had my 2 cents worth

Rod_

[ROK Lobster]

...and the full forward could wear a bib with "GA" on it.

[Sanecow]

You should practice your straw man arguments to be less obvious, ROK!

[penga]

FWIW, he didn't kick him in the nads, it was the studs in the upper thigh that made him go down. if fevola had made contact he would've had to have been stretchered off...

[Sanecow]

Yeah, but, you know and that.

[ROK Lobster]

"Step!"

[Sanecow]

You play in a mixed competition, don't you, sissy!

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by Sanecow
You play in a mixed competition, don't you, sissy!
No men in my comp moo.

[Tooth Fairy]

Originally posted by Sanecow
A "controlled leg extension"? Hehehehe exactly

[Tooth Fairy]

Obstruction Wing Attack!

[ROK Lobster]

Don't play your own TF.

[nugget]

Unfortunately didn't see the incident coz I currently live in the UK.

No I was never able to take a speccie but I was always taught to bring my leg up in front of me to protect myself. When I was 17 I was playing full forward and was quite often told that one day I was going to be hammered because I was too exposed. I was taught use the leg in front as a means of protection.

[ScottH]

He didn't bring his leg up in front of him, he stuck it out side ways as that is where the defender was coming from.

[Tooth Fairy]

And the difference being?

[ScottH]

nugget says he was taught to bring his leg up in front, just pointing out that Fev didn't.

[satchmopugdog]

It wasn't obstruction wing attack it was "contact Goal Shooter" and you have to say it in a particularly piercing and bossy voice if you are going to go anywhere in Netball umpiring. So in that case it was a free kick against Fevola as he initiated the contact.
Anne Sargent should be the next big thing in Footy commentating