AFL Rd 15 2022 Post Game Postulations Carlton vs Fremantle

[kruddler]

What's the rule that says that?

Not sure if there is a written rule or not, but the logic follow this.
His intention was to spoil first and foremost, NOT hit the ball out of bounds.

[Lods]

Not sure if there is a written rule or not, but the logic follow this.
His intention was to spoil first and foremost, NOT hit the ball out of bounds.

As far as I can see it is not a rule.
I'll stand corrected if you can find it.

Often the intent of the spoiling player is obviously to force the ball out of play.

Rule 18.10.2 (b)  Kicks, Handballs or 'forces'  the football over the Boundary Line...

is a rule and seems quite clear.

It should be a free kick if the intention of the player  (in the opinion of the umpire) is to put the ball over the boundary line.

It happens every week.

[kruddler]

As far as I can see it is not a rule.
I'll stand corrected if you can find it.

Often the intent of the spoiling player is obviously to force the ball out of play.

Rule 18.10.2 (b)  Kicks, Handballs or 'forces'  the football over the Boundary Line...

is a rule and seems quite clear.

It should be a free kick if the intention of the player  (in the opinion of the umpire) is to put the ball over the boundary line.

It happens every week.

I think i've heard this discussed by an umpire.

As mentioned, you intention is to spoil. It cannot be deliberate if its a spoil.

If you start paying that then you get players holding back on their spoils so they don't get pinged for deliberate, which means the ball is more likely to be marked.

[kruddler]

18.5 MARKING CONTESTS
18.5.1 Spirit and Intention
The Player whose sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark shall be permitted to do so

[Lods]

I think i've heard this discussed by an umpire.

As mentioned, you intention is to spoil. It cannot be deliberate if its a spoil.

If you start paying that then you get players holding back on their spoils so they don't get pinged for deliberate, which means the ball is more likely to be marked.

Rather than worrying about introducing new rules like 'last touch', just enforce the rules as they are .
The onus should be on the spoiling player to make the spoil sure, but also keep the ball in play not deliberately knock it out of bounds.
There is a difference between a spoil that goes to ground and rolls out and one that gets deliberately knocked twenty metres into the stand.

18.5 MARKING CONTESTS
18.5.1 Spirit and Intention
The Player whose sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark shall be permitted to do so

Yep that's fair
The key words are "sole objective" and when you deliberately knock it over the line it's no longer a sole objective.
It becomes a spoil and a reset

[kruddler]

Rather than worrying about introducing new rules like 'last touch', just enforce the rules as they are .
The onus should be on the spoiling player to make the spoil sure, but also keep the ball in play not deliberately knock it out of bounds.
There is a difference between a spoil that goes to ground and rolls out and one that gets deliberately knocked twenty metres into the stand.

Yep that's fair
The key words are "sole objective" and when you deliberately knock it over the line it's no longer a sole objective.
It becomes a spoil and a reset

How many times have you seen someone wind up with a huge round arm spoil that could knock someone's head off, but the player still clunks the mark. Think Levi, when he got his hands to it, a bazooka couldn't dislodge it. Thats one reason why you can put it into the outer.

FWIW, i'm not sure why you are fixating on this rule. It might happen once a round. It doesn't hold up play or delay a game so why would you need to penalise it?

[madbluboy]

In the SANFL all of the deliberate kicks are paid and all of the accidental kicks are paid.
In the AFL some of the deliberate kicks are paid and some of the accidental kicks are paid.

You could not argue that the AFL system is better.

[Lods]

How many times have you seen someone wind up with a huge round arm spoil that could knock someone's head off, but the player still clunks the mark. Think Levi, when he got his hands to it, a bazooka couldn't dislodge it. Thats one reason why you can put it into the outer.

FWIW, i'm not sure why you are fixating on this rule. It might happen once a round. It doesn't hold up play or delay a game so why would you need to penalise it?

It does hold up play.
It causes a stoppage and a throw in.
If it was a free kick it might cause players to modify their spoiling and keep the ball in play.
At the very least redirect the spoil.
I think it probably happens much more than once a round.
Watch it in our next game.

I guess I'm fixating on it because it seems a bit inconsistent to penalise a 'dubious' deliberate out of bounds with a kick.
Yet a definite 'deliberate'  punch of the ball out of bounds is fine.

If we're going to seriously look at 'last touch' either by hand or foot then all these will be free kicks anyway under that rule.

[WASurfer]

Upshot of all this....leave the rules as they are. Introducing more rule changes with grey areas just infuriates fans when you see different interpretations on the same infringement week after week.

[DJC]

Upshot of all this....leave the rules as they are. Introducing more rule changes with grey areas just infuriates fans when you see different interpretations on the same infringement week after week.

Absolutely! 

Apart from changes that protect players’ health and safety, the only rule changes should be to wind back the rule changes/interpretations that have come in over the last decade.