AFL Rd 15 2022 Post Game Postulations Carlton vs Fremantle

[Thryleon]

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.

Or we could just can the deliberate kick altogether.

If you are skilful enough to bounce the ball inside the lines, then a throw in ensues, thats a genuine tactic to help get out of defense and prevent repeat entries.

[DJC]

Or we could just can the deliberate kick altogether.

If you are skilful enough to bounce the ball inside the lines, then a throw in ensues, thats a genuine tactic to help get out of defense and prevent repeat entries.

Yes Thry, a kick out of defence that landed millimeters inside the boundary line before bouncing out was a sublime skill, particularly when it was disguised as a miss-kick.

I think I’d prefer no deliberate out of bounds to the last kick rule.  However, umpires should be able to determine blatantly deliberate out of bounds.  That would be better than the current “insufficient intent” interpretation.

[cookie2]

Or we could just can the deliberate kick altogether.

If you are skilful enough to bounce the ball inside the lines, then a throw in ensues, thats a genuine tactic to help get out of defense and prevent repeat entries.

I don't know which is worse, the current farce or the introduction of a licence to "kick for touch" with the resulting increase in stoppages.

[kruddler]

I don't know which is worse, the current farce or the introduction of a licence to "kick for touch" with the resulting increase in stoppages.

It depends what you want.

The 'look' of the game is the driving factor of the AFL and its clear they want less stoppages.

However, from an 'evenness' point of view, having the ability to deliberately put the ball over the line opens up a whole set of tactics available to coaches and a more diverse style of game plans available.
The more diverse styles available, the more of a chance a team can win on any given day. That is, one style of play can outdo a different style of play. Whereas if everyone is playing the same style, one team will always be better at it.

[LP]

We've got a team that wins via domination over stoppages, and the current AFL administration wants to remove/diminish stoppages as part of the game, that change could not be worse for us as players like Cripps, Hewett and Kennedy will be involved in less play.

From my perspective, the current balance in the rules of the game and the speed of play is just about right, across the competition we've got midfielders getting 30+ possessions, small forwards kicking goals and KPFs taking marks. I think they should just leave the game alone for a few seasons to see where it settles.

There is too much politics in the way the AFL fiddles with the rules, it is nearly always due to one coach or club executive having the ear of the AFL authorities to change rules to favour a list. The debate is further driven by the AFL media, and it's rarely impartial because it's not even close to being representative!

[Mav]

Consistency is overrated. Apply it religiously and it will set start a chain reaction that will result in perverse results. Fatprick Smith used to argue that the AFL’s changes to the bump rule to protect the head (with which he agreed) required the AFL to bring in similar changes regarding marking contests. He believed that a guy like Naughton who flies into a pack should be banned if his hip or knee contacts the head of anyone in the pack. For him, outlawing the  Byron Pickett pick-off should lead to a ban on pack marks.

Excluding spoiling from the deliberate out of bounds penalty isn’t confusing. Only the dimwitted players think they’re allowed to intercept a handball by punching it 10 rows back. And it’s not such a regular occurrence that it needs to be addressed. You could even argue the ability of a defender to spoil over the boundary provides a disincentive to teams that hit up targets close to the boundary to reduce their exposure on turnovers. But such justifications aren’t necessary. All we have to do is recognise that a rule change doesn’t have to result in the domino effect forcing a chain of consequential changes. Enjoy the messiness of the game rather than seeing it through the eyes of an OCD sufferer.

[Professer E]

Spoiling over the boundary line is a skill, hate to see it lost to the game. 

Who gives a flying....  what Patrick Smith thinks anyway.  Bloke was irrelevant 20 years ago. .

[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.

[ElwoodBlues1]

The Fisher out of bounds deliberate free kick tonight was garbage, he may have been facing the boundary line but the ball was miskicked not deliberately aimed for the boundary line.

[shawny]

The Fisher out of bounds deliberate free kick tonight was garbage, he may have been facing the boundary line but the ball was miskicked not deliberately aimed for the boundary line.

Totally agree. The umps have no idea about this rule. To make it easier for their pea brains should just be any kick that is not touched and that does not have a player within 20 metres of it is a free to the opposition. Need to take the thinking out of it cause they have no feel for the game these blokes.