Rule Changes

[gadj1976]

The current rules/interpretations of:
Holding the Ball - disgrace
Out of Bounds Deliberate - so what if the ball goes out of bounds for a few seconds?
Interchange Rule - ridiculous.
High contact when the player deliberately ducks.
When the non-controlling umpire picks out a free in the course of the play that the controlling umpire misses. Fair enough if it is off the ball, but if it is in play, then stay out of it.
Calling play-on when a player dares to bend his knees sidewards. But then the defending player anticipates this and is penalised 50 metres for the most ridiculously small infringements. The AFL wants to keep the game moving, but by paying these decisions actually holds it up for longer.
Ball has to travel 15 metres for a mark. Do not see how the point of this or how it has enhanced the games at all, and even after 10 years it still confuses umpires and players, not occasionally, but in every game.
Suspending players for the Buddy Franklin-Ben Cousins type of bump a couple of years ago.

Apart from cracking down on the bump when the player has his head over the ball, I can't think of one rule change in the past 15 years that has not been needless.

Holding the ball is an odd one. My thoughts are still that if you lay the perfect tackle, it should be rewarded, regardless of prior opportunity. A player can take possession of the ball in traffic, know that they're going to get tackled and also know that they're not going to get pinged.

The one where players lie on the ground and hold it in and then get rewarded is ridiculous.

Jeff Gieschen is on SEN saying that the player is given (quote) "a reasonable amount of time" (unquote). How the F*** is that umpire-able?

Deliberate out of bounds - scrubby kicks and taps to the line, fair enough but not the one where Montagna kicks it 80m and it dribbles out. The game is too fast - we saw that last night with both sides struggling to raise a gallop in the last quarter. So having more throw ins isn't going to stop the spectacle IMO.

Interchange.....just don't even get me started on this one.....

Kick ins - change it back so that the flags have to be waved FFS. If you want contests, there is one solution.

50's are a joke too. Too pedantic.

[FlyingHigh]

Apart from cracking down on the bump when the player has his head over the ball, I can't think of one rule change in the past 15 years that has not been needless.

'Chopping the arms' and 'hands in the back' have both been good rule changes as before they were an infringement they encouraged lazy football.

Yep, good call on the chopping-the-arms.
Reckon the hands-in-the-back is 50-50. Has improved the game to a certain extent, but as always gone too far and some are now incredibly soft or even good body work, plus the players act it up just as much now. hate it when a player might me trailing by a yard, the player in front props, so he puts his hand out in protection, slightly touching the leading player, and this is paid a free.
The other one I reckon they are too harsh on is when the player comes from the front in a mark and there is just minor contact.

[FlyingHigh]

Holding the Ball - disgrace.

Holding the ball is an odd one. My thoughts are still that if you lay the perfect tackle, it should be rewarded, regardless of prior opportunity. A player can take possession of the ball in traffic, know that they're going to get tackled and also know that they're not going to get pinged.

The one where players lie on the ground and hold it in and then get rewarded is ridiculous.

Can't believe Trengove gets suspended for two games for laying a tackle, but if a player finds himself on the ground with the ball, the opposition get rewarded for a "tackle" of laying their knees into his back or head.