Rushed behinds in AFL

[bennymacca]

Discussion of the rushed behind rule in the other thread got me thinking about a separate discussion I had the other day

Can you think of another game where you get a lesser score for conceding an "own goal" than actually kicking one yourself?

Off the top of my head I can't think of one.

Making a rushed point worth 6 would certainly liven the game up around the goal line.

It could also be used to remove the ambiguity around touched off the boot etc as this would now be irrelevant.

A further extension would be removing the requirement for the attacking team to kick the ball through but this would change the game a lot and would probably lead to rolling maul type situations near goals.

As a result you would still have different scores for attacking and defending teams punching or running the ball over which might not do away with the ambiguity at all.

Thought it was a decent discussion point even though I don't think it will ever be implemented.

Are there any other games that score differently in that regard?

[carey]

"If it aint broken don't fix it"

[bennymacca]

Doesn't mean we still can't have a discussion around this.

Two big advantages would be no rushed behinds anymore, and no silly video review to check inconclusively whether a ball was touched at all.

If it goes through the goal it's a goal is much simpler.

As I said though it has the potential to introduce other problems.

[reppoh_eht]

If it goes through the goal it's a goal is much simpler.

And also a totally different game...

Going by your statements, we may as well allow all marks to count even if they are touched.

Understand you were only after a discussion, but if you think what you wrote has merit then I reckon you are following the wrong sport.

[bennymacca]

No I don't think it has merit, for the reasons you mentioned. But it is still a unique quirk of our game.

Still can't think of another game that has a different scoring method for "own goals" though.

Actually just though of one - a safety in gridiron.

[Booney]

Under this ruling, a touched kick would still count as a goal if it goes through?

[bennymacca]

Under this ruling, a touched kick would still count as a goal if it goes through?

probably not no - which in a way it would simplify the game a ton, and get rid of ambiguities. as a corollary - imagine if soccer had a rule where if it was touched it wasnt a goal.

its not unprecedented in games similar to ours either - in gaelic football (and also in the international rules) you can punch the ball through and it is still a goal.

they get around the whole rolling maul on the goal line thingy by having a goal keeper (and also because unders are worth more)

[Booney]

Is a mark a mark if the ball is touched off the boot?

[bennymacca]

Is a mark a mark if the ball is touched off the boot?

this is where it gets complex, and where one rule has so many flow on effects that it probably cant ever be implemented, and would change the fabric of the game.

(i dont think they have marks in gaelic do they?)

[bennymacca]

i guess you could still have touched for field kicking but not for goals? that then seems a little silly.

[nuggety goodness]

This is just one of the 'quirks' that make our game so unique. Barring gaelic show me another sport that you get a point for missing the goal...
Basically, good try, here's a point for your efforts! But it's why we love it...

[bennymacca]

Gaelic don't have point posts either, they just have overs and goals. (Though I guess overs is kind of like a behind in afl)

[HH3]

No, overs are the standard goal, unders are like Super goals, if you wanna look at that scoring system.

You would only go for unders in one on one contests with the goalie. Any other time, you aim for an over. Which makes it not like a point in AFL, which is considered a miss.

If what you are suggesting was even discussed by anyone involved with running the AFL, i would never watch a game again.

There is no problem with the current scoring system. Even if there was, do you think they wouldn't find another "problem" to "fix" just so there was a job for someones mate who has nothing to do after finishing playing/coaching.

These discussions (even hypothetical ones) annoy the shit out of me.

Why compare this sport to other sports? They are not related to each other and dont need to function the same way. If you wanna play a sport where an own goal counts as a full score, watch/play soccer.

[Wedgie]

Discussion of the rushed behind rule in the other thread got me thinking about a separate discussion I had the other day

Can you think of another game where you get a lesser score for conceding an "own goal" than actually kicking one yourself?

Off the top of my head I can't think of one.

Making a rushed point worth 6 would certainly liven the game up around the goal line.

It could also be used to remove the ambiguity around touched off the boot etc as this would now be irrelevant.

A further extension would be removing the requirement for the attacking team to kick the ball through but this would change the game a lot and would probably lead to rolling maul type situations near goals.

As a result you would still have different scores for attacking and defending teams punching or running the ball over which might not do away with the ambiguity at all.

Thought it was a decent discussion point even though I don't think it will ever be implemented.

Are there any other games that score differently in that regard?

Good and should be applied retrospectively so Geelong won the 2008 GF by about 10 goals

[jackpot jim]

These discussions (even hypothetical ones) annoy the shit out of me.

Why compare this sport to other sports? They are not related to each other and dont need to function the same way. If you wanna play a sport where an own goal counts as a full score, watch/play soccer.

Couldn't agree more !

[carey]

No, overs are the standard goal, unders are like Super goals, if you wanna look at that scoring system.

You would only go for unders in one on one contests with the goalie. Any other time, you aim for an over. Which makes it not like a point in AFL, which is considered a miss.

If what you are suggesting was even discussed by anyone involved with running the AFL, i would never watch a game again.

There is no problem with the current scoring system. Even if there was, do you think they wouldn't find another "problem" to "fix" just so there was a job for someones mate who has nothing to do after finishing playing/coaching.

These discussions (even hypothetical ones) annoy the shit out of me.

Why compare this sport to other sports? They are not related to each other and dont need to function the same way. If you wanna play a sport where an own goal counts as a full score, watch/play soccer.

Very well said my good man....

[bennymacca]

No, overs are the standard goal, unders are like Super goals, if you wanna look at that scoring system.

You would only go for unders in one on one contests with the goalie. Any other time, you aim for an over. Which makes it not like a point in AFL, which is considered a miss.

If what you are suggesting was even discussed by anyone involved with running the AFL, i would never watch a game again.

There is no problem with the current scoring system. Even if there was, do you think they wouldn't find another "problem" to "fix" just so there was a job for someones mate who has nothing to do after finishing playing/coaching.

These discussions (even hypothetical ones) annoy the shit out of me.

Why compare this sport to other sports? They are not related to each other and dont need to function the same way. If you wanna play a sport where an own goal counts as a full score, watch/play soccer.

your life must be very boring if you cant even discuss some random hypothetical without acting like a tool about it.

[PatowalongaPirate]

No, overs are the standard goal, unders are like Super goals, if you wanna look at that scoring system.

You would only go for unders in one on one contests with the goalie. Any other time, you aim for an over. Which makes it not like a point in AFL, which is considered a miss.

If what you are suggesting was even discussed by anyone involved with running the AFL, i would never watch a game again.

There is no problem with the current scoring system. Even if there was, do you think they wouldn't find another "problem" to "fix" just so there was a job for someones mate who has nothing to do after finishing playing/coaching.

These discussions (even hypothetical ones) annoy the shit out of me.

Why compare this sport to other sports? They are not related to each other and dont need to function the same way. If you wanna play a sport where an own goal counts as a full score, watch/play soccer.

your life must be very boring if you cant even discuss some random hypothetical without acting like a tool about it.

Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them a tool.

[HH3]

How am i acting like a tool?

I explained the gaelic scoring system you brought up, because I actually play gaelic and know a little bit about the tactics.

And then I gave my opinion on your hypothetical discussion. Nowhere did i even mention you, so taking it personally enough to call me a tool is pretty amazing to me.

Everyone agree with Benny and close the thread.

There....thats me being a tool.

[cracka]

Didn't the AFL trial a rushed behind being worth 3 points years ago in the pre season comp.