Time In Possession

[JK]

I'm probably just not aware of a ruling, or why it's in place, so Im hoping you guys can help me out.

Scenario 1 - A player marks inside 50 of their own goal and seems to get about 30 seconds (including a reminder of 10 seconds remaining from the ump) before they have to move the ball on.

Scenario 2 - A team is running the clock down, and one of their player's takes a mark in the back 50 ... They seem to only have between 5-10 seconds before the ball has to be moved on.

Where is the consistency in this?

[Rik E Boy]

I'll get the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus to explain it to you Permstance. You must believe in both if you are expecting consistency from umpires.

regards,

REB

[JK]

I'll get the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus to explain it to you Permstance. You must believe in both if you are expecting consistency from umpires.

regards,

REB

LOL I do, and I await their replies ... Doesn't seem as though the problem stems from the umpires, moreso the rules or the direction given to the umpires.

Did Ottens come off his mark in the last quarter yesterday, or will you need the EB or SC aswell?

[Dutchy]

Someone should mark the ball 90 metres out and go through their goal shooting routine and argue they are having a shot at goal!

[redden whites]

Good points gents, watching the fox games on active with commentary off I am staggered how quickly and often you hear play-on called in general play.No wonder the easy chip kick across or behind has evolved into the game it is just called play on too quickly IMHO.

[Hondo]

Players kicking for goal are allowed 30 seconds to do their thing ... it was the compromise in the crack-down on excessive amounts of time being spent by forwards kicking set shots such as Lloyd who used to spend 5 minutes (or so it felt like at times ) throwing blades of grass in the air, pulling up his socks, etc, etc ............ etc

I don't think that 'concession' applies to any other part of the ground - and fair enough too I reckon.

I personally don't want to see forwards rushing their set shots nor do I want to see defenders taking 30 seconds to move the ball on. So I guess I am OK with how it works at the moment. So long as the defenders get a reasonable amount of time to kick - 5 seconds is too fast

[RoosterMarty]

Someone should mark the ball 90 metres out and go through their goal shooting routine and argue they are having a shot at goal!

That is an excellent idea. It is ridiculous how in defence you can almost get asked to play on before marking it yet forwards can take as long as they like. I would lose it if somebody did place the ball on the ground, pull their socks up.. throw some grass in the air.. while standing in the middle of the ground (especially if they were kicking into the wind).

[Stumps]

Someone should mark the ball 90 metres out and go through their goal shooting routine and argue they are having a shot at goal!

Maybe that was what blighty was doing- and he just happened to get onto it

[JK]

I don't think that 'concession' applies to any other part of the ground - and fair enough too I reckon.

I personally don't want to see forwards rushing their set shots nor do I want to see defenders taking 30 seconds to move the ball on. So I guess I am OK with how it works at the moment. So long as the defenders get a reasonable amount of time to kick - 5 seconds is too fast

Appreciate your points Hondo, but it allows for inconsistencies in 2 cases:

1. Lloydy marks inside 50, uses close to his allotted 30 seconds and then rather than kicking for goal, dishes off anyway (most likely backward if running clock down) ... (ok, so Lloydy dishing off might be a bad example lol)

2. When trying to run the clock down a team will be forced to move it on in less time anywhere on the ground other than their forward 50

I guess there's no perfect solution to it, I certainly don't have an answer, but it just seems an odd anomaly to me.

[Hondo]

Appreciate your points Hondo, but it allows for inconsistencies in 2 cases:

1. Lloydy marks inside 50, uses close to his allotted 30 seconds and then rather than kicking for goal, dishes off anyway (most likely backward if running clock down) ... (ok, so Lloydy dishing off might be a bad example lol)

2. When trying to run the clock down a team will be forced to move it on in less time anywhere on the ground other than their forward 50

I guess there's no perfect solution to it, I certainly don't have an answer, but it just seems an odd anomaly to me.

A possible scenario but how often do you see teams wasting time in their own forward line in the last few minutes? Usually there's 34 players in the area and a shot for goal is something teams most times would take rather than try to pass it off in the conjestion to buy another 30 seconds.

One of the suggested rule changes for next year is automatic play on from backwards kicks in the defensive 50 so that gives you an idea of where the AFL are thinking.

I thought most of us hated the backwards-kicking / time-wasting / tempo football stuff anyway? Move it along I say why do you need 30 seconds to kick across your defensive 50 to an un-marked player?

[smac]

The simple answer to your final question Hondo is "to keep the ball away from port and stop the mogrels winning in the last few seconds, AGAIN".

[JK]

Appreciate your points Hondo, but it allows for inconsistencies in 2 cases:

1. Lloydy marks inside 50, uses close to his allotted 30 seconds and then rather than kicking for goal, dishes off anyway (most likely backward if running clock down) ... (ok, so Lloydy dishing off might be a bad example lol)

2. When trying to run the clock down a team will be forced to move it on in less time anywhere on the ground other than their forward 50

I guess there's no perfect solution to it, I certainly don't have an answer, but it just seems an odd anomaly to me.

A possible scenario but how often do you see teams wasting time in their own forward line in the last few minutes? Usually there's 34 players in the area and a shot for goal is something teams most times would take rather than try to pass it off in the conjestion to buy another 30 seconds.

One of the suggested rule changes for next year is automatic play on from backwards kicks in the defensive 50 so that gives you an idea of where the AFL are thinking.

I thought most of us hated the backwards-kicking / time-wasting / tempo football stuff anyway? Move it along I say why do you need 30 seconds to kick across your defensive 50 to an un-marked player?

Maybe Im just stuck in days of yesteryear, but I just fail to see how a set of rules can be different according to which part of the ground you're on.

I don't hate the winding down of the clock stuff, and if rules are brought in to make this more difficult, it also makes it easier for the opposition who are putting numbers behind the ball (something most people aren't happy about either) in that they don't have to man up as much and can still force a kick to a contest - I don't believe they should be rewarded for this by a rule which will clearly help them.

[silicone skyline]

If every player on the ground has an opponent, how does one man continually get free in the defensive half for that person to kick back to anyway.
Teams are stupid if they zone off and expect the opposition to bomb it into forward territory.
What teams need to do is force the error by manning up.
Get a direct opponent and stick to him.
If teams can play keep off for ninety seconds without the other team going "holy shit, i think theres a free payer i should go and stand next to" then they deserve to lose.
As far as the spectacle goes, i would happily watch my team win a shit game than watch them lose a good one.
I know which one will make me feel better.

[smac]

A Geelong supporter at work is telling me Ottens was given 8 seconds prior to being called play on in the closing stages of the game.

What he then says is; given Port scored the final goal with 3 seconds remaining, the result should be overturned because the umpire stuffed up (by not allowing the full 15 seconds).

I told him that was unlikely.

[silicone skyline]

In no uncertain terms i hope

[JK]

Just to point out that I made reference to the Ottens one because it's the one I saw most recently ... I reckon it happens plenty of times every week.

[westozfalcon]

Slight change of tack but I thought I'd throw this one in too:-

A player takes a mark right on the boundary line then goes back on the mark 'til he's standing out of play. If he then takes his time and gets called to play-on shouldn't it be an immediate throw-in since the ball is over the line?

[JK]

Slight change of tack but I thought I'd throw this one in too:-

A player takes a mark right on the boundary line then goes back on the mark 'til he's standing out of play. If he then takes his time and gets called to play-on shouldn't it be an immediate throw-in since the ball is over the line?

Yeah and they sometimes call it