New Rule Interpretations and Bazza

[timthefish]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Because it's natural if someone is pushing back into you, then you will hold them off with your arms or hands. That's not pushing in the back, yet it will now be penalised.

which is precisely where the ambiguity, diving and inconsistent umpiring comes marching right in. i don't think this rule is going to solve all issues with umpiring of contests, but much less do i think it's going to be a complete disaster. i think it's a simpler and clearer rule than that which has allowed lloyd's diving to become such a nuisance in recent times.

[Chow-Chicker]

Originally posted by timthefish
i think it's a simpler and clearer rule than that which has allowed lloyd's diving to become such a nuisance in recent times.

???

Well all he has to do now is lean slightly forward whenever he feels a pair of hands on his back and he'll receive the free. He will no longer have to do an olympic dive to get the umpires attention. This rule is a nonsense. Not once did I ever sit in the stands and say "gee, they ought to do something about players who place their hands on the back of an opponent". I did however say on numerous occasions "when the bloody hell are they going to introduce a rule to prevent this ridiculous keepings off garbage?" Quite simple really, one is a blight on the game (keepings off) and the other is an insignificant piece of play that will now become controversial.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Originally posted by nat
You mean kick?

Aww that's harsh. His kicking was pretty good throughout the year. He did choose a big game to lose form, though

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Originally posted by floppinab
I reckon Roosy got the selective memory happening a bit. I think it was the late 80's early 90's when use of the hands was being more and more allowed in contests. Prior to that you had to use your body, no forearms or hands on your opponent.

Of course once the hands were progressively allowed we got more and more of the jumper grabbing which is more difficult to police. Take the hands out of the picture and there'll be no more jumper grabbing either.

It's not that black n white mate, it's like the handball rule in 'soccer'. If the ball is kicked into someone's shoulder or forearm and they're facing the other way or had no way of avoiding it, it's never a free kick, which is exaclty how the hand in the back interpretation should be seen. It's all about balance, and also defending yourself if someone is pedalling back into you. Why should the forwards be to blame when a huge defender is ramming his back against him? You watch, by round 7-10 next year, this rule will be causing HUGE problems for umpires.

[floppinab]

Originally posted by DeadlyAkkuret
Why should the forwards be to blame when a huge defender is ramming his back against him? You watch, by round 7-10 next year, this rule will be causing HUGE problems for umpires.

As young footballers the hip and shoulder was always king and the best players could always outbody their opponents this way.

You turn your body slightly side on, arms tucked in, hold your ground as the defender backs into you, then arms go up with a slight leap backward to take the mark. That's the way it was done and I've seen Nickky Davis do it this way a few times as well which I strongly suspect is coming from his dad.

Some of you folks on this forum have been watching footy longer than I have, would surely remember.

Banning the use of the hands will encourage more leaping in marking contests as well.

[AnnieH]

Originally posted by floppinab
As young footballers the hip and shoulder was always king and the best players could always outbody their opponents this way.

You turn your body slightly side on, arms tucked in, hold your ground as the defender backs into you, then arms go up with a slight leap backward to take the mark. That's the way it was done and I've seen Nickky Davis do it this way a few times as well which I strongly suspect is coming from his dad.

Some of you folks on this forum have been watching footy longer than I have, would surely remember.

Banning the use of the hands will encourage more leaping in marking contests as well.

This was how they played the game in the 69 granny I watched the other night.

It was fantastic ... streamers a foot thick on the ground, no advertising on the fence, confetti for a goal, two cameras, NO INSTANT REPLAYS (if you missed it you missed it), and the "english" commentary. Not to mention the speed of play, and some legendary marking contests. They used their bodies rather than their hands to hold off their opponents. Seriously, it's poetry to watch.

Maybe the teams should sit down and watch the old grannies on ABC2 for the rest of the summer and take down pointers.

[hammo]

And here I was thinking that Leo couldn't possibly give away more free kicks than last year, now they go and do this!

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Originally posted by Annie Haddad
two cameras, NO INSTANT REPLAYS (if you missed it you missed it), and the "english" commentary.

Yeah, sounds like poetry

[AnnieH]

Originally posted by DeadlyAkkuret
Yeah, sounds like poetry

I don't think they had many DVD recorders with instant playback in 1969.

For the time, I'm sure it was cutting edge.

The poetry in motion referred to the way in which they used their bodies (rather than their hands) as defense.

[Jeffers1984]

Originally posted by Annie Haddad
.



.

[AnnieH]

Originally posted by Jeffers1984

[Nico]

Cant see how it will affect Leo. He already gives away a heap of frees. Whats a couple more. They are the ones he doesn't get pinged for.

[reigning premier]

Is it just me but hasn't pushing your man in the back ALWAYS been illegal???

BBBH & MOL are regularly penalised for doing so. If anything, MOL is a bigger offender than BBBH. Whilst body on body contact is permitted, flat palms in the back like MOL regularly does, isn't.

We all know BBBH is unfairly accused and penalised for pushing when in reality it's just his superior body strength that gets his opponents under the ball. If anything, hopefully the umpires will start penalising every other fwd like the do BBBH and perhaps that may even the playing field a little.

[sharp9]

Originally posted by Chow-Chicker
I'll give you a scenario and explain what will happen. Two players, a forward who is in front of a defender, start "pedalling" backwards with the flight of the ball. The forward, who is backing INTO the defender will receive a free kick if the defender puts his hands out to prevent the forawrd backing into him. That, to me, is bull-@@@@. The hand doesn't actually "push" the forward but only prevents him from colliding with him. The rule will be shown to be a total croc when it will be applied next season.

I REALLY like that interpretation....reward for who gets their BODY into the best position.

[sharp9]

Originally posted by reigning premier
Is it just me but hasn't pushing your man in the back ALWAYS been illegal???

BBBH & MOL are regularly penalised for doing so. If anything, MOL is a bigger offender than BBBH. Whilst body on body contact is permitted, flat palms in the back like MOL regularly does, isn't.

We all know BBBH is unfairly accused and penalised for pushing when in reality it's just his superior body strength that gets his opponents under the ball. If anything, hopefully the umpires will start penalising every other fwd like the do BBBH and perhaps that may even the playing field a little.

The problem with Bazza is that he is the ONLY player who can outbody from behind but then get penalised for "push in the back" without using his hands. That's the interpretation they use with him fairly often. It could be valid too...I mean in theory a stiff shoulder in the back is also a push. Unfortunately other players from other teams get away with it.