Tweet
in my opinion, this is one of the worst rules that has come in, alongside the chopping the arm rule, have your say.
-
m smith -
Worst rule ever!Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.
"[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football." -
It is spoiling the game. There is no physical infringement to the player in front, but will be paid a free kich simply because a hand is placed there. Total rubbish.
On the other hand, the chopping of the arms is a good rule. That is a physical infringement on the player and should be paid. If you you want to spoil, spoil the ball, not the arms.Comment
-
The chopping of the arms rule is one of the better to come in. Why should a defender be able to rip down a forwards arms as he is going for the grab? Only one of them is going for the ball.
The hands in the back is a stupid one. Its doesnt allow for someone to stand their ground while a player backs into them. Its fair to award the guy at the front best possie and not have him pushed out. But the guy at the back has to be able to hold his ground when another is backing back.Comment
-
"As everyone knows our style of football is defensive and unattractive, and as such I have completely forgotten how to mark or kick over the years" - Brett Kirk
Comment
-
i love it.
the pressure is more physical.Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.Comment
-
Someone please show me where the "hands in the back" rule exists. I am convinced we have a pack of idiots in charge of the rules committee.
Take note of law 15.4.3 (Permitted Contact) p55 and law 15.4.5 (Prohibited Contact) p56. These are the actual laws of the game. Don't know what Bartlett and his puppets are on about really....
Comment
-
This is the rule
The new 'interpretation' is obviously wrong with reference to the rule as written.pushes an opposition Player in the back, unless such contact
is incidental to a Marking contest and the Player is legitimately
Marking or attempting to Mark the footballCaptain Logic is not steering this tugboat.
"[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."Comment
-
Yes indeed. We have tiggy touchwood decisions made every week just because a pair of hands are placed on a players back. That is not prohibited contact under the rules. A push in the back is, but not just "hands in the back". Time for the laws of the game committee to be held accountable for this nonsense and duly replaced with logical thinkers.
I applaud the umpire who paid McVeigh's mark, because I think a gross injustice would have been committed if it was not allowed because of Bartlett's delusions.Comment
-
The push in the back rule can be good for both teams if umpired on a consistant basis but at the moment i believe their is not enough consistancy. The chopping of the arms rule is a great rule in my opinion as chopping a players arms in a marking contest is unsportsmen like. Ive gone up for many marking contests and i become extremely aggitated at players chopping my arms to stop me marking the ball.Comment
Comment