Staker's 'lineball' kick....

[stellation]

The line is the edge of the padding, not the line on the ground.

Really? That's pretty odd.

[Lucky Knickers]

I agree Liz, the reason I asked is that the goal ump seems to position themselves sideways across the line and watch the ball go over. He doesn't position himself sideways in line with the back of the padding on post and then rule.
I guess it it would be really difficult to adjudicate a goal that had brushed the padding/versus a hit to the post if they didn't include the pads as field of play.
I vote for a fat line!

[Allymay]

Are you missing the other points being (correctly) made? The padding is part of the field of play.

So is the fence!!

[AnnieH]

Only asked, because when I played it was a goal if it was over he line.

I don't think padding was invented yet when you were playing!!

[iigrover]

Going back to the previous time we played Wet Toast in WA, didnt Jude (I think??) dive to touch the ball kicked at goal, and it was ruled a goal as the ump said he touched it only slightly over the line?

If the AFL are now saying its the padding not the line, then surely that last goal was point and we should have won that game too.

Methinks if the AFL wants to be treated seriously it needs to bring in video review of Goal umpires decisions.

[floppinab]

Really? That's pretty odd.

There's been a few issues with it in recent years in that the ball can have completely crossed the line but then still hit the back of the padding, if the rule was "the ball completely over the line", then that case should be a goal. Or in a recent case (a Collingwood game I think, can't remember the opponent), where the ball hit the umps flag in it's slot as it went through. As the flag is deemed as part of the padding, same story should it be a goal or a point.

So in response to that I think it was deemed recently the the ruling is a "virtual" line from the back of the padding of the two goal posts is the area that denomates "through the goal".

And yes therefore pretty silly that they still mark the line from post to post. Classic AFL making up the rules as we go along. Bit like the interchange, timekeepers, hands in the back.............................................. ............

EDIT : Interesting that the official rules still haven't been updated to reflect this :

12. SCORING: GOALS AND BEHINDS
12.1 Goals and Behinds
12.1.1 Scoring a Goal
Subject to Law 12.2, a Goal is scored when the football is Kicked
completely over the Goal Line by a Player of the attacking Team
without being touched by any other Player, even if the football first
touches the ground.
12.1.2 Scoring a Behind
Subject to Law 12.2, a Behind is scored when any of the following
occurs:
(a) the football touches or passes over the goal post or touches
padding or any other attachment to the goal post; or

EDIT again :

Actually I've just done a bit more looking and I think in this instance with Staker the line on the ground is still the mark to aim for. I understand with "ball in flight, touched on the line/mark" cases the umps are told to use the back of pads as the reference. So there you go.

[liz]

EDIT : Interesting that the official rules still haven't been updated to reflect this :

Which says to me that the line is the goal line, not some imaginary line at the back of the padding. That would be the most ridiculous interpretation I could think off and, as I've already posted, surely impossible to adjudicate. This week is the first time I've ever heard it suggested that the goal line is not actually the goal line, though I am aware of shots being behinds before when they've actually hit the padding despite having fully crossed the line. (Monty not scoring the winning goal against the Bummers last year is a recent example.)

[floppinab]

I suspect from what I've read recently that the goal umps have been told something like the following.

For balls crossing the line from a soccer/point blank kick/touched at ground level the line is the reference point. i.e. the whole ball, wholly over the back edge of the line.

For balls in flight (i.e. pretty much above waist line) touched or mark, the back of the pads is the reference point (i.e. the whole ball, wholly over an imaginary line between the back edge of the two sets of pads.

Who coulda thought it could be so complicated!!!!!!