New Rules

[Steve]

I'm all for cracking down on taggers or defenders making it impossible for those who actually make the play, but one like Grundy's when the hand on/around the waist has no real impact (as soon as Riewoldt leads he breaks free anyway) is just over-officiating and actually leads to frustration as there are always going to be 100 of them each game. If you take a step back, the way our game is officiated just doesn't shape up well - Koschitzke on Malceski is play-on, but Mattner on Riewoldt is a free, and Dawson on Kennelly is just a free (when he did actually mark it prior), etc etc.

[goswannie14]

I'm all for cracking down on taggers or defenders making it impossible for those who actually make the play, but one like Grundy's when the hand on/around the waist has no real impact (as soon as Riewoldt leads he breaks free anyway) is just over-officiating and actually leads to frustration as there are always going to be 100 of them each game. If you take a step back, the way our game is officiated just doesn't shape up well - Koschitzke on Malceski is play-on, but Mattner on Riewoldt is a free, and Dawson on Kennelly is just a free (when he did actually mark it prior), etc etc.

Not according to the umpires, see this thread Umpires are stupid

Scenario 2. Kenelly attempts to mark, is flattened. Swans players ask for 50m penalty. Umpire refuses with the comment "He didn't mark it". Again commentators go off about "How was he supposed to mark that when he was flattened."

[Triple B]

Inconsistency is the most annoying part.

The umpires appear to have a different mindset on FF/FB contests depending on the players involved. When Riewoldt/Koschitzke and Lloyd before them are/were competing for the ball, all focus is on the FB, picking up the slightest hold/grab/push.

When Hall/Fevola/Mooney are competing, all the focus is on whether they are the ones infringing and infringements against them are overlooked.

[Jesse Richards]

Triple B, well put. Because the game is so fast the umpires often don't have time to think clearly and their prejudices and beliefs show, not only in their decisions but in their comments too. One of the advantages of losing Hall was the numbers of frees against him (deserved and otherwise) - our other forwards now might get to kick the ball won in a fair contest.

[Jewels]

Riewoldt is such a pretty boy and such a @@@@@@ing protected species. That swan dive he took for one of his free kicks wouldn't have been out of place in the Ice Skating at the winter olympics.

Not sure if I imaged it or not, but wasn't there talk in the offseason about a rule outlawing playing for frees?
If I wasn't imaging this and such a rule does exist, why then was Reiwoldt given a free every time he threw his arms in the air?

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Yeah they were supposedly meant to be coming down on anyone playing for a free. That obviously doesn't include Riewoldt.

I thought Goodes was meant to be a protected species?

[laughingnome]

Not sure if I imaged it or not, but wasn't there talk in the offseason about a rule outlawing playing for frees?
If I wasn't imaging this and such a rule does exist, why then was Reiwoldt given a free every time he threw his arms in the air?

Such a rule was brought in, but is only to report players post-match to front the tribunal. The umpire on the ground in the heat of the moment is not expect to spot the fraud everytime. Players will be reported and sent to the tribunal to explain their actions if accused of acting.

[Jewels]

Such a rule was brought in, but is only to report players post-match to front the tribunal. The umpire on the ground in the heat of the moment is not expect to spot the fraud everytime. Players will be reported and sent to the tribunal to explain their actions if accused of acting.

Ok, thanks for the explaination. That makes sense.

[mcs]

Ok, thanks for the explaination. That makes sense.

So in reality the rule is pointless as it gives them the opportunity to let the pretty boys and protected species off the hook rather easily then doesn't it.

[laughingnome]

I guess, but as has been discussed before players get reputations that are hard to shake. Goodes is rarely pinged for holding the ball or throwing, for example, because it is assumed in a split second by an umpire that a player of his calibre got it away clean, even if the umpire was slightly blindsided to think otherwise. Gary Ablett is another who benefits more from 50-50 calls then not.

In the same manner a player who has been reported for acting a couple of times could suddnely find free kicks harder to come by. Umpires aren't robots, and if someone gets a valid (even occasionally valid) mark as an actor (see: Schnieder) they will assume on the spot that the 50-50 free they thought was there wasn't, because the possibly infringed player reacted heavily.

It won;t punish in the short term, but over time I think it will have an effect.