(swans) holding the ball

[SCGonasunnyday]

I am very concerned about the change in interpretation recently which is really hurting our team in particular. Used to be HTB was reserved for failure to dispose legally when the player had prior opportunity. At some stage it was expanded to players diving on the ball rather than trying to keep it moving. At some other stage it was expanded to a player has to look like they are trying to get rid of it even if they are immediately tackled - see McGlynn free kick last night, Recently it seems to have been expanded yet again to a player getting the ball and immediately being tackled as long as that player is a swan. Actually I can't work it out but someone can help I'm sure.

We are particular at risk I think judging by the amount of decisions against us in the last two games - particularly because we have a few players who are good at winning the hard ball and forcing a stoppage (if the better result of getting a clean takeaway is not possible) - ie Kirky, Jude Bolton, Jack etc.

I hope this ridiculous interpretation changes soon or alternatively our players quickly adapt. I note we often appear to be late at adopting to rule changes (ie the quick kick in). But this may lose us games during the next half of the year if we don't work on it - witness 3rd quarter last night when free kick after free kick gave port a chance to get back in the game.

[Damien]

I just think some of players need to wise up, as much as the rule is frustrating in some ways and I would probably change it to reward the attacker on the ball a bit more, the swans do some very silly things at times. The three swans players holding the ball in while a PA player wasn't involved, the amount of times we got over the ball 2005 style only to look shocked when HTB was called, failure to even pretend to handball on a few occasions when tackled. I knew when HTB was going to be called last night and I just watch games, so the coaches and players need to make sure they have the right systems in place so we don't get caught out. (Mind you, in the other two games I watched this weekend, HTB was a bit of an issue across the board, so probably not a Swans exclusive issue of course)

[cruiser]

HTB and frees paid for high (head) have become absurd. A player only has to fall over and have his head hit the leg of another player to now be given a free. Players will get wise to this and start throwing their heads at other players to get paid the free. Consequently a rule introduced to protect the heads of players will instead now put players heads at more risk.

[Reggi]

I think it was there. There is no doubt we jump on the footy to lock it in. The bad aspect is that Port knew that and their looked to be at least one where they waited for Jack? to go for the footy before jumping on him. SEN where right last night the umps where going to pay against the player on the bottom of the pack and it was invariably a Swan

As we get better ball winners into the side maybe we can be more confident to put the ball out into the open. So something for our coaches to work on

[BigD]

Maybe I'm biased but it seems to me at times that opposition players are given a lot longer to dispose of the ball before being pinged while Swans players seem to have to dispose of the ball as soon as they get touched or its HTB. It is just so frustrating.
And its not just HTB where there seems to be one interpretion for the Swans and another one for everyone else. I no longer know what constitutes hands in the back or a high tackle on a Swans player.

[Jewels]

HTB and frees paid for high (head) have become absurd. A player only has to fall over and have his head hit the leg of another player to now be given a free. Players will get wise to this and start throwing their heads at other players to get paid the free. Consequently a rule introduced to protect the heads of players will instead now put players heads at more risk.

Unless said player has a red and white guernsey on!

[Scottee]

Totally agree with many of the sentiments on this thread.I think there are many issues with the AFL "Product" atm at a time when the competition is making great inroads (eg FIFA World Cup etc).How the hell can you talk seriously about internationalising the game if the rules are so rediculously framed and interpreted?

HTB Rule issue #1 - the ball player is constantly penalised. The scragger is king. Most beatifully demonstrated last night when a swans player had both arms in the air and the defender had his arms around the swans player and was holding against the swans player's chest. Ping!!! HTB against the Swan. WTF are these guys thinking? Don't they realise that they are rewarding the person holding the ball in and encouraging the sort of scrums that they are supposed to be stopping?

HTB Rule issue #2 - Prior opportunity or not ? - last night many instances of players being penalised with absolutely no proir opportunity. Has the interpretation been scrapped? Two weeks ago against the Hawks it was being applied liberally.

HTB issue # 3 - How long constitutes HTB? Last night there was no leeway at all, there was no time to dispose of the ball if there was a strong tackle > instant ping! Two weeks ago against Hawthorn - the 360 degree swing was fine!!!!- ?????

Improper Disposal - There does not seem to be any consistent interpretation of this rule. In the past, where the tackle caused the spill it was play on, where there was a clear throw it was pinged. Last night - more clear throws than I can ever remember (I think we got the better of these decisons BTW).Spills caused by tackles -inconsistent.

Head high tackles - if ever there was an interpretation that illustrated how the AFL can shoot itself in the foot when it tries to address a particular issue - this is it! You can see the players minds ticking over "gee , my opponent is getting on top of me, now if just dive head first into his legs - I'll get a free kick!!!! Yahtzee!!!"

I have never seen so many players throwing themsleves at the feet on other players in order to get the free kick, trouble is, if they don't get a free for high contact, they will get HTB against them - please refer to HTB Issue #1.

Finally, changed interpretations -throughout the game. It was pretty clear that the umpiring interpretations changes between the two halves last night. There is no excuse for this and there couldn't be anything more confusing for suppoterters and players. I have some frinds from overseas who say the game is exciting to watch - but if only they could understand the rules!!! God help them if last night was any example.

Seriously, how is the game going to thrive in Sydney and anywhere else when even seasoned supporters can't work out what the hell is going on.

[cruiser]

Unless said player has a red and white guernsey on!

Dead right. Port were paid this every time it happened last night while we kept missing out.

[swanspant12]

this is @@@@@@@** ridiculous. i am so frustrated by this stupid rule. how the hell was kerian jack caught for holding the ball in instance when he didnt even have prior opportunity. and when his arms are bloody pinned what do the dumb umpires want him to do. i get so angry and in the 3rd quarter had to stop watching the game i was that frustrated.

[mcs]

The one that pissed me off mightily was the one where we got pinged and I think it might have been Bird didn't even have the ball- he clearly had both arms up and the Port Bogan was holding it in and he got pinged for HTB. The interpretation of the rules are just so inconsistent from umpire to umpire. The AFL needs to make it clear to EVERYBODY what is and isn't HTB and it will make life a lot easier for everyone. For I am certain at the moment that some teams and players get a lot more leeway than others in this area (I doubt on purpose, but umpires like anyone can be swayed by reputation etc of a particular team). we seem to get exceptionally harshly treated about it at times.

[KirkysSocks]

Yet another game ruined by biased anti swans umpiring? Really?

What's even more frustrating? Watching Geelong last night in small patches the same HTB rule is different for Geelong as they have so much latitude when tackled. And then players like chapman and Johnson pull their heads back fake a free and umpires fall for it. The afl brought in a rule to stamp this out yet the players who have still do it the AFL turn a blind eye to it.

It's clear as day the agendas set this year by the AFL

Watching the WC last night FIFA has made it clear there is no diving at all. Maybe the Afl should follow their path and actually enforce this new rule..unless u r Geelong.

[ugg]

Not surprised that Tadhg lost his cool and gave away 50 after he saw the replay on the big screen. The Port players basically barged head first into Tadhg's legs, forcing Tadhg to lose balance and fall into the Port player's head. Not much he could do.

BTW, at quarter time the free kick count was 10-5 our way. For the rest of the game the count was 25-6 for Port. Roosy had a snide comment about this huge discrepancy at the post match press conference.

[ScottH]

The one that pissed me off mightily was the one where we got pinged and I think it might have been Bird didn't even have the ball- he clearly had both arms up and the Port Bogan was holding it in and he got pinged for HTB. The interpretation of the rules are just so inconsistent from umpire to umpire. The AFL needs to make it clear to EVERYBODY what is and isn't HTB and it will make life a lot easier for everyone. For I am certain at the moment that some teams and players get a lot more leeway than others in this area (I doubt on purpose, but umpires like anyone can be swayed by reputation etc of a particular team). we seem to get exceptionally harshly treated about it at times.

That was probably the worst of them.

[ScottH]

Not surprised that Tadhg lost his cool and gave away 50 after he saw the replay on the big screen. The Port players basically barged head first into Tadhg's legs, forcing Tadhg to lose balance and fall into the Port player's head. Not much he could do.

BTW, at quarter time the free kick count was 10-5 our way. For the rest of the game the count was 25-6 for Port. Roosy had a snide comment about this huge discrepancy at the post match press conference.

And we still gave them a flogging.

[Swannette]

A non free kick that bugged me (and I reckon this occured at least twice) was when mummy's second or third effort saw him lunging forward at ground level trying to move the ball on, and ending up with a port players legs nearly taking his head off, but no whistle. Good enough for a swan to give one ala Irish, but no chance for a swan to get one. Very frustrating. I have no confidence in the geisch addressing this because I feel he is a yes man and even if he wasn't, simply seems not up to the task. So agree that we need to adapt- fast.