Perplexing things about our game

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Sandridge
    Outer wing, Lake Oval
    • Apr 2010
    • 2049

    Perplexing things about our game

    As much as I love our game, a couple of things are beginning to really annoy me.

    1. That if you punch someone in the head, the crime is somehow lessened if you just happen to be holding on to their jumper with the same fist you punched them.

    2. A defender can hurry a kick out of the backline, have it bounce at an unfortunate angle and then get pinged for deliberate out of bounds. Yet, if there's a marking contest near the boundary line and a defender deliberately punches the ball 20 rows into the crowd, that goes unpunished and is, in fact, seen as fantastic defensive work.

    Forgetting the usual holding the ball, dropping the ball, prior opportunity, Bulldogs throw-balls issues, any other annoying inconsistencies we can add to the list?
  • Hotpotato
    Senior Player
    • Jun 2014
    • 2261

    #2
    For most of this year in chaos footy if the ball was knocked out of the ball carriers hands , its was play on , which seemed fair.
    In the games over this weekend, knocking it out in similar circumstances has been holding the ball against the carrier.
    Go figure.

    Comment

    • bloodspirit
      Clubman
      • Apr 2015
      • 4448

      #3
      It's very hard to go past the holding the ball rule and its interpretation.

      The changes that have largely eliminated simulation have been very positive.

      The inconsistent fussiness around the mark is bothersome.
      All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)

      Comment

      • dimelb
        pr. dim-melb; m not f
        • Jun 2003
        • 6889

        #4
        The one that gets my goat is the "in the back" rule. If someone tackles from behind and happens to bring the ball carrier down and land on him, why on earth is that a free? The carrier wasn't jumped on (which should provoke a free), or pushed from behind (which might or might not get a free, depending on the umpire) which is one of the laws of the game, observed in the ignoring rather than in the breach. Really gives me the irrits.
        He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)

        Comment

        Working...