General footy chat The "100 metre" rule

[Velour&Ruffles]

Having seen it in action tonight and really taken it in for the first time, I think this is quite possibly the stupidest and most poorly thought through rule change the AFL has ever come up with ..... which is saying a lot given the AFL's history of stupid and poorly thought through rule changes.

What they don't seem to have considered is this. If the player awarded the initial free and fifty is a faster runner than the player on the mark, then the player with the free can simply run up the rear end of the player on the mark and get another 50. I saw late in the game that McVeigh had clued into this and tried precisely this tactic but wasn't quite quick enough to carry it out. But mark my words - this rule is just awful and will be revoked within 2 seasons. It is just so open to abuse and imposes a penalty that is grotesquely out of proportion with the "crime" (in fact, it imposes a monstrous penalty even when there isn't a crime).

I'm beginning to think I might join Boddo in giving up on this crap. It just isn't enjoyable any more.

[707]

GF gets won by one of these rules and (unless it's GWS losing) the MCG will erupt.

Never has a penalty be so disproportionate to the crime

[ugg]

Yes it’s a stupid rule but while it’s in place the players have to be smarter and basically the guy who gives away the 50m penalty should not run back and trust a teammate to man the mark. It’s just not worth the risk otherwise.

[S.S. Bleeder]

Yes it’s a stupid rule but while it’s in place the players have to be smarter and basically the guy who gives away the 50m penalty should not run back and trust a teammate to man the mark. It’s just not worth the risk otherwise.

Exactly. It's a heavy penalty but I have no issue with the umpires decision on the second 50m penalty. That's what the rule is. O'Riordon clearly made a Mistake.

However, I don't believe that the original decision should have been a 50m penalty. The push was insignificant and it occurred using the marking process. Unfortunately it was consistent with the u pairing standards throughout the night.

[Blood Fever]

Having seen it in action tonight and really taken it in for the first time, I think this is quite possibly the stupidest and most poorly thought through rule change the AFL has ever come up with ..... which is saying a lot given the AFL's history of stupid and poorly thought through rule changes.

What they don't seem to have considered is this. If the player awarded the initial free and fifty is a faster runner than the player on the mark, then the player with the free can simply run up the rear end of the player on the mark and get another 50. I saw late in the game that McVeigh had clued into this and tried precisely this tactic but wasn't quite quick enough to carry it out. But mark my words - this rule is just awful and will be revoked within 2 seasons. It is just so open to abuse and imposes a penalty that is grotesquely out of proportion with the "crime" (in fact, it imposes a monstrous penalty even when there isn't a crime).

I'm beginning to think I might join Boddo in giving up on this crap. It just isn't enjoyable any more.

Against the spirit of the game and totally unnecessary. Change for change sake. Hocking justifying his existence. Must have too much time on his hands.

[stellation]

Yes it’s a stupid rule but while it’s in place the players have to be smarter and basically the guy who gives away the 50m penalty should not run back and trust a teammate to man the mark. It’s just not worth the risk otherwise.

I was wondering if we had a team rule in place for it (to just have someone up the ground man the mark); if so bad on COR (also bad on the teammates around him, he's fairly inexperienced and I can't recall anyone saying "ease up Tadhg-er"), if not I daresay bad on the coaching staff.

[Rod_]

I understand that umpires need to 50m to control circumstances on the field. This works for and against, and thank goodness it works 2 ways. Generally it evens out over a game or a couple of games.

What absolutely does my head in is when the player that receives the free sprints past the offending player. I consider that to be play on? Pay a double 50 is just disappointing for players and fans.

I hope they (AF rule makers) fix this soon!

[Hotpotato]

The AFL should come out and state that the first 50m was incorrect .
The second 50m, I hadn’t read about that rule and it’s an abomination and so easily milked its a completely unacceptable penalty.

[barry]

Does the infringer have to stand the mark after a 50?.
No, get out of the way.

[Sandrevan]

Yes, a very harsh penalty for a minor crime.

My take - the first 50 m penalty was paid because COR did not move back to the mark when instructed by the umpire. COR was outside the field of play and just stood there like he was manning the mark. He was definitely forward of the mark - hence the first 50. The second 50 was for the open interference with the Crows player. This was just a lack of composure from an inexperienced player. A harsh lesson but he will learn from this.

[barry]

If I was the recipient of a 50m, I'd be trying my best to run into any opposition player remotely in my path. Like sprinting at them.

[Meg]

My take - the first 50 m penalty was paid because COR did not move back to the mark when instructed by the umpire. COR was outside the field of play and just stood there like he was manning the mark. He was definitely forward of the mark - hence the first 50.

I assumed that as well. But if so the ump didn’t appear to tell him to move back. It was a very quick-fire 50 - usually the player is given one warning.

Alternatively COR was penalised for the very mild push as the Crows player marked the ball. If so it was a very harsh 50.

Clearly the second 50 was justified. COR didn’t seem to understand what was happening - bit disappointing.