Laws Committee looking at 20 metres for a mark

RookieDTer · April 24, 2014, 11:47:31 AM

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-04-24/plus-five-for-a-mark
"Laws Committee looking at 20 metres for a mark ... "Although the number of stoppages has increased from 62.6 last year to 65.7 this year, Evans said ball-up numbers had fallen by about three per game, with the increase of boundary throw-ins by six per game accounting for the rise in stoppages."

Wouldn't the obvious solution be to actually pay deliberate out of bounds, when a player deliberately puts the ball out of bounds? Why would they need to change a rule like the 15m kick for a mark rule?

How can people be so utterly retarded?

Rusty00 · April 24, 2014, 12:23:11 PM

The idea for the change from 15 to 20m for a mark would mean it would be harder for teams to chip the ball around maintaining possession. The rules committee would be hoping that forces teams to kick the ball forward quicker, giving players less time to push back, meaning less players around the fall of the ball, meaning less chance for the forming of "rolling mauls" and more stoppages.

Mailman the 2nd · April 24, 2014, 12:46:34 PM

How has the game become "just rolling mauls"?

Why is the AFL trying to homogenize almost every possible unique team strategy there is?

A team is good at locking down and holding possesion? Nope, not anymore lets just increase the mark range ::)

The umpires barely understand the new rules of deliberate out of bounds, sliding and ducking that adding anymore useless rules would make it more of a mess, not clean it up.

The_Captain · April 24, 2014, 12:56:10 PM

Quote from: Mailman the 2nd on April 24, 2014, 12:46:34 PM
How has the game become "just rolling mauls"?

Why is the AFL trying to homogenize almost every possible unique team strategy there is?

A team is good at locking down and holding possesion? Nope, not anymore lets just increase the mark range ::)

The umpires barely understand the new rules of deliberate out of bounds, sliding and ducking that adding anymore useless rules would make it more of a mess, not clean it up.

Eff it!! I'ma go play rugby now!!!

Ringo · April 26, 2014, 08:46:50 AM

This is a ridiculous idea at the imo. It is set to reward some times but disadvantage the teams that play the stoppage game. If they want to open it up why not 30 metres make it more interesting??

Seriously though some umpires can not even define 15 metres so how are they going to measure 20 metres? We will have to give all umpires laser measurers so they can get it right. Just speaking from my observations at the game there are probably 5/6 times a game where a kick would not travel the 15 metres but mark still given.

Toga · April 26, 2014, 09:28:22 AM

Yeah don't like.

Kellogscrunchynut · April 26, 2014, 05:45:41 PM

They had this in the Nab Cup a few years ago, I can't recall if it had an effect on the amount of stoppages it had at the time although I do remember an abundance of long (20m) handballs as opposed to kicks.

Tominator · May 01, 2014, 01:20:06 PM

ridiculous. Why fix what ain't broke?

elephants · May 01, 2014, 01:22:04 PM

I reckon the umps might have tried to implement it without telling anyone. The number of 20m kicks last weekend that were deemed 'not 15' was a joke!

Mr.Craig · May 01, 2014, 01:23:47 PM

They haven't been paying 15m kicks this year for the most part anyway. I've even seem some closer to 20 called play on.

Nails · May 01, 2014, 01:41:07 PM

I wanna see the 1m kick rule. The tactic of kicking it as high above your head in the air as possible will be back in vogue!

Little trick kicks of 2 metres. shower just got crazy boi!

R.Griffen · May 12, 2014, 01:25:22 PM

just saw this thread anyone pick up about 10-15 in the Adelaide vs Melbourne called play on!!! Not sure who from Melbourne kicked one closer to 30m and was called play on. Me and my old man always have a go at it every time 5 metre marks called they turn it over and goes back to where it came from and the second one is called play on!!!