New Interchange Rule!

[Chaddy chaddy bang bang]

The AFL has announced that "sloppy bench moves" can result in not only a Free kick to the opposition, but a fifty meter penalty!

I think that a free kick is warrented but the extent of the 50m penalty is to severe, IMO.

If your team is in attack, the emergency umpire will reward a free kick, then the field umpire will return to the center of the ground and begin to step out the 50m penalty! Resulting in a guarateed shot at goal. (Unless your Richie Vandenberg and cant make the distance).

To save all the messing around they could just locate the exact spot 50m from the square and automatically place the opponent on the mark there! But it seems to be another case of the umpires getting involved in the game!

OK AFL! The draw situation wont happen again now that you are enforcing a more strict interchange process, we understand that! So why a guaranteed shot at goal, why not just a simple free kick (turnover). What does the 50m prove. If this were to decide a game in the last 30 secs, then all hell would break loose again.

To harsh. I understand what they are tring to do, but the AFL has already F--ked up at the Kangaroos expence. The 50m aspect of it will only cause more frustration for the players and supporters.

BORDERLINE STUPIDITY! Let em play! What do you guys think!

[Brades]

Good rule, end of story.

[Chaddy chaddy bang bang]

Originally Posted by Brades

Good rule, end of story.

Anyone with creditation please reply. That excludes you Brady!

[Brades]

Why shouldn't a team get a free kick infront of goal? This new rule is to prevent game changing 19th men situations. If you are stupid enough to cockup then you deserve a goal against you.

[Chaddy chaddy bang bang]

Originally Posted by Brades

Why shouldn't a team get a free kick infront of goal? This new rule is to prevent game changing 19th men situations. If you are stupid enough to cockup then you deserve a goal against you.

Its for SLOPPY INTERCHANGES there is a new note process taking place for interchange, therefore it is impossible to have 19 players out there playing! Before the 19th player is able to run more than 5 metres onto the field, the emergency umpire begins his charade! Technically it can be a matter of centimetres.

It is positive that the AFL is handing out penalties for this breach but not that harsh.

If your a forward you can smash a players nose through the back of there head, and the free kick is given against you + a 50m penalty. Its not measured from the centre square, its from the point of infringement!

[Brades]

Its not impossible to have 10 men on the field. He can just bolt out there and not get stopped. They'd have to noticed the 19 men. Sloppy interchanges? I'm sure they will be a bit lenient early on, but if you don't inform the AFL of who is coming off etc you deserved to be kicked in the balls.

[Chaddy chaddy bang bang]

Originally Posted by Brades

Its not impossible to have 10 men on the field. He can just bolt out there and not get stopped. They'd have to noticed the 19 men. Sloppy interchanges? I'm sure they will be a bit lenient early on, but if you don't inform the AFL of who is coming off etc you deserved to be kicked in the balls.

Yeah I agree! But a 50m from the square seems a tad harsh, but I see where your coming from these types of infringement can really p!ss some supporters off.

[OLDFELLA]

Originally Posted by Chaddy chaddy bang bang

Yeah I agree! But a 50m from the square seems a tad harsh, but I see where your coming from these types of infringement can really p!ss some supporters off.

To harsh. I understand what they are tring to do, but the AFL has already F--ked up at the Kangaroos expence. The 50m aspect of it will only cause more frustration for the players and supporters.

So Chaddy, if your player is going for a bounce down the side line and an opportunity to slot one from 45 or 50, and the other team does a sloppy interchange, he should get rewarded with a free kick from the centre?

Or have I read it wrong?

[Chaddy chaddy bang bang]

Originally Posted by OLDFELLA

So Chaddy, if your player is going for a bounce down the side line and an opportunity to slot one from 45 or 50, and the other team does a sloppy interchange, he should get rewarded with a free kick from the centre?

Or have I read it wrong?

Mmmm, interesting point!

I guess that common sense would prevail and a shot on goal would be allowed?

Are you suggesting that an opposition coach may obstruct the play so the player with the ball is forced to lose momentum (and a shot at goal), and have to go back to the centre and effectively "restart again". Therefore a 50m penalty is most certainly warrented? (hope u understood that)

I think there should be a free kick to the opposing team. And that the free kick should take place where the play is at the time. Also impose a fine on the club so it hits there pocket a bit. Maybe $25,000 each infringement.

Reason being if lets say Franklin is lining up for goal with 45 secs left and there up by 5. A Hawks midfielder is coming on for rotation purposes, he jumps the gun a bit, by say 3 secs, and hees only going to the middle for when the ball may be bounced after the goal (if its a behind he will only set up the defnsive zone which he would of made position 3 secs ahead or not).

There is no disadvantge to the opposing team, yet Hawks are penalised, and the result is Cameron Ling with a shot 35m out directly infront, chances are he slots it, Cats win. This scenario is what worries me a little.

I think i'm with ya, on where your coming from! Does this clear up my point a bit?

[OLDFELLA]

Originally Posted by Chaddy chaddy bang bang

Mmmm, interesting point!

I guess that common sense would prevail and a shot on goal would be allowed?

Are you suggesting that an opposition coach may obstruct the play so the player with the ball is forced to lose momentum (and a shot at goal), and have to go back to the centre and effectively "restart again". Therefore a 50m penalty is most certainly warrented? (hope u understood that)

I think there should be a free kick to the opposing team. And that the free kick should take place where the play is at the time. Also impose a fine on the club so it hits there pocket a bit. Maybe $25,000 each infringement.

Reason being if lets say Franklin is lining up for goal with 45 secs left and there up by 5. A Hawks midfielder is coming on for rotation purposes, he jumps the gun a bit, by say 3 secs, and hees only going to the middle for when the ball may be bounced after the goal (if its a behind he will only set up the defnsive zone which he would of made position 3 secs ahead or not).

There is no disadvantge to the opposing team, yet Hawks are penalised, and the result is Cameron Ling with a shot 35m out directly infront, chances are he slots it, Cats win. This scenario is what worries me a little.

I think i'm with ya, on where your coming from! Does this clear up my point a bit?

I don't think any true supporter would be satisfied with a win like that. I was a bit embarrassed with the win when Steynes ran through the mark on Buckanara.
I think there are too many rules in the game and it should be handled at the interchange area. Maybe a fine like you suggest.