AFL pushing ahead with last-disposal rule and abolishing sub for 2026 season

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • GVGjr
    Moderator
    • Nov 2006
    • 44939

    AFL pushing ahead with last-disposal rule and abolishing sub for 2026 season

    AFL pushing ahead with last-disposal rule and abolishing sub for 2026 season

    The AFL Commission will rule on recommendations to introduce a last-disposal rule and the scrapping of the sub on the day of the Brownlow Medal as Greg Swann ushers in a period of change.
    Club football bosses were told late last month that the AFL was keen to introduce a raft of changes as part of a football department submission.
    Swann is keen to bring in a last-disposal rule which would mean if a player handballed or kicked the ball over the lines between the arcs they would give away a free kick.

    If a player knocked the ball over the line in a contest it would not be a free kick, with the usual insufficient intent rules within each 50m arc.
    While that SANFL rule has not resulted in a big increase in free kicks it has incentivised corridor play and meant a more black-and-white decision making process.

    The AFL is also likely to ask the AFL Commission to have five players on the bench instead of four and a sub.
    The AFL Commission is likely to rule on the retention or abolition of the bounce at the October commission meeting.
    Senior coaches including Brad and Chris Scott and Hawthorn’s Sam Mitchell have all pushed for five on the bench, with Mitchell saying: “Get rid of it, it’s hopeless.”

    Norwood coach Jade Sheedy told the Herald Sun last month: “I like it between the arcs. It gives greater clarity. There are a few quirky bits to it.”
    Players are not given a free kick if the ball is tumbling towards the line but they choose not to keep the ball in.
    South Adelaide coach Jarrad Wright was also in favour: “It eliminates the ambiguity from an umpire’s perspective and it’s clear cut. It keeps the game going.”
    New AFL football boss Swann told the AFL Record he was keen to bring in five on the bench and the last-possession rule.

    “All these things have to be approved by the commission. But there will be recommendations put forward and that will be one that we adopt,” Swann said.
    “We do it in AFLW, the SANFL does it, it’s between the arcs and it’s a kick or a handball.
    “The stats show on the games played that there would only be two extra free kicks a game. It’s not a big change, but it’s a tough call for the umps sometimes and we’re almost there anyway.”
    Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"
  • comrade
    Hall of Fame
    • Jun 2008
    • 18089

    #2
    Tim English for the Brownlow.
    Our 1954 premiership players are our heroes, and it has to be said that Charlie was their hero.

    Comment

    • GVGjr
      Moderator
      • Nov 2006
      • 44939

      #3
      I don't think either rule change is necessary and I wonder how the AFL has fitted up the data to support this.
      If we change the sub rule then I agree with some statements Bevo has shared that we will need to increase the IC restriction by at least 5.
      Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"

      Comment

      • jazzadogs
        Bulldog Team of the Century
        • Oct 2008
        • 5712

        #4
        I have seen this adjudicated where accidental contact with the players foot, for example while running or in a contest, will be judged as a kick and free kick against. Hope that isn't going to be the case in AFL - should only be deliberate kicking actions.

        Comment

        • jazzadogs
          Bulldog Team of the Century
          • Oct 2008
          • 5712

          #5
          Also when are they scrapping ruck nominations/no third man up and rucks being able to grab the ball with no htb?

          Comment

          • Bornadog
            WOOF Clubhouse Leader
            • Jan 2007
            • 67202

            #6
            Originally posted by jazzadogs
            Also when are they scrapping ruck nominations/no third man up and rucks being able to grab the ball with no htb?
            The trouble is with no ruck nomination and no third man up, you can block the opposition ruckman and plead you didn't know he was the ruck.
            FFC: Established 1883

            Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.

            Comment

            • FrediKanoute
              Coaching Staff
              • Aug 2007
              • 3858

              #7
              I don't like the OOB rule change. Call me a traditionalist, but there was little wrong with the deliberate rule and the insufficient intent rule muddied what was already grey. Whilst they say that this will give greater clarity, I doubt it will as players and coaches will look for ways to win an advantage. The most obvious is forcing the ball onto an opposition player to gain a free kick. Given many players can kick 55/60m you would absolutely be doing this as a tactic. What about if its not clear cut? are we going to have ARC review boundary line matters as well, because hey, scores don't originate from the just inside the arcs and a poorly timed free kick in a key game will have fans livid.

              I think the less apparent impacts will be how the ruckman plays. If they no longer have to attend boundary line throw ins, how will they position themselves? I'd imagine as a defensive cover. What does this mean for forwards? Could a tinkering of the OOB rule have an impact on scoring and goals and actually reduce scoring opportunities as a result?

              Comment

              Working...