"deliberate out of bounds"?

[Dry Rot]

The game is now on replay here on Sydney, and I just saw Bateman trying to force a behind and hit the behind post = free to the Cats.

That is bullshit, IMO. How often is this rule stupidly invoked by umps?

[G-Mo77]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

I don't think it was BS at all he is try to rush a deliberate behind, unfortunately he hit the post and it was out of bounds. It was just unfortunate it wasn’t the wrong call.

I've actually been called for it while playing quite a few years ago.

[Dry Rot]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

I don't think it was BS at all he is try to rush a deliberate behind, unfortunately he hit the post and it was out of bounds. It was just unfortunate it wasn’t the wrong call.

If he was "deliberately" trying to rush a behind ie intent but failed, then how can he be pinged for "deliberately out of bounds"?

[The Coon Dog]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

The game is now on replay here on Sydney, and I just saw Bateman trying to force a behind and hit the behind post = free to the Cats.

That is bullshit, IMO. How often is this rule stupidly invoked by umps?

Every time this scenario occurs.

Players know that if they attempt to concede a behind & get it wrong, the consequences are severe.

In attempting to concede a behind, the umpires are instructed to interpret the defenders actions as deliberate, consequently, if the ball goes out of bounds, the umpires must pay a free kick for a deliberate action that has caused the ball to go out of bounds.

I think it's a silly interpretation, but one well known, just seems very harsh.

No good blaming the umpires either, they just enforce the rules that are determined by the rules committee.

[G-Mo77]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

If he was "deliberately" trying to rush a behind ie intent but failed, then how can he be pinged for "deliberately out of bounds"?

I know where your coming from. You could look at it this way too. He had no intention of trying to keep that ball in. It wasn't the wrong call.

[Topdog]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

It was one of the things they implemented to try and stop people rushing behinds.

Get it wrong and you are in a lot of trouble.

[Bulldog4life]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

The game is now on replay here on Sydney, and I just saw Bateman trying to force a behind and hit the behind post = free to the Cats.

That is bullshit, IMO. How often is this rule stupidly invoked by umps?

It has been happening for years. I remember a game at Carlton, not sure of the year, when Peter Foster got pinged when he tried to handball through the oppositions goals and hit the behind post on the full.

[LostDoggy]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

I know where your coming from. You could look at it this way too. He had no intention of trying to keep that ball in. It wasn't the wrong call.

Totally agree. By trying to rush a behind you are deliberately trying to put the put the ball out of play. If you get it wrong you should be penalised.

[Bornadog]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

It has been happening for years. I remember a game at Carlton, not sure of the year, when Peter Foster got pinged when he tried to handball through the oppositions goals and hit the behind post on the full.

Hey, I remember that game too, the umpire got banished to the country as those days there was no such interpretation. Was it umpire Vasilou or something similiar?

[Bornadog]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

Totally agree. By trying to rush a behind you are deliberately trying to put the put the ball out of play. If you get it wrong you should be penalised.

Otherwise the player could put it out of bounds and say they were trying to push it through the points.

[SonofScray]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

Totally agree. By trying to rush a behind you are deliberately trying to put the put the ball out of play. If you get it wrong you should be penalised.

That has always been my understanding of the ruling, I've been called for it playing as well.

I actually think its fair enough, by rushing a behind you are putting the ball out of bounds in order to regain possession. It adds the element of risk to that decision I suppose. then again, conceding the behind might be considered risk enough in itself. That's how I thought of it until in recent years where its become more and more common.

[Bulldog4life]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

Otherwise the player could put it out of bounds and say they were trying to push it through the points.

Unfortunately I am having trouble remembering the exact year let alone the umpire.

Good memory if you are correct.

[Bornadog]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

Unfortunately I am having trouble remembering the exact year let alone the umpire.

Good memory if you are correct.

I remember the game, Carlton kicked 11 straight goals before they had a behind. I think we only had a couple of goals on the board to that stage.

We ended up getting flogged

[LostDoggy]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

Totally agree. By trying to rush a behind you are deliberately trying to put the put the ball out of play. If you get it wrong you should be penalised.

I agree, we've been pinged for it before in the last couple of years- I vaguely remember Minson or Harris doing it a year or two ago. It's a good rule, they are trying to take it out of play and stuffed it up...big punishment, but they shouldn't make the mistake.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: "deliberate out of bounds"?

It has been happening for years. I remember a game at Carlton, not sure of the year, when Peter Foster got pinged when he tried to handball through the oppositions goals and hit the behind post on the full.

I reckon it was Tits.

It was in front of the hill (where the Legends stand is now) in the southern pocket. Ken Hunter got the free (what was he doing in the forward line?) and dobbed it with a banana.