AFL make rules on the fly again

'THIRD MAN up' has been banned in a radical change to the laws of the game in 2017.

In a surprise move, the AFL notified clubs on Wednesday that next season only nominated ruckmen will be able to compete at a contest for a throw-in or ball-up.

Other players will therefore no longer be permitted to contest a ruck contest as 'third man up'.

A stricter interpretation of deliberate rushed behinds will also be introduced and the interpretation of where a player draws high contact will be simplified.

However, theto ban 'third man up' decision is sure to spark debate, with coaches split as to whether a rule was necessary when consulted on the proposed change at the annual AFL laws summit on the day of the NAB AFL Draft.

The AFL Commission approved the contentious recommendation from the League's football department that came after widespread consultation with a range of relevant stakeholders.

The AFL is understood to have been concerned that if it continued to allow players the ability to go 'third man up' the role of the ruckman would be under threat.

AFL football operations manager Mark Evans said it was important a change was made to protect one of the game's unique features.

"Eliminating the 'third man up' at ruck contests will support the recruitment of tall players and ensure our game continues to be played at the elite level by players of various sizes and differing abilities," Evans said

Follow
Mark Blicavs ✔ @MarkBlicavs
Officially announcing my retirement from the game effective immediately #threesacrowd @seekjobs
6:25 PM - 21 Dec 2016
245 245 Retweets 866 866 likes
The incidence of players going 'third man up' at stoppages has increased dramatically in the past two years from 8.5 per cent in 2014 to 13.2 per cent last season.

Statistics show there is no link between the controversial tactic and clearances, and medical advice was that injuries had not increased because of the spike.

However the umpires believe banning 'third man up' will make the game easier to adjudicate.

Many in the industry are split, with Brownlow medallist Patrick Dangerfield saying a fortnight ago he did not think there was a need to ban it.


However, Brisbane Lions ruckman told AFL.com.au that from a selfish point of view as a ruckman, he would like the see the rule changed.

"I don't reckon I have been injured from being jumped into, but I like the contest and hate it when you think you have got a bloke covered and someone comes out from behind," Martin said.

"It would help it be a pure battle of strength, otherwise we just get another midfielder because they are reducing stoppages anyway."

Lions coach Chris Fagan was less certain a change was needed when he spoke to SEN 1116 last Friday.

"Keep it, but if you're good enough, legally block the third jumper," Fagan said.

"If the third jumper [is] good enough to beat the blocks around the stoppage, then so be it."

Umpires have been briefing clubs on the proposed changes with the high tackle also being looked at.

"Umpires will be instructed that whether a tackle is reasonable should always be their first assessment when adjudicating high contact," Evans said.

Umpires will be asked to call play on when a tackle is assessed as reasonable and the player with the ball is responsible for the high contact however the call carrier will be protected against high or reckless tackling.

The stricter interpretation of the deliberate rushed behind, will take into account the distance a player is from the goals and whether the defender had a chance to dispose of the ball.

Evans has indicated that players who have clear possession will be expected to keep the ball in play under the new interpretation.

The protected area around the mark will also be clarified, with the umpires looking at enforcing the area once the player in possession has moved back on their mark.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-12-21/third-man-up-gets-the-chop-in-radical-rule-change

This is despite the players being against it typical AFL and after trade/draft period would hate if you brought in someone who can play 3rd man up and he can no longer do that
«13

Comments

  • RebootReboot If the band you're in starts playing different tunes, I'll see you on the dark side of the moon
    edited December 2016
    So we have now almost arrived at the basketball tip off.
  • DiggersDiggers Tank fly boss walk jam nitty-gritty
    I despise the 3rd man up.
  • True_Value_BlitzerTrue_Value_Blitzer Irrelevant. Always
    Classic.

    Makes changes for the sake of it, and then pats themselves on the back at how good they are...fkn laughable

    Mob of *****
  • Good move. Very happy with this. Still hate the AFL however.
  • Reboot said:

    So we have no almost arrived at the basketball tip off.

    Pretty soon every time there is a stoppage teams will just it in turns to receive the ball
  • Now can we just let the big fellas go at it with out calling bullshit free kicks all the time. Ffs rucking used to be an artform now it's just a 3 step tippy tapoff
  • Anyone else can see morphing into no boundary throw ins each team starts with the ball at the beginning of each quarter seriously what next zones that you cant leave ONCE AGAIN THEY HAVE NO FARKIN IDEA~!
  • I actually don't mind this particular change, but still, **** the AFL with their **** constant rule changes and **** meddling **** **** pieces of **** ****
  • SCareySCarey once was rijofl
    I support the ruckman getting a clearer go at it.

    It is interesting though that this one splits supporters down the middle.

    I didn't mind the AFL's justification that they want to support the big players to stay in the game and keep their pivotal role.

    Genuine ruckman are in danger of becoming extinct, the game needs its dinosaurs.
  • edited December 2016
    I love the bit in the article that says that only "nominated ruckmen" will be allowed to contest ball ups and boundary throw ins.

    Who nominates them? The umpires? The coaches? The captains? From the teamsheet?

    It's almost like Little League now.

    Are we going to see the fat pudgy kid go up against the tall athletically slim built girl or whoever two opposing players nearest to the ump when they blow the whistle compete the contest?

    I'll be bemused as to what sport I'll be watching in 2017 with all these changes happening.
  • "Statistics show there is no link between the controversial tactic and clearances"

    I call bullshit on this. Just because the team who puts the third man up doesn't always win the clearance doesn't mean there isn't a link.

    I think the change will make the game easier to close down and more stoppages will be the result.
  • ivan said:

    "Statistics show there is no link between the controversial tactic and clearances"

    I call bullshit on this. Just because the team who puts the third man up doesn't always win the clearance doesn't mean there isn't a link.

    I think the change will make the game easier to close down and more stoppages will be the result.

    Further on this just watch sides with a dominant ruckmen and a narrow lead force stoppage after stoppage late in games and quarters.
  • Houli DooliHouli Dooli Half Forward Flanker
    meh.
    AFL just trying to get on the front cover/back cover of newspapers leading up to christmas.
  • YossarianYossarian Follow AFL? No, I follow Essendon
    It will definitely add to stoppages. Two wrestling rucks rarely get a jump at the ball which is what makes the third man effective because he can jump and spike the ball clearing the area.
  • David J RichardsonDavid J Richardson Relevant Avatar King
    Will the ump nominate the two rucks before each contest, like in the under-tens?
  • SCarey said:

    I support the ruckman getting a clearer go at it.

    It is interesting though that this one splits supporters down the middle.

    I didn't mind the AFL's justification that they want to support the big players to stay in the game and keep their pivotal role.

    Genuine ruckman are in danger of becoming extinct, the game needs its dinosaurs.

    What a load of ****
    What next? Compulsory to play 2 players over 200cm and 5 under 180cm to "keep them in the game"?
    If an athlete(s) can't adapt to the way their sport is heading they don't deserve to play at the elite level

    Perhaps Vandal Savage and Magneto were right in their suggestion(s) mankind was slowing down its own glorious evolution
  • I love the bit in the article that says that only "nominated ruckmen" will be allowed to contest ball ups and boundary throw ins.

    Who nominates them? The umpires? The coaches? The captains? From the teamsheet?

    It's almost like Little League now.

    Are we going to see the fat pudgy kid go up against the tall athletically slim built girl or whoever two opposing players nearest to the ump when they blow the whistle compete the contest?

    I'll be bemused as to what sport I'll be watching in 2017 with all these changes happening.

    Players on field already nominate a ruckman at every ball up and throw in. That part is not a rule change.
  • Yossarian said:

    It will definitely add to stoppages. Two wrestling rucks rarely get a jump at the ball which is what makes the third man effective because he can jump and spike the ball clearing the area.

    AFL reckons the data doesn't back that statement up.
  • ivan said:

    ivan said:

    "Statistics show there is no link between the controversial tactic and clearances"

    I call bullshit on this. Just because the team who puts the third man up doesn't always win the clearance doesn't mean there isn't a link.

    I think the change will make the game easier to close down and more stoppages will be the result.

    Further on this just watch sides with a dominant ruckmen and a narrow lead force stoppage after stoppage late in games and quarters.
    What about when the third man up is used by teams with a narrow lead to nullify a dominant ruckman and force stoppage after stoppage?
  • David J RichardsonDavid J Richardson Relevant Avatar King
    Players on field already nominate a ruckman at every ball up and throw in. That part is not a rule change.
    And the umps already give stupid frees because they sometimes misunderstand who they are.
  • RebootReboot If the band you're in starts playing different tunes, I'll see you on the dark side of the moon
    SCarey said:

    I support the ruckman getting a clearer go at it.

    It is interesting though that this one splits supporters down the middle.

    I didn't mind the AFL's justification that they want to support the big players to stay in the game and keep their pivotal role.

    Genuine ruckman are in danger of becoming extinct, the game needs its dinosaurs.


    This is about having really tall people pretend to be ruckman. Way better they remove the centre circle and allow ruck work to reintroduce tests of strength rather than just asking are you 847 feet tall. This is about homes for kids who don't stick with basketball, and absolutely nothing to do with dinosaurs.
  • SCareySCarey once was rijofl

    SCarey said:

    I support the ruckman getting a clearer go at it.

    It is interesting though that this one splits supporters down the middle.

    I didn't mind the AFL's justification that they want to support the big players to stay in the game and keep their pivotal role.

    Genuine ruckman are in danger of becoming extinct, the game needs its dinosaurs.

    What a load of ****
    What next? Compulsory to play 2 players over 200cm and 5 under 180cm to "keep them in the game"?
    If an athlete(s) can't adapt to the way their sport is heading they don't deserve to play at the elite level

    Perhaps Vandal Savage and Magneto were right in their suggestion(s) mankind was slowing down its own glorious evolution

    Don't be so full of **** yourself. If you had your way KB types would still be throwing the ball out in front of themselves and drawing frees.

    Just saying I think a ruck contest should be between 2 ruckman and if you want to legislate they should be under 180cm that's your business.

  • Other rule changes not within the AFL article posted


    In a series of pre-Christmas rule changes, clubs were told:

    * THERE will be a stricter interpretation of deliberate rushed behinds.

    * PLAYERS won’t get a free kick for high contact if they drop their knees or raise their arms to make a legal tackle illegal.

    * PUNCHES to the stomach will have a “stricter interpretation”, meaning players are more likely to cop a suspension.

    * JUMPER punches with minimal impact will attract a fine.

    * THE match review panel will be given the power to recommend a sanction to clubs involved in large melees or multiple breaches in a single season.

    * CHARGES of engaging in a melee and wrestling will be merged to further discourage repeat offenders.

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/luke-hodge-has-labelled-the-afls-decision-to-abolish-the-third-man-up-rule-as-ridiculous/news-story/893e03a1a8415079acc291047d0c8160
  • Does anyone actually think that removing the third man up is going to make the game worse?

    People just want to get angry at the AFL and the rules committee for the sake of it.

  • mrjezmrjez Embracing The Hate
    I support no rule changes unless they are no-brainers after years of evidence showing that the game is suffering because of something. Alas, they're always knee-jerk reactions to evolution of the game, and each change usually creates its own set of new problems as players/teams work out ways to, not exploit, but work their way though or around the rules. The game will go through its phases of how it's played, but it's these rule changes that forever alter its course.
  • SCarey said:

    SCarey said:

    I support the ruckman getting a clearer go at it.

    It is interesting though that this one splits supporters down the middle.

    I didn't mind the AFL's justification that they want to support the big players to stay in the game and keep their pivotal role.

    Genuine ruckman are in danger of becoming extinct, the game needs its dinosaurs.

    What a load of ****
    What next? Compulsory to play 2 players over 200cm and 5 under 180cm to "keep them in the game"?
    If an athlete(s) can't adapt to the way their sport is heading they don't deserve to play at the elite level

    Perhaps Vandal Savage and Magneto were right in their suggestion(s) mankind was slowing down its own glorious evolution

    Don't be so full of **** yourself. If you had your way KB types would still be throwing the ball out in front of themselves and drawing frees.

    Just saying I think a ruck contest should be between 2 ruckman and if you want to legislate they should be under 180cm that's your business.

    I'm full of ****?
    You're basically advocating the AFL change the rules to appease a sub set of players once the natural progression of the game means their kind are no longer relevant
    The dinosaurs of the AFL have gone the way the actual dinosaurs, and that's the way it should be (otherwise it wouldn't have happened)
  • Will the ump nominate the two rucks before each contest, like in the under-tens?

    And they will say lets have 2 new ruckman you cant ruck 2 stoppages in a row.......walla aginst rioli would be fun!
  • Tippa vs Caleb Daniel.
  • Houli DooliHouli Dooli Half Forward Flanker
    McGrath vs Rioli
  • AllblackAllblack Voice of Reason
    I dont understand why this was actually a problem much less one that required action.
Sign In or Register to comment.