The Interchange Rule

[ttufc7]

Firstly I just want so say that I am not complaining about us being on the recieving end of this new interchange penalty as all the players know or should know the rule and we were obviously outside of that.

My question is, having not seen a replay yet how far from the interchange line was the player coming off when our player was coming on?

I understand that the rule has been made definate but i cant see why, with an interchange steward in place common sense can't have an impact on the policing of the rule. Under the rule if a player is running to the bench, if they are even 1 metre from the line as the player set to replace him runs on to the field then the rule can be enforced.

I guess what im trying to say is how can a rule punish a team so severly for a breach that has no impact on the game and gives the team responsible no advantage whatsoever. Why can't it be left to the interchange steward to make a judgement call. It wouldn't be hard.

[True Blue Sainter]

It's a pretty terrible rule really. As you correctly point out, if a player runs onto the ground, whilst the man he is replacing is barely a couple of metres away (and for that fraction of a second there are 19 men on the field), there is no impact on the game whatsoever. Common sense should prevail.

Does anybody know what the penalty is for the breach of the rule? Is it just a 50m penalty? If so, what were the other 2 50's for that led to Harris' goal?

[ttufc7]

The penalty is that the ball is brought to the centre and then a 50 metre penalty is walked out from there. basically it gives the opposition team a free shot at goal

[Saints-06-Premiers]

apparently the rule is if the balls in the back half, its taken to the centre and then a 50m penalty

kinda ridiculous cos its never been a problem from a hundred years then sydney delibrately cheat and dont get punished yet we do for a really minor offence

bring back the headcount

[cowboy18]

The rule's OK in my opinion, the punishment seems excessive.

It wouldn't be an issue if the AFL would acknowledge that one team managed to snatch 2 premiership points by cheating and actually playing with 19 players at a critical time in the game. They tried to make a point with the rule set up.

I doubt that the rule is there to control these 2 second overlaps, it came in to stop teams cheating.

Should be turnover plus 50m. It's overstepping and should be easily controlled.

[Mr Magic]

During the telecast Christi Malthouse said that she had spoken to the officials and that Luke Ball had been on for 2 seconds before the player coming off had crossed the line.

That resulted in a penalty against us equivalent to a free kick and 3x50 metre penalties.

The rule was brought in to solve a problem, but the punishment seems ridiculously harsh for an inadvertant breaking of the rule. By all means punish blatant infringements like the Swans one against the kangaroos, where the player was on teh ground for 20+ seconds.

This rule/penalty will need to be looked at again (remember that Monkey-Boy has already changed it once) because if a final is decided by a penalty from one of these, there will be trouble.

Quite frankly, what happens if one of our interchange players (not coming onto the field) walks over to the opposition 'interchange box' where a player is waiting to come on, and pushes him over the line? Ridiculous idea maybe but how many times was a player pushed into the centre square at a ballup?

I can just see a coach(coaches?) trying to gain an advantage in an important game with this 'trick'. Why wouldn't you when it results in a free shot at goal as the rule currently stands?

[ttufc7]

Not only do I think the rule is silly but what brainiac thought of the penalty. Was just making the penalty is a free kick 40 metres out from goal too simple?

Too many people at the AFL rules commitee trying to justify their jobs i think!

[GrumpyOne]

A far better option would be a sizable fine and the offending player sin-binned for 5 mins. Up the other end of the ground for a free shot on goal is far too harsh IMO.

[saintm]

Punishment does not fit the crime in my opinion and it would be interesting to see what happens if such a penalty is applied in a close Grand Final.

There was also an interchange infringement yesterday in the Melbourne v Brisbane game, not sure of the particulars only that a point was scored from the free kick.

[longtimesaint]

I think it was an Adrian Anderson "brainwave' similar to the ridiculous match review system.
A system that allows a 25% reduction to Barry Hall's guilty plea, Adam Goodes to have multiple reprimands, and at the same time gives a loading to Steven Baker for something no one saw.

[Solar]

simple solution, over 5 seconds or the player coming on touches the ball and it is a penalty of a 50. Under 5 seconds and it's a free no matter where it is paid (or a 50 if the team who doesn't offend has the ball).

This is similar to the runner being in the 50 for a kick out.

And to fix the fiasco that is an offcial running onto the field stopping play you have the umps have a buzzer like a doctor has and they get buzzed with "interchange offence against stkilda, free kick"

[Solar]

I think it was an Adrian Anderson "brainwave' similar to the ridiculous match review system.
A system that allows a 25% reduction to Barry Hall's guilty plea, Adam Goodes to have multiple reprimands, and at the same time gives a loading to Steven Baker for something no one saw.

my fav is goodes having points hanging over his head and having these points get the 25% reduction as well as the points for the offence

sheesh that make life hard KISS (keep it simple, stupid)

[BAM! (shhhh)]

I think it's great that the AFL has finally decided to put some structure around the interchange, especially given how much use it gets.

I think it's ridiculous that the harshest penalty in the game is handed out for a technical infraction.

Barry Hall roundhouse punches Brent Staker for a knockout. Free kick + 50m.

Luke Power steps on the ground for half a second to early, ball moved from defensive wing area to 30M out in front of goal... (gimme shot is missed, Lions lose by 1 point).

The mere presence of the interchange ump means the Sydney/Kangas situation is no longer possible, and with no ability to cheat (on purpose or accidentally) there is simply no reason the penalty for screwing up by a couple of seconds needs be treated as the most heinous act in football.

[St DAC]

OTOH I would have thought our players should have been in absolutely no doubt about this rule, and it's possible repercussions. How hard is it to wait until your bloke is in the box? Luke Ball is supposed to be super smart isn't he? Seems like a really stupid error, and a completely avoidable one to boot.

Having said that the punishment seems excessive for the crime, but it's not like the penalty was a big secret.

[bergsone]

Fine the club,player or both and get on with the game

[saintspremiers]

A far better option would be a sizable fine and the offending player sin-binned for 5 mins. Up the other end of the ground for a free shot on goal is far too harsh IMO.

Well sensible options such as yours or just a 50 metre penalty from wherever the ball is is far too simple for Monkey Nuts Anderscum.

The silly twit had the gall to say after the match that it's far less severe a penalty than losing all your points if there was a head count!

Well, Monkey Nuts, how the F*** do you expect any captain to be able to count all the players on the ground, notice there are 19 men and order a head count?

Or, even if the coach, or a assistant coach (under the old rules), noticed 19 men on the ground, they would've had only 30 seconds (when Shitme cheated) to get a message to the runner to then relay to the captain to order a head count!

F*** off Monkey Nuts and just resign from your post.

Patronising comments like yours don't wash with ANY of us.

You are incompetent and just downright out of touch with reality.

Keep sucking up to the like of Sydney and no doubt you'll keep your job.

YOUR days are numbered little man!

[gooner]

I think it's ridiculous that the harshest penalty in the game is handed out for a technical infraction.

Barry Hall roundhouse punches Brent Staker for a knockout. Free kick + 50m.

Luke Power steps on the ground for half a second to early, ball moved from defensive wing area to 30M out in front of goal... (gimme shot is missed, Lions lose by 1 point).

The mere presence of the interchange ump means the Sydney/Kangas situation is no longer possible, and with no ability to cheat (on purpose or accidentally) there is simply no reason the penalty for screwing up by a couple of seconds needs be treated as the most heinous act in football.

It is strange that what is tantamount to introducing the penalty kick in footy is for this pen-pushing, administrative type of infraction.
I still find it odd that you can have a player who KOs an opposition player and it's the team they would play next round who get the benefit of the penalty wheras here someone with a clipboard mucks up and its an automatic set shot for goal.
I often think Franz Kafka is on the rules of the game committee sitting next to KB.

[ttufc7]

I say lose the rules comittee completely!

No other major sporting code in the world piss farts around and changes rules on a whim like the AFL does. Why after over 100 years of Australian Football with very little change has there been more rule changes than you can poke a stick at in the last 5-10 years? It is completely unneccisarry.

The thing that I think highlights the incompetence of this comittee the most is the fact that a few years ago they introduced a rule that would make the game move faster by allowing teams to kick the ball back into play after a behind had been kicked. Then early this year they were complaining "oh the games moving too fast" so they capped interchange rotations for the NAB cup! Personally i think it will only be a matter of time before they try and force this rule into the home and away season.

The AFL's umpires have enough trouble policing the existing rules correctly already without a brand spanking new rule each year.

LEAVE THE BLOODY GAME ALONE!

[SteveStevens66]

I say lose the rules comittee completely!

No other major sporting code in the world piss farts around and changes rules on a whim like the AFL does. Why after over 100 years of Australian Football with very little change has there been more rule changes than you can poke a stick at in the last 5-10 years? It is completely unneccisarry.

The thing that I think highlights the incompetence of this comittee the most is the fact that a few years ago they introduced a rule that would make the game move faster by allowing teams to kick the ball back into play after a behind had been kicked. Then early this year they were complaining "oh the games moving too fast" so they capped interchange rotations for the NAB cup! Personally i think it will only be a matter of time before they try and force this rule into the home and away season.

The AFL's umpires have enough trouble policing the existing rules correctly already without a brand spanking new rule each year.

LEAVE THE BLOODY GAME ALONE!

Excellent post. The overarching problem is that the AFL is the only code that has a rules committee that is in permanent session. It order, therefore, to justify its existence, it keeps adding new rules. It is absurd. Worse than this is the general attitude of AFL and the umpires. Both the penalties mandated by the League and the umpiring itself have become draconian. Any expression of common sense or discretion on the part of an umpire has been legislated out of the game, the result of which, is that the most minor offences, e.g. being on the ground for 2 seconds before the other bloke has come off, or the most insignificant touching of an opponent's arm in a marking contest, or the slightest nudge in the back, are treated as high crimes.

Listen to the umpires when they are miked up, nagging, screaming at players, no lightness of touch about them at all. They sound like humourless, bloody headmasters telling off children. In fact they sound like Dimwit and Anderson in the way they patronisingly speak to the public, as though we need to be instructed about how footy should be played. They take us all for fools.

The AFL has everyone convinced it has improved the game. Instead it has ruined the game as a spectacle with its intrusiveness and micro-management.

When a Grand Final is lost because of an interchange infraction, and the resultant goal, then all hell will break lose and those who are sanguine about the state of the game at the moment won't feel that way then.

[yipper]

Just think - we are in the GF, and Barry Hall decks someone whilst the ball is in their forward pocket. He will get free kicked (maybe even reported) and a 50m penalty. We now have the ball, but it is still in their half of the ground. However: If Luke Ball puts his big toe over the interchange line whilst the ball is in our forward pocket - well then, that will mean the ball is taken back into the centre of the ground - and then 50 meters is paid to a spot 20m out from our opponents goal - result a goal!! Which situation is the more serious and deserving of the harsher penalty??

[HarveysDeciple]

all the afl had to do was show some balls and say "look sydney, you lose your points"

Case closed. No need for rule change