When you can legally 'drop the ball'

[perfectionist]

Rule 18.6.3 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Incorrect Disposal
Where a Player in Possession of the Football has not had Prior Opportunity, a field Umpire
shall award a Free Kick if that Player elects to Incorrectly Dispose of the football when
Legally Tackled.
For the avoidance of doubt, a Player does not elect to Incorrectly Dispose of the football
when:
(a) the Player genuinely attempts to Correctly Dispose of the football; (i.e. he tries to kick or handball but misses the ball and it drops)
(b) the Legal Tackle causes the football to be dislodged from the Player’s possession (i.e it is knocked from his hands).

The question then relies on the interpretation by the umpire of "Prior Opportunity."

Two extremes:
Either (a) or (b) above happen a second after the player is tackled - no prior opportunity - so, play on.
Either (a) or (b) above happen after the player has been tackled and tried to break the tackle - so, holding the ball.

As you can see, the gap between the two is wide, albeit being just a few seconds in time, and that is where "umpire interpretation" lays. The change to the rule a few years ago (allowing for no prior opportunity) introduced this extra bit of "interpretation" as if we didn't already have enough.

[Yorkeys]

Clearly Shakespeare didn't draft the rule. Too many negatives for me to really understand.

[bangaulegend]

I saw Nat Fyfe get a holding the ball free kick yesterday for exactly the same way Butler got his & no one even commented on it.

[Fugazi1966]

In answer to the OP

When you play for Geelong.

[kosifantutti]

I saw Nat Fyfe get a holding the ball free kick yesterday for exactly the same way Butler got his & no one even commented on it.

No doubt the AFL will issue an apology.

[saynta]

I saw Nat Fyfe get a holding the ball free kick yesterday for exactly the same way Butler got his & no one even commented on it.

No doubt the AFL will issue an apology.

f****** identical to the Butler bump FFS.

[Munga]

I thought Melbourne were caught holding the ball at least three or four times in the first five minutes! None were called

[saynta]

I thought Melbourne were caught holding the ball at least three or four times in the first five minutes! None were called

Yep and they were all obvious.

[CURLY]

I thought Melbourne were caught holding the ball at least three or four times in the first five minutes! None were called

Viney tried to barge through got caught ball up.

[Ghost Like]

In answer to the OP

When you play for Geelong.

That is also the answer to "When can you legally throw the ball?"

[Scollop]

I thought Melbourne were caught holding the ball at least three or four times in the first five minutes! None were called

Yep and they were all obvious.

It didn't matter early on, but the umps kept letting them get away with it in the second half when the game was up for grabs

Gawn held on to Paul Hunter's jumper and it was play on

Webster gets hit high and it's called play on

They jump straight into Higgins back and it's called paly on

Oliver tackles Jones and Zac had no prior. Also looked like Zac was pushed in the back

The frees were heavily in our favour in the first half, but that was because we worked harder and our tackle count was way ahead of theirs.

In the last quarter there were a few critical non decisions that could have turned the tide for us but I think the boys were spent

[Sainter_Dad]

The frees were heavily in our favour in the first half, but that was because we worked harder and our tackle count was way ahead of theirs.

How did the frees end up at 15-14 - what was the greatest differential - ie did we get to say 13 - 4 and then them get 10 - 2? It certainly felt that way.