Hands in the Back rule

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages to chat Saints Footy and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Grimfang
Club Player
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:30am
Location: Tecoma, Vic.
Been thanked: 1 time

Hands in the Back rule

Post: # 549146Post Grimfang »

Does anybody know where in the Laws of the Game 2008 I can find this rule relating to marking contests? I haven't been able to find it. The only ones that come close are:-

15.3 Free Kicks Relating to Disposal of the Football
15.4.3 Permitted Contact
Other than the Prohibited Contact identified under Law 15.4.5, a
Player may make contact with another Player:
(a) by using his or her hip, shoulder, chest, arms or open hands
provided that the football is no more than 5 metres away from
the Player;
(e) if such contact is incidental to a marking contest and the Player
is legitimately Marking or attempting to Mark the football.


AND

15.4.5 Prohibited Contact and Payment of Free Kick
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player where he or
she is satisfied that the Player has made Prohibited Contact with an
opposition Player.
A Player makes Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player if he
or she:
(b) pushes an opposition Player in the back, unless such contact
is incidental to a Marking contest and the Player is legitimately
Marking or attempting to Mark the football;


According to these; hands in the back, and even a push, are allowable if it is incidental to a marking contest and the player is legitimately marking or attempting to mark the football.

Either there's a super-secret hidden section to the rules that contains the "Hands-in-the-back" rule OR we're currently playing with a rule interpretation that is the polar opposite of the ACTUAL rule.


Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons; for you are a quick and tasty morsel.
saintsrus
SS Hall of Fame
Posts: 2324
Joined: Sat 01 Oct 2005 5:10pm
Location: F.K.A. saintsforlife
Been thanked: 3 times

Post: # 549149Post saintsrus »

I didnt see (C) Mathew Scarlett can do as he pleases


Before Im 85
User avatar
perfectionist
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 9000
Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 345 times

Post: # 549150Post perfectionist »

Section 15.4.6 states that the party of the first part - oops wrong contract,
it states, the foregoing is to be ignored if the offender is playing against Nick Riewoldt hereby referred to as the offendee (otherwise knownst as scum St Kilda player), as in this circumstance, any means necessary to stop the aforementioned offendee from marking the ball shall be deemed legal.
And two fried eggs.


User avatar
Spinner
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 8502
Joined: Sat 02 Dec 2006 3:40pm
Location: Victoria
Has thanked: 185 times
Been thanked: 133 times

Post: # 549153Post Spinner »

saintsrus wrote:I didnt see (C) Mathew Scarlett can do as he pleases
Correct, using your elbo is STILL a push in the back. How pathetic are the umpiring fraternity.

Just because its not a hand, an elbo/forearm is still a push in the back. Resting an elbo/forearm in the back is fine (unlike the hand) but pushing with them is still a PUSH IN THE BACK.

Scarlett is a mole.


Post Reply