Interpretation of holding the ball

[True Blue Sainter]

Hi everyone,

Still furious at the way we capitulated after quarter time - weak effort, but the worst part is it's not unexpected, typical St Kilda.

In any case, there were those couple of "holding the ball" decisions played - one against Coffield (I think in the 3rd) and I think one against Marshall in the 2nd where both players had ZERO opportunity to get rid of the ball but were pinged. One of the umps was quoted as saying "perfect tackle". Yeah?! So what - the bloke still needs to have an opportunity to get rid of it. Otherwise you're discouraging players from going in and trying to pick the ball up in a contested situation.

Watching other games played throughout the rest of the weekend, did anyone notice that players with seemingly more opportunity to dispose of the ball were being wrapped up and not getting pinged? So frustrating.

[ace]

The umpires chief changes interpretation of the rules from week to week.
The players train to behave instinctively.
They don't have time to think.
I don't even know if they get briefed on the change in interpretation.

It is frustrating for players and team supporters but the AFL does not care.
They are thinking more long term at where the game is heading and the quality of entertainment product they are selling to the public and TV.

[True Blue Sainter]

The umpires chief changes interpretation of the rules from week to week.
The players train to behave instinctively.
They don't have time to think.
I don't even know if they get briefed on the change in interpretation.

It is frustrating for players and team supporters but the AFL does not care.
They are thinking more long term at where the game is heading and the quality of entertainment product they are selling to the public and TV.

Valid points - however, in that case, shouldn't there be some degree of consistency across the matches on the same weekend?

I could accept it if I watched other games where it was adjudicated in the same manner, but I was left shaking my head

[CURLY]

Look at the umpires we had. Our game was mentioned numerous times by commentators during other games about the holding the ball interpratation in our game. Some one mentioned we were pinned a record amount. Margetts and Foote are known cheats.

[CarlD]

Holding the ball decision-making by umpires is as random and inconsistent as it comes. Players are still getting away with just dribbling (dropping) the ball out and not getting pinged for incorrect disposal.

[Ghost Like]

Holding the ball decision-making by umpires is as random and inconsistent as it comes. Players are still getting away with just dribbling (dropping) the ball out and not getting pinged for incorrect disposal.

This is true & with respect to the OP's grievance & this won't be popular, I believe the decision against young Coff was correct. Not holding the ball but incorrect disposal.

[st.byron]

Hi everyone,

Still furious at the way we capitulated after quarter time - weak effort, but the worst part is it's not unexpected, typical St Kilda.

In any case, there were those couple of "holding the ball" decisions played - one against Coffield (I think in the 3rd) and I think one against Marshall in the 2nd where both players had ZERO opportunity to get rid of the ball but were pinged. One of the umps was quoted as saying "perfect tackle". Yeah?! So what - the bloke still needs to have an opportunity to get rid of it. Otherwise you're discouraging players from going in and trying to pick the ball up in a contested situation.

Watching other games played throughout the rest of the weekend, did anyone notice that players with seemingly more opportunity to dispose of the ball were being wrapped up and not getting pinged? So frustrating.

Absolutely true. There was another one against Ross right in front of us I think in the third quarter. Ball come down from a boundary ruck contest, Ross grabbed it out if the air and at almost the exact same moment he was tackled and pinned. He had ZERO, absolutely no chance to dispose of the ball. Ump paid HTB. Effectively he was penalised for going for the footy. We commented on it a few times during the game.

[older saint]

Leigh Matthews summed it up too much talk about rewarding the tackle (Clarkson) . Went over the top Friday and our game Sat with trying to cvover it with no realistic attempt to get around prior opportunity. As Matthews ( arguabbley greatest player and coaching discussions also) said when both armed pinned immediately it is imposible to even makea relaistic attempt.

Then watched some games Sunday and seemed more lienient again. Impossioble when it chagnes from game to game for players, coaches, fans etc.
Get ready to start watching seagulls everywhere

[Devilhead]

I said it in the Umpire Msrgetts and Foote thread

Problem with the umpiring is the appalling consistency

Its a lottery that said if you know what umpires you are going to get then you could prepare accordingly

The club should keep tabs on each individual umpire and see what they are paying at least then we might have a bit of an idea we what each individual umpire wiil be hot on cause they are all different in how they individually adjudicate decisions

Homework on opposition and umpires

[CURLY]

SEN using Hunter Clarks holding the ball which resulted in a Freo goal as a example of a clear mistake.

[SaintDippa]

Still can't fathom the Marshall HTB. Literally tackled one thousandth of a second after taking possession. Arm pinned, taken to ground and gone. Having said that.... Enjoyed watching - except Swans game - the hot potato style of footy that has resulted. At least the ball is moving.

[asiu]

whats gunna eff this game
is less actual game time
more add time on telly
countdown clocks
as that pre mentioned extra add time finishes
so the maggot
can bounce the ball and get on with it

filling every space with music or inane chatter
aint helping either

i wanna interact with ‘my’ bunch of ferals
even if that ... is just listening to em losing their respective rags ... coz its funny , n real.

OUT with the amerikanism ffs

Breathing Space Matters at the footy.

if i wasn’t a tragic
i wouldn’t go

[st.byron]

whats gunna eff this game
is less actual game time
more add time on telly
countdown clocks
as that pre mentioned extra add time finishes
so the maggot
can bounce the ball and get on with it

filling every space with music or inane chatter
aint helping either

i wanna interact with ‘my’ bunch of ferals
even if that ... is just listening to em losing their respective rags ... coz its funny , n real.

OUT with the amerikanism ffs

Breathing Space Matters at the footy.

if i wasn’t a tragic
i wouldn’t go

Likewise. Every space filled up. Even between a goal and the ball being bounced. And please note that every goal is a Chemist Warehouse goal.

[The Craw]

Still can't fathom the Marshall HTB. Literally tackled one thousandth of a second after taking possession. Arm pinned, taken to ground and gone. Having said that.... Enjoyed watching - except Swans game - the hot potato style of footy that has resulted. At least the ball is moving.

With one arm pinned and the other holding the ball the only way Marshall could of disposed of the ball was by dropping it, so he held it.

So if he dropped it, incorrect disposal, but held onto it, holding the ball. Correct decision.

[SaintDippa]

One thousandth of a second is prior opportunity? Marshall was a mistake otherwise everyone who is tackled and does not correctly dispose should be pinged. That was not the case many times in many matches.

[CURLY]

Still can't fathom the Marshall HTB. Literally tackled one thousandth of a second after taking possession. Arm pinned, taken to ground and gone. Having said that.... Enjoyed watching - except Swans game - the hot potato style of footy that has resulted. At least the ball is moving.

With one arm pinned and the other holding the ball the only way Marshall could of disposed of the ball was by dropping it, so he held it.

So if he dropped it, incorrect disposal, but held onto it, holding the ball. Correct decision.

Incorrect. Prior opportunity is a requirement of the rule.

[The Craw]

Still can't fathom the Marshall HTB. Literally tackled one thousandth of a second after taking possession. Arm pinned, taken to ground and gone. Having said that.... Enjoyed watching - except Swans game - the hot potato style of footy that has resulted. At least the ball is moving.

With one arm pinned and the other holding the ball the only way Marshall could of disposed of the ball was by dropping it, so he held it.

So if he dropped it, incorrect disposal, but held onto it, holding the ball. Correct decision.

Incorrect. Prior opportunity is a requirement of the rule.

Um....he had an opportunity to dispose of the ball, by dropping it or throwing it with one hand, which is illegal so he held onto it, therefore holding the ball. Correct decision.

[CURLY]

Still can't fathom the Marshall HTB. Literally tackled one thousandth of a second after taking possession. Arm pinned, taken to ground and gone. Having said that.... Enjoyed watching - except Swans game - the hot potato style of footy that has resulted. At least the ball is moving.

With one arm pinned and the other holding the ball the only way Marshall could of disposed of the ball was by dropping it, so he held it.

So if he dropped it, incorrect disposal, but held onto it, holding the ball. Correct decision.

Incorrect. Prior opportunity is a requirement of the rule.

Um....he had an opportunity to dispose of the ball, by dropping it or throwing it with one hand, which is illegal so he held onto it, therefore holding the ball. Correct decision.

Please never become a umpire.

[SaintDippa]

Craw. Sorry don't know how to embed your post.
If it was a correct decision why then isn't every tackle where the ball is held in a free?

[resaintlee]

The fox commentary team were discussing this before the Coffield incident suggesting players would be safer to hit the ball on rather than attempt to take possession

[Red]

I like the way it was interpreted. I can't stand it when a player picks up the ball trying to create a stoppage.
Neither Coffield or Marshall were interested in moving the ball on.

[SaintDippa]

I like also like the interpretation but hated the inconsistencies. Marshall took possession and almost instantly was brought to ground. Just make it no choice for umpires to interpret. Take possession you need to rid it legally. Get tackled by 3 blokes a milisecond later anywhere on the ground bang gone.

[CQ SAINT]

Still can't fathom the Marshall HTB. Literally tackled one thousandth of a second after taking possession. Arm pinned, taken to ground and gone. Having said that.... Enjoyed watching - except Swans game - the hot potato style of footy that has resulted. At least the ball is moving.

With one arm pinned and the other holding the ball the only way Marshall could of disposed of the ball was by dropping it, so he held it.

So if he dropped it, incorrect disposal, but held onto it, holding the ball. Correct decision.

The rule states that in the spirit of the game, to be fair, he should have an opportunity to dispose of the ball correctly.
He had no prior opportunity and did not dispose of it incorrectly. Ball up. That is fair and in the spirit of the game.

[Red]

I think he had the opportunity to knock the ball, but chose to pick it up.

[CURLY]

I think he had the opportunity to knock the ball, but chose to pick it up.

Yes because the name of the game is football and he needs to gain possesion to distribute it.


Please don't umpire,.