AFL -Buddy's "natural arc" not against the rules

[plugger66]

So Plugger, what is the 'protected area' around Buddy when he's kicking at goal?

Do opposition players have to stand out a further 5-10m away from teh man on the mark to allow for the 'natural arc'?

5 metres. If you actually watched games a few years back, clubs were crowding his kicking style and if they didnt move there was no penalty.

SO Joey was standing around 5m away from Buddy.
If he hadn't taken a step towards Buddy (pinged for 50m) what would have been the call if Buddy kept running towards him?

Nothing as was done 3 years ago.

[St Michele]

Typical

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/o ... 5897213289

BUDDY'S arc has the blessing of the highest power.
The AFL said today Lance Franklin's "natural arc" when kicking for goal was not against the rules, despite the laws of the game apparently unequivocal that a player must not deviate from a "direct line".

Franklin's distinctive kicking style flies in the face of rule 16.3.1, which states: "Where a player is kicking for a goal after being awarded a mark or a free-kick, the kick shall be taken along a direct line from the mark to the centre of the goal line."

So I assume now all players can say they have a natural arc and will be allowed to do the same thing.

Even in a Grand Final, post-siren shot-for-goal scenario, Franklin would be allowed to swing drastically to the left, regardless of it opening up the goals.

[St DAC]

But if he has a natural arc - in order to kick over the man on the mark he'd have to play on in the first instance (ie. start 15m off the line).

Probably. And that's the concession umpires should make to his swing; that he starts away from the line of the mark so that he gains no advantage during his run in, and so he actually kicks it over the mark.

So, assuming he has a 3 metre arc, on the right flank he starts 3 metres outside and swings inside, and on the left flank he starts 3 metres inside and swings out.

[degruch]

Laughable.

[plugger66]

Laughable.

Agree whay would anyone give a stuff.

[degruch]

Laughable.

Agree whay would anyone give a stuff.

I'm glad we all know he's outside the rules...I still want to see that list of others. Is it a secret Adrian, or do other clubs know?

[plugger66]

Laughable.

Agree whay would anyone give a stuff.

I'm glad we all know he's outside the rules...I still want to see that list of others. Is it a secret Adrian, or do other clubs know?

Who are you talking to? My name is Jeff.

[degruch]

Laughable.

Agree whay would anyone give a stuff.

I'm glad we all know he's outside the rules...I still want to see that list of others. Is it a secret Adrian, or do other clubs know?

Who are you talking to? My name is Jeff.

Demoting yourself? I though Jeff was a mere puppet.

[Leo.J]

Why should anyone get compensation for their natural arc.

Learn to bloody run in a straight line... is Buddy retarded?

Murali Franklin...

This game is a farce at times.

This is one of the most straight forwards rules there is... bloody well police it properly you bunch of idiots.

[markp]

What farcical expediency.

John Clarke and Bryan Dawe should do a series about the AFL!

Exactly how wide does he (alone) get to run?

Is it really fair if he decides to take the kick at the peak of the arc?

Is a kick after the siren different... and if so, why?

[Leo.J]

What farcical expediency.

John Clarke and Bryan Dawe should do a series about the AFL!

Exactly how wide does he (alone) get to run?

Is it really fair if he decides to take the kick at the peak of the arc?

Is a kick after the siren different... and if so, why?

It really is a farcical situation.

Its a simple rule, yet now the Gieschen has made it complicated , this guy is a joke.

[plugger66]

What farcical expediency.

John Clarke and Bryan Dawe should do a series about the AFL!

Exactly how wide does he (alone) get to run?

Is it really fair if he decides to take the kick at the peak of the arc?

Is a kick after the siren different... and if so, why?

It really is a farcical situation.

Its a simple rule, yet now the Gieschen has made it complicated , this guy is a joke.

Maybe we should get rid of him. Lets get Schwab back or even Harry Beitzel. Thats right they were just as stupid as i remember. Just maybe it is a no win job like being head of the AFL. Name the last popular head of either area?

[degruch]

What farcical expediency.

John Clarke and Bryan Dawe should do a series about the AFL!

Hmmmm, I think those guys prefer to write their own script. An AFL comedy series would write itself...just take transcripts from JG's press conferences and MRP results alone...done!

[degruch]

What farcical expediency.

John Clarke and Bryan Dawe should do a series about the AFL!

Exactly how wide does he (alone) get to run?

Is it really fair if he decides to take the kick at the peak of the arc?

Is a kick after the siren different... and if so, why?

It really is a farcical situation.

Its a simple rule, yet now the Gieschen has made it complicated , this guy is a joke.

Maybe we should get rid of him. Lets get Schwab back or even Harry Beitzel. Thats right they were just as stupid as i remember. Just maybe it is a no win job like being head of the AFL. Name the last popular head of either area?

That's it...I forgot it was a popularity contest. How about just doing your job and enforcing the rules as they stand...surely that can't be hard?

[plugger66]

What farcical expediency.

John Clarke and Bryan Dawe should do a series about the AFL!

Exactly how wide does he (alone) get to run?

Is it really fair if he decides to take the kick at the peak of the arc?

Is a kick after the siren different... and if so, why?

It really is a farcical situation.

Its a simple rule, yet now the Gieschen has made it complicated , this guy is a joke.

Maybe we should get rid of him. Lets get Schwab back or even Harry Beitzel. Thats right they were just as stupid as i remember. Just maybe it is a no win job like being head of the AFL. Name the last popular head of either area?

That's it...I forgot it was a popularity contest. How about just doing your job and enforcing the rules as they stand...surely that can't be hard?

It isnt. The point i was making is that in some peoples opinions they will always be wrong. Go to the hawks forum and there will people complaining about the interchange on friday but no one complaining that the Franklin and Kosi incidents were wrong just like no one is complaining on here about the interchange rule being wrong from Friday night. It is a no win job as people before and the next person will find out. Hang around here long enough when the geich is replaced and ethe next person in charge will be the worst that we have ever had.

[degruch]

What farcical expediency.

John Clarke and Bryan Dawe should do a series about the AFL!

Exactly how wide does he (alone) get to run?

Is it really fair if he decides to take the kick at the peak of the arc?

Is a kick after the siren different... and if so, why?

It really is a farcical situation.

Its a simple rule, yet now the Gieschen has made it complicated , this guy is a joke.

Maybe we should get rid of him. Lets get Schwab back or even Harry Beitzel. Thats right they were just as stupid as i remember. Just maybe it is a no win job like being head of the AFL. Name the last popular head of either area?

That's it...I forgot it was a popularity contest. How about just doing your job and enforcing the rules as they stand...surely that can't be hard?

It isnt. The point i was making is that in some peoples opinions they will always be wrong. Go to the hawks forum and there will people complaining about the interchange on friday but no one complaining that the Franklin and Kosi incidents were wrong just like no one is complaining on here about the interchange rule being wrong from Friday night. It is a no win job as people before and the next person will find out. Hang around here long enough when the geich is replaced and ethe next person in charge will be the worst that we have ever had.

Yes, I know what you're saying...gawd, you're no fun this morning.

One point, the interchange issue is not negotiable, so there's no room for Hawks supporters to complain. The rule was there, it was broken, the appropriate penalty was give.

This applies also to 'Buddy's arc' (which is getting a reasonable amount of press off this forum), except the rule was there, it was broken, it was ignored and an appropriate penalty not awarded - it resulted in a goal that may have not been kicked, in a game that ended as a draw.

In regard to Kosi's free, there have been two rules hypothesised as applying to the umpire's ruling, but neither applies to the situation. The umpire obviously acted on 'impulse', assuming it was a free. They were wrong and the resulting defense is only a retrospective patch up job. Would it have effected the result? We'll never know...I'm not certain it would have been a goal, but with Kosi's kicking, you could assume it would have at least have been a score.

IMO, Osbourne's outrageous advance call should be of more concern to all clubs...there was an even worse one awarded in the Essendon game the previous week, and it seems the umpires have lost grip on the rule.

[plugger66]

What is Osbournes advance call? And I am being serious. I have no idea what you are on about.

[saintbob]

This whole thing about bending the rules for certain players under the heading "It's his natural action" stinks!!!

That's exaactly why we have got a "CHUCKER" as the greatest wicket taker in Test cricket.

Why bother having rules?????

[saintsRrising]

I am "naturally" not very good at bouncing the ball. Can I have a Buddy Amendment and just be able to run without bouncing.....

[degruch]

What is Osbournes advance call? And I am being serious. I have no idea what you are on about.

Start of the 4th quarter - the beinning of 'the end'. Osbourne kicked a goal as a result of a play-on advantage free, despite being about 15m away from the point where the free was paid, and play had otherwise completely stopped.

It was also a terrible call (holding free against Gwilt, where the Hawks played clearly had hold of Gwilt's arm with both hands for several seconds prior to the marking contest - but with the advantage of instant replay on TV, I saw more of it than the umpire obviously), but that's beside the point.

In the Essendon game, every player had stopped for several seconds, when the player who'd been awarded the kick gingerly walked off with the ball, then decided to run, then kicked a goal. The ball was practically in the air when the advantage call was given, much the same as the Osbourne incident.

[saint3d]

I wonder what allowances a first gamer is given by the umpires because they don't yet know his natural arc.

[plugger66]

What is Osbournes advance call? And I am being serious. I have no idea what you are on about.

Start of the 4th quarter - the beinning of 'the end'. Osbourne kicked a goal as a result of a play-on advantage free, despite being about 15m away from the point where the free was paid, and play had otherwise completely stopped.

It was also a terrible call (holding free against Gwilt, where the Hawks played clearly had hold of Gwilt's arm with both hands for several seconds prior to the marking contest - but with the advantage of instant replay on TV, I saw more of it than the umpire obviously), but that's beside the point.

In the Essendon game, every player had stopped for several seconds, when the player who'd been awarded the kick gingerly walked off with the ball, then decided to run, then kicked a goal. The ball was practically in the air when the advantage call was given, much the same as the Osbourne incident.

Osbourne was going to kick that goal whether a free was paid or not. The ball fell to him and Gilbert slipped over. Dont mind that at all. cant comment on the Essendon one. didnt see it. Dont remember the Gwilt one. Obviously didnt worry me at the time. I was watching the things we could control like BJ kicking to a Hawks player with 2 seconds left on the clock and Dempster being smart enough to play on after the free for the interchange infringement and quickly kicking it to Rooy.

[degruch]

What is Osbournes advance call? And I am being serious. I have no idea what you are on about.

Start of the 4th quarter - the beinning of 'the end'. Osbourne kicked a goal as a result of a play-on advantage free, despite being about 15m away from the point where the free was paid, and play had otherwise completely stopped.

It was also a terrible call (holding free against Gwilt, where the Hawks played clearly had hold of Gwilt's arm with both hands for several seconds prior to the marking contest - but with the advantage of instant replay on TV, I saw more of it than the umpire obviously), but that's beside the point.

In the Essendon game, every player had stopped for several seconds, when the player who'd been awarded the kick gingerly walked off with the ball, then decided to run, then kicked a goal. The ball was practically in the air when the advantage call was given, much the same as the Osbourne incident.

Osbourne was going to kick that goal whether a free was paid or not. The ball fell to him and Gilbert slipped over. Dont mind that at all. cant comment on the Essendon one. didnt see it. Dont remember the Gwilt one. Obviously didnt worry me at the time. I was watching the things we could control like BJ kicking to a Hawks player with 2 seconds left on the clock and Dempster being smart enough to play on after the free for the interchange infringement and quickly kicking it to Rooy.

Oh yeah, Osbourne was going to kick the goal...that's right, what was I thinking. He'd have been kicking from the 50m arc, so would have been 100% dead cert, just like Kosi's. Of course, being 15m in the clear, on the run, with no-one else on the ground moving obviously helps.

BJ's kick was terrible...he does one every game, but his general play gives us about 5 every game, so sweet and sour. Dempster's play on was brilliant.

[plugger66]

What is Osbournes advance call? And I am being serious. I have no idea what you are on about.

Start of the 4th quarter - the beinning of 'the end'. Osbourne kicked a goal as a result of a play-on advantage free, despite being about 15m away from the point where the free was paid, and play had otherwise completely stopped.

It was also a terrible call (holding free against Gwilt, where the Hawks played clearly had hold of Gwilt's arm with both hands for several seconds prior to the marking contest - but with the advantage of instant replay on TV, I saw more of it than the umpire obviously), but that's beside the point.

In the Essendon game, every player had stopped for several seconds, when the player who'd been awarded the kick gingerly walked off with the ball, then decided to run, then kicked a goal. The ball was practically in the air when the advantage call was given, much the same as the Osbourne incident.

Osbourne was going to kick that goal whether a free was paid or not. The ball fell to him and Gilbert slipped over. Dont mind that at all. cant comment on the Essendon one. didnt see it. Dont remember the Gwilt one. Obviously didnt worry me at the time. I was watching the things we could control like BJ kicking to a Hawks player with 2 seconds left on the clock and Dempster being smart enough to play on after the free for the interchange infringement and quickly kicking it to Rooy.

Oh yeah, Osbourne was going to kick the goal...that's right, what was I thinking. He'd have been kicking from the 50m arc, so would have been 100% dead cert, just like Kosi's. Of course, being 15m in the clear, on the run, with no-one else on the ground moving obviously helps.

BJ's kick was terrible...he does one every game, but his general play gives us about 5 every game, so sweet and sour. Dempster's play on was brilliant.

What are you on about. It wasnt Osbournes free. He got the ball after the free. What has kicking from 50 to do with Osbourne? He was clear because Gilbert fell over not because he stopped. The others all stopped but they were no where near the play. If the whistle wasnt blown the same thing would have happened.

[degruch]

What is Osbournes advance call? And I am being serious. I have no idea what you are on about.

Start of the 4th quarter - the beinning of 'the end'. Osbourne kicked a goal as a result of a play-on advantage free, despite being about 15m away from the point where the free was paid, and play had otherwise completely stopped.

It was also a terrible call (holding free against Gwilt, where the Hawks played clearly had hold of Gwilt's arm with both hands for several seconds prior to the marking contest - but with the advantage of instant replay on TV, I saw more of it than the umpire obviously), but that's beside the point.

In the Essendon game, every player had stopped for several seconds, when the player who'd been awarded the kick gingerly walked off with the ball, then decided to run, then kicked a goal. The ball was practically in the air when the advantage call was given, much the same as the Osbourne incident.

Osbourne was going to kick that goal whether a free was paid or not. The ball fell to him and Gilbert slipped over. Dont mind that at all. cant comment on the Essendon one. didnt see it. Dont remember the Gwilt one. Obviously didnt worry me at the time. I was watching the things we could control like BJ kicking to a Hawks player with 2 seconds left on the clock and Dempster being smart enough to play on after the free for the interchange infringement and quickly kicking it to Rooy.

Oh yeah, Osbourne was going to kick the goal...that's right, what was I thinking. He'd have been kicking from the 50m arc, so would have been 100% dead cert, just like Kosi's. Of course, being 15m in the clear, on the run, with no-one else on the ground moving obviously helps.

BJ's kick was terrible...he does one every game, but his general play gives us about 5 every game, so sweet and sour. Dempster's play on was brilliant.

What are you on about. It wasnt Osbournes free. He got the ball after the free. What has kicking from 50 to do with Osbourne? He was clear because Gilbert fell over not because he stopped. The others all stopped but they were no where near the play. If the whistle wasnt blown the same thing would have happened.

If it's not Osbourne's free, what are you dribbling about then? How could he have 'kicked the goal anyway'?

Am I the only poster on here that notices you make incorrect statements, just so you can argue against them in the next post? You are bipolar, aren't you both?

Anway, as you pointed out, the players at the point of the free had stopped, what Osbourne and Gilbert do in another part of the ground is of no concern...no advantage as play had stopped.