Adelaide

Talk on the national game

Re: Adelaide

Postby Eagles2014 » Mon Sep 29, 2025 1:29 pm

Jimmy_041 wrote:
whufc wrote:Not disagreeing but I thought i read somewhere that the 'definition' of what constitutes a tackle statistically has changed dramatically over the years.


Well; there used to be this thing called "prior opportunity" and "incorrect disposal"
Both of those have gone

Example: Cameron's tackle on Jaspa Fletcher
No reward (from the umpires) for the outstanding chase and tackle
Fortunately, the football Gods stepped in and awarded Geelong a goal out of it

No need to show the 20 examples per game of players just dropping the ball when tackled


The Cameron tackle where Fletcher got a handball away :shock:
Eagles2014
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 1:56 pm
Has liked: 181 times
Been liked: 599 times

Re: Adelaide

Postby am Bays » Mon Sep 29, 2025 1:51 pm

The HTB law hasn't changed, it's just the interpretation

They just dont pay it unless it's major and obvious with respect to prior opportunity like Fletchers.

The AFL want the ball in motion and most HTBs result in a break in play that allows for defensive set up to prevent that.

So many HTBs that should be paid (especially with respect to incorrect disposal) are simply called play on.
Let that be a lesson to you Port, no one beats the Bays five times in a row in a GF and gets away with it!!!
User avatar
am Bays
Coach
 
 
Posts: 19921
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:04 pm
Location: The back bar at Lennies
Has liked: 186 times
Been liked: 2162 times

Re: Adelaide

Postby Jimmy_041 » Mon Sep 29, 2025 2:59 pm

Eagles2014 wrote:
Jimmy_041 wrote:
whufc wrote:Not disagreeing but I thought i read somewhere that the 'definition' of what constitutes a tackle statistically has changed dramatically over the years.


Well; there used to be this thing called "prior opportunity" and "incorrect disposal"
Both of those have gone

Example: Cameron's tackle on Jaspa Fletcher
No reward (from the umpires) for the outstanding chase and tackle
Fortunately, the football Gods stepped in and awarded Geelong a goal out of it

No need to show the 20 examples per game of players just dropping the ball when tackled


The Cameron tackle where Fletcher got a handball away :shock:


I am well aware of what the Rule is.
Rule 18.6.2 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Prior Opportunity
Where a Player in Possession of the Football has had Prior Opportunity, a field Umpire shall award a Free Kick if that Player does not Correctly Dispose of the football immediately when they are Legally Tackled.

However, in direct contravention of the Rule, the players are given a "reasonable" amount of time to dispose of the ball once tackled
https://www.afl.com.au/news/1140579/hol ... rification

Is "reasonable time" the same as immediately? No

Immediately: This term suggests an instantaneous or immediate action, with no time gap or delay whatsoever.

Reasonable Time: This concept is context-dependent. It means the amount of time that is fairly and conveniently needed to do what is required, considering the nature of the task and any relevant circumstances, as soon as possible.

In summary, while "immediately" implies no delay, "reasonable time" allows for delays as long as they are necessary and justified by the particular situation.

In my opinion, Fletcher didn't immediately get rid of the ball

Same as the Collingwood v Hawthorn game in the last 2 minutes where the Collingwood took him 360 degrees in the tackle in the centre but let go.
There was no immediate disposal as per the Law.

The Law says "immediately" That means immediately not "oh this is exciting - let it go because its exciting"

Either change the Law to "reasonable" or police the actual Law
dedja: Dunno, I’m just an idiot.
User avatar
Jimmy_041
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15253
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:30 pm
Has liked: 847 times
Been liked: 1306 times
Grassroots Team: Prince Alfred OC

Re: Adelaide

Postby Booney » Mon Sep 29, 2025 3:12 pm

Petracca in Adelaide to tour facilities and look at Thebarton I'd imagine.
If you want to go quickly, go alone.

If you want to go far, go together.
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 62412
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 8326 times
Been liked: 12104 times

Re: Adelaide

Postby am Bays » Mon Sep 29, 2025 3:19 pm

Jimmy_041 wrote:
Eagles2014 wrote:The Cameron tackle where Fletcher got a handball away :shock:


I am well aware of what the Rule is.
Rule 18.6.2 Free Kicks - Holding the Ball: Prior Opportunity
Where a Player in Possession of the Football has had Prior Opportunity, a field Umpire shall award a Free Kick if that Player does not Correctly Dispose of the football immediately when they are Legally Tackled.

However, in direct contravention of the Rule, the players are given a "reasonable" amount of time to dispose of the ball once tackled
https://www.afl.com.au/news/1140579/hol ... rification

Is "reasonable time" the same as immediately? No

Immediately: This term suggests an instantaneous or immediate action, with no time gap or delay whatsoever.

Reasonable Time: This concept is context-dependent. It means the amount of time that is fairly and conveniently needed to do what is required, considering the nature of the task and any relevant circumstances, as soon as possible.

In summary, while "immediately" implies no delay, "reasonable time" allows for delays as long as they are necessary and justified by the particular situation.

In my opinion, Fletcher didn't immediately get rid of the ball

Same as the Collingwood v Hawthorn game in the last 2 minutes where the Collingwood took him 360 degrees in the tackle in the centre but let go.
There was no immediate disposal as per the Law.

The Law says "immediately" That means immediately not "oh this is exciting - let it go because its exciting"

Either change the Law to "reasonable" or police the actual Law


Prior opportunity is defined at beginning of the law book. Under the definition of prior opportunity Fletcher was clearly "balanced and steady" given the number of bounces he had after he took permission.

https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2025/03/21/19a8bff6-8f49-45b9-b686-83a64db02fe0/LEGAL_2025_150532_Laws-of-the-Game_Booklet_Digital_FA.pdf
Let that be a lesson to you Port, no one beats the Bays five times in a row in a GF and gets away with it!!!
User avatar
am Bays
Coach
 
 
Posts: 19921
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:04 pm
Location: The back bar at Lennies
Has liked: 186 times
Been liked: 2162 times

Re: Adelaide

Postby Booney » Mon Sep 29, 2025 3:34 pm

Adelaide have picks 14, 41, 48, 50, 66, 68 in this years draft.

Sides like Gold Coast (6, 13, 16, 31, 56, 67), Brisbane (18, 37, 40, 46, 49, 61, 72) , Sydney (9, 27, 45, 63) and GWS (12, 30, 32) aren't too interested in the 40-50 picks for points, so do Adelaide give up this year and next years first for Petracca?
If you want to go quickly, go alone.

If you want to go far, go together.
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 62412
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 8326 times
Been liked: 12104 times

Re: Adelaide

Postby wenchbarwer » Mon Sep 29, 2025 3:40 pm

Booney wrote:Petracca in Adelaide to tour facilities and look at Thebarton I'd imagine.


Take him out for a couple of sushi rolls, watch out for his shoes though
my yes be yes, my no be no
wenchbarwer
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2947
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:30 pm
Has liked: 1543 times
Been liked: 668 times

Previous

Board index   Football  AFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Lightning McQueen and 37 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |