Gather Round

[Bandit]

I like the like touch out of bounds (concept) but when the ball is bouncing off a few shins and then they pay a free as it crosses the line it is a joke. It should be for clear last disposal only, otherwise we are going to end up with ARC reviews for out of bounds, I think there was one ARC over-rule last night, and whilst it was decided quickly it just doesn't pass the pub test for me, the old saying applies - KISS.

[amber_fluid]

I like the like touch out of bounds (concept) but when the ball is bouncing off a few shins and then they pay a free as it crosses the line it is a joke. It should be for clear last disposal only, otherwise we are going to end up with ARC reviews for out of bounds, I think there was one ARC over-rule last night, and whilst it was decided quickly it just doesn't pass the pub test for me, the old saying applies - KISS.

Mate that would make too much sense
The AFL doesn’t deal in common sense these days

[Brodlach]

The conditions were terrible but last nights umpiring was as bad as I’ve seen for a long time.

VFL bias apparently

You could be forgiven for thinking it was the 90’s given the amount of Crow throws last night.
The Rachele flick pass in the last quarter was elite.
He didn’t even try to disguise it but not one of the umps saw it

Definitely a throw, we were surprised it wasn’t called but the umpire was on the other side and probably didn’t see it.

How about the Walker tackle in the last quarter that wasn’t called HTB, he went to kick the ball and got tackled and it went straight to ground.

Evens up IMO

[Brodlach]

I like the like touch out of bounds (concept) but when the ball is bouncing off a few shins and then they pay a free as it crosses the line it is a joke. It should be for clear last disposal only, otherwise we are going to end up with ARC reviews for out of bounds, I think there was one ARC over-rule last night, and whilst it was decided quickly it just doesn't pass the pub test for me, the old saying applies - KISS.

Totally agree, it’s not a possession if it bounces off your shin

[amber_fluid]

The conditions were terrible but last nights umpiring was as bad as I’ve seen for a long time.

VFL bias apparently

You could be forgiven for thinking it was the 90’s given the amount of Crow throws last night.
The Rachele flick pass in the last quarter was elite.
He didn’t even try to disguise it but not one of the umps saw it

Definitely a throw, we were surprised it wasn’t called but the umpire was on the other side and probably didn’t see it.

How about the Walker tackle in the last quarter that wasn’t called HTB, he went to kick the ball and got tackled and it went straight to ground.

Evens up IMO

They should be getting it right though!
We have so many umps out there if they are just going to even the free kicks up then it’s pointless having them.
It’s a bloody tough job I know but the inconsistency is what turns me off watching any other game outside of the Blues these days

[bertiebeatle1]

The actual rule is last disposal, not last touch. They are just completely incompentent & have made a mess of it. The umps are classing the touches off the shin as a disposal, but the stats wont pick it up as a disposal if it was in general play


LAST DISPOSAL
A free kick will now be awarded when the ball crosses the line from a disposal between the arcs, bringing the men's game in line with the AFLW's 'lasso' rule.

It will operate similar to SANFL in the sense that if a player blocks an opponent or doesn't play the ball before it crosses the line, a normal boundary throw-in will occur instead of a last disposal free kick.

In the 2025 season, the AFL's findings discovered that there were 20 boundary throw-ins paid between the arcs and 0.5 insufficient intent free kicks paid between the arcs per game. The League then adapted those numbers for a scenario where the last disposal rule had been introduced. Its adapted numbers showed boundary throw-ins would be reduced by three per game, while 0.3 current insufficient intent free kicks would be negated by a last disposal free kick.

[am Bays]

Couldn't agree more, the one that grazed the Carlton players shin in the 3rd qtr and then went out OMFG

As a sh!t umpire you're looking for a back swing and then forward motion of the lower leg for it to be a disposal.

If in doubt it go with the lesser penalty (throw it in please boundary)

So the question in has there been a directive by the AFL that there is a much stricter interpretation or are there people in the ARC that just don't know the law or the intent of the law?

[wenchbarwer]

The actual rule is last disposal, not last touch. They are just completely incompentent & have made a mess of it. The umps are classing the touches off the shin as a disposal, but the stats wont pick it up as a disposal if it was in general play


LAST DISPOSAL
A free kick will now be awarded when the ball crosses the line from a disposal between the arcs, bringing the men's game in line with the AFLW's 'lasso' rule.

It will operate similar to SANFL in the sense that if a player blocks an opponent or doesn't play the ball before it crosses the line, a normal boundary throw-in will occur instead of a last disposal free kick.

In the 2025 season, the AFL's findings discovered that there were 20 boundary throw-ins paid between the arcs and 0.5 insufficient intent free kicks paid between the arcs per game. The League then adapted those numbers for a scenario where the last disposal rule had been introduced. Its adapted numbers showed boundary throw-ins would be reduced by three per game, while 0.3 current insufficient intent free kicks would be negated by a last disposal free kick.

They should have just copied the SANFL rule, rather than bastardising it and turning it into yet another joke rule interpretation.

Clear kick or handball - free kick
Player gets a hand on it prior to going OOB - great job, throw it in
No clear disposal - throw it in

It's not that f***ing hard!!!!!*

[dedja]

Couldn't agree more, the one that grazed the Carlton players shin in the 3rd qtr and then went out OMFG

As a sh!t umpire you're looking for a back swing and then forward motion of the lower leg for it to be a disposal.

If in doubt it go with the lesser penalty (throw it in please boundary)

So the question in has there been a directive by the AFL that there is a much stricter interpretation or are there people in the ARC that just don't know the law or the intent of the law?

Don’t over think it, they’re all clueless idiots.

[woodublieve12]

I am still working out how Cripps initiates contact and gets a free kick

[Lightning McQueen]

It's not that f***ing hard!!!!!*

That's what she said.

[wenchbarwer]

I am still working out how Cripps initiates contact and gets a free kick

Up there with Michalanney outbodying Hollands for a clear mark, only for it to be a free and a 50m penalty

The league is rapidly becoming a joke, and that absolute muppet Dillbags just grins his smarmy lawyer grin and tells us the game has never been better

[wenchbarwer]

It's not that f***ing hard!!!!!*

That's what she said.

Speaking of, how was the date?

[Brodlach]

I am still working out how Cripps initiates contact and gets a free kick

Up there with Michalanney outbodying Hollands for a clear mark, only for it to be a free and a 50m penalty

The league is rapidly becoming a joke, and that absolute muppet Dillbags just grins his smarmy lawyer grin and tells us the game has never been better

Whoa, both of those frees are against the Crows, that’s not the rhetoric

[amber_fluid]

I am still working out how Cripps initiates contact and gets a free kick

Up there with Michalanney outbodying Hollands for a clear mark, only for it to be a free and a 50m penalty

The league is rapidly becoming a joke, and that absolute muppet Dillbags just grins his smarmy lawyer grin and tells us the game has never been better

Whoa, both of those frees are against the Crows, that’s not the rhetoric

I can list 5 others against the Blues if you want?
I think we all agree the umpiring was shit last night

[Brodlach]

Haha, I know there was. They were terrible both ways

[Lightning McQueen]

Speaking of, how was the date?

She seems alright, catching up again tomorrow morning or possibly this arvo if I can sort through my work shit in time.

[Booney]

Mali would get what, 3 hours sleep each night this week? Bloke is one of the hardest working people in the public eye, no wonder he's as successful as he is.

[amber_fluid]

Speaking of, how was the date?

She seems alright, catching up again tomorrow morning or possibly this arvo if I can sort through my work shit in time.

Might be both if you play your cards right

[Trader]

The actual rule is last disposal, not last touch. They are just completely incompentent & have made a mess of it. The umps are classing the touches off the shin as a disposal, but the stats wont pick it up as a disposal if it was in general play


LAST DISPOSAL
A free kick will now be awarded when the ball crosses the line from a disposal between the arcs, bringing the men's game in line with the AFLW's 'lasso' rule.

It will operate similar to SANFL in the sense that if a player blocks an opponent or doesn't play the ball before it crosses the line, a normal boundary throw-in will occur instead of a last disposal free kick.

In the 2025 season, the AFL's findings discovered that there were 20 boundary throw-ins paid between the arcs and 0.5 insufficient intent free kicks paid between the arcs per game. The League then adapted those numbers for a scenario where the last disposal rule had been introduced. Its adapted numbers showed boundary throw-ins would be reduced by three per game, while 0.3 current insufficient intent free kicks would be negated by a last disposal free kick.

Couldn't agree more, the one that grazed the Carlton players shin in the 3rd qtr and then went out OMFG

As a sh!t umpire you're looking for a back swing and then forward motion of the lower leg for it to be a disposal.

If in doubt it go with the lesser penalty (throw it in please boundary)

So the question in has there been a directive by the AFL that there is a much stricter interpretation or are there people in the ARC that just don't know the law or the intent of the law?

I think you guys have missed what happened on this one.
Granted I was up in the stands, so I could be the one who had it wrong, but from where I was, it wasn't paid as last disposal off of the carlton guy's shin, it was paid as out on the full.

This is a different rule.

I agree last disposal should be an actual intent to play at the ball.
But out on the full has always been paid for accidental and deliberate possessions.

Last night's decision, from my perspective, was correct.