Should the AFL adopt the VFL rule that play on is called when the ball is kicked backwards in defence?

Question

In the VFL, if a defender kicks the ball closer to his own goal, the umpire calls 'play on' even if it is marked by a teammate. Is this a good rule?

Answer 1

Aussie RULES, geez thats all we ever hear about RULES, change this,  that,  and something else.   All the game needs is TWO extra interchange players, 2 to replace any of the 6 defenders, 2 for the 6 midfielders  and 2 for the the 6 forwards.

That would make SENSE !

Answer 2

I dont like to see too many rule changes either, but im about 70/30 on this one

I reckon that 'running down the clock" in the last quarter, particularly in close finishes, is allmost cheating-

esp when all they do is chip the ball 15 m backwards, then 15 sideways, then 15 forwards, then backwards again.

If kicking the ball backwards was an automatic play on, then the team trailing by a few points would have  better chance of gaining possession , and would make for a more exciting finish.

if a team cant maintain possession while moving the ball FORWARDS, they shouldnt be playing AFL

Answer 3

Yes!!    Abso friggin lutely!

Answer 4

all you need to stop this from happening

is players to man up

so as annoying as it is to see, it is an easy problem to solve

Answer 5

In theory it is a good idea,  but as everyone has said just man up,  at any given time there is (supposed to be)  18 players from each side on the ground,  if each player had an opponent it couldn't  happen.

But in reality,  players run forward to fill holes that opposition players lead into,  well, they are supposed to be, that's why they run forward etc,   to create the 'flood'.  which we all hate.

I'm 50/50 on this one,   I'm pretty sure they trialed this a few years back in he pre season comp, it seemed to work ok,  you see most times when they kick backwards,  no one is any where near the player the ball is going to anyway, so they normally do play on,  except when they are 'milking' the clock of course.

it has it's good and bad points.

Answer 6

I say yes if everyone thought AFL football was not exciting,in the old days there was no flooding or keeping possesion in the last 2 minutes of a game ect,it was just get the ball to the fowards to kick a goal.

This was the case in the famous 1989 Grand final where the football was tough and uncompromising till the end! Correct me if I am wrong but Hawthorn won the game and did not "protect" there lead.

I would say no for now personally but the idea is a good one for the fans,I hate the possesion game that Ross Lyon imposes on the Saints.

(Lyon could play a bit too)

Great question!

Answer 7

No. If a team's skills are good enough to play possession football, then good for them. If the opposition applies enough pressure, then tempo footy usually comes unstuck anyway. this has been the case in a few Richmond games this year, we have tried to slow things down in the last q, and got beaten.

Answer 8

hmmm i dont think so. I dont like the rule but maybe they could trial it in the pre-season comp. Just like the 9 point goal rule.

Answer 9

I didn't know this was a rule. Things are bound to change in the AFL eventually if the younger players have had to abide by this, so perhaps they wont need to adopt the rule.

Just one more point; if rules keep being changed and added, this game we love WONT be AFL at all anymore!

Answer 10

I think the rules are good.

Why?

There tends to be less of a blow out.

Because they are less of a blow out, teams generally able to keep close and have a chance to come back.

The best games are the close games regardless who is playing.

Brisbane v Melbourne

Answer 11

Nahh, i reckon they should just leave it how it is for a while aye.

Answer 12

yes

Answer 13

No.. not at all!

This rule does not need to be introduced and those that are annoyed by "kick to kick" footy should get over it. There is nothing wrong (with this), so nothing needs to change.

(If it ain't broke, don't fix it!)

Besides.. would this rule be only for the defensive 50?? Because what about the player who is 15m out from his goals, on the boundary and kicks the ball to the man 30m out straight in front?? That shouldn't be play on... and so it shouldn't be in the defensive 50 either.

If a rule was to be changed, I'd say drop the chopping the arms rule!

Answer 14

i also agree with andy, no more rule changes, if they kick it back then thats their fault they will most likely cause a turn over!

Answer 15

I agree with andy, leave the rules alone.

As annoying as it is, it is an easy problem to solve, get the defenders to man up

Answer 16

yes i believe so because whilte possesion footy is very effective it is making the game slower and effective and playing on when the ball is kicked backwards will make the game so much faster and better to watch!

Answer 17

No more rule changes, even if it would be a good rule change like that one. If defenders man-up the game should turn into a contested contest quick enough. Leave the game alone.

Answer 18

I think the idea has it's good points - but all this fiddling with the rules is having an effect on the game.

When I used to play basketball, the ball was not allowed to be passed back over the centre line once it had been passed over & into attack.

I know it wont happen but I'd like to see that in footy - a line across the centre & once the ball is in the forward line no passing back over that line. It would chop out a lot of what is happening now.

Answer 19

Yes, it would be a good move,because when defenders do this the game is slowed down & the clock time dissapears.

Yet there have been so many rules put into the afl over the course of the last couple of years, and one like this could get annoying.

What you are saying is an amazing theory and it would be a good rule because if they dont man up, they should be aloud to play on.

Answer 20

I think it would be good in some circumstances, but when your team is winning by a small margin in the last quarter, you'd like them to keep possession. I think if too many new rules are introduced, it will ruin the game.