Jump to content


Photo

The "Bowden game"incident from last Saturday


  • Please log in to reply
1 reply to this topic

#1 Caveman

Caveman

    Arthur Olliver

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 807 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Niddrie

Posted 23 July 2008 - 09:35 PM

I have been on this bandwagon for years- now here is the occasion that has brought this to the forefront.

There is no need to change the scoring. Keep it at 6 points for a goal and 1 point for a behind.

However to eliminate the DELIBERATELY CONCEDED behind- ball it up at the end of the rectangle.

All that is needed is for the goal umpire (and field and boundary umpires if necessary) is to distinguish what the difference between a 'RUSHED' behind and a 'DELIBERATELY CONCEDED' behind.

A RUSHED behind would be where the ball crosses over for a behind- the ball falls off the pack and through either touched or between the goal and behind post.

A DELIBERATELY CONCEDED behind would be where the defending team decides to deliberately concede a behind. This done with the intention of either taking possession or( as in Bowden's case) pure and absolute time wasting.

When it is established that the behind was a 'DELIBERATELY CONCEDED' point- then David Flegg, Chelsea Roffey, Steve Stirling etc (they are a few goal umpires for those who don't know) could do a different signal (this would have to be devised) and from there David Flegg, Chelsea Roffey and Steve Stirling etc would wave their one flag as normal and the field umpire would bounce the ball at the end of the rectangle- just as they do when the full back kicks off from outside the goal square and it is brought back for a bounce on that rectangle point.

This new method completely takes away any advantage in conceding a behind. There is no free kick, so the bloke who is due to kick out can't do a Bowden. If the bloke kicking out "does a Bowden" then it is a ball up on the point of the rectangle. To further drum home the idea,after the scoring of a point let the timekeepers not restart the clock until the defender has either kicked in /kicked to himself then played on / or DELIBERATELY CONCEDED so then the clock restarts after the field umpire has bounced the ball.

Now my trade off would be this-

We need to make the deliberate out of bounds rule more lax.

If a player kicks the ball FORWARD- yes it MUST be FORWARD and NOT SIDEWAYS and NOT BACKWARDS and it goes say more than 30 metres before going out of bounds (NOT ON THE FULL though- that would be a free kick as it is now and has been since 1969) it should be NOT considered deliberate, even if that was the intention. The deliberate out of bounds is penalised way to often- remember the time on law was changed for the start of the 1994 season. Time on starts when it travels out of bounds- has been this way from 1994.

So a kick where its intention was probably designed to find the boundary line travels more than 30 metres forward- then so be it- it is a clearing kick and if it goes out of bounds- well thats the way the cookie crumbles. By giving leniency to the team who happens to kick it out of bounds- well that can be tolerated because the team with the ball -

(a) Haven't kicked it backwards

(:) Haven't kicked it sideways

© Aren't playing keepings off- with no intention of attempting to score themselves

(d) They have accepted the possibility that their opponents may gain possession from the throw in


I totally believe that this would be the best rule introduced since the 'OUT OF BOUNDS ON THE FULL' rule of 1969.

#2 Amelia Jane

Amelia Jane

    Vernon Banbury

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 237 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ted Whitten Stand

Posted 12 August 2008 - 06:39 AM

Agree with you totally Caveman. Your ideas are brilliant.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users