AFL news: League warns clubs, players to stop drawing headhigh free kicks
Marcus Bontempelli has sprung to the defence of Bulldogs coach Luke Beveridge and a high-drawing teammate as the fallout from new high tackle rules continues to be felt.
AFL News
Don't miss out on the headlines from AFL News. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Western Bulldogs captain Marcus Bontempelli has gone in to bat for coach Luke Beveridge and teammate Cody Weightman as the AFL’s high tackle rule continues to polarise.
Beveridge accused league headquarters of “another flinch” after this week’s high tackle clarification, including that free kicks would not be paid if the ball-carrier was responsible for the high contact.
Collingwood’s Jack Ginnivan is at the centre of the debate, but Geelong skipper Joel Selwood and Bulldogs small forward Weightman are also masters of the shrug while being tackled.
“I do appreciate that players are able to exploit different parts of the game and add layers to their game that are within the rules essentially and make it, in this situation, difficult to tackle them,” Bontempelli said.
“‘Bevo’ has his thoughts and opinions, as he always does, and I think we all get somewhat frustrated with the different interpretations and how difficult that might be for umpires, so I can definitely see where he’s coming from.”
Watch every blockbuster AFL match this weekend Live & Ad-Break Free In-Play on Kayo. New to Kayo? Start your free trial now >
Bontempelli said Weightman may have to “tweak an aspect or two” after the rule clarification but said he was “tough as nails”.
“You’ve got to earn everything you do as a small forward, so I think if there are aspects you can exploit to your advantage in the game, then, I guess, full credit to you,” he said.
Selwood said he would seek greater understanding of the rule via the Cats’ coaches but declined to comment directly on Ginnivan’s approach.
Adelaide’s Brodie Smith praised the change, saying it had become a dangerous situation that didn’t set a good example to juniors.
“You don’t want to see guys leading with their head and kids at the lower level starting to practise that,” Smith said.
“Concussion is a serious issue and this can also bring that into play, so I like that we’ve tweaked it a bit, so that it’s not always going to be paid ... the more we can let the game go and not pay so many free kicks, the better.”
Melbourne forward Ben Brown believes, like many of the AFL’s rules, there is “still a little bit of grey” but appreciated the clarification, which the Demons addressed as a collective.
“At the end of the day, if you can get your team an extra goal or an extra kick downfield, it’s worth something,” Brown said.
“If there are players who are actually trying to exploit those rules; I think that’s actually a skill.
“There was a clarification made at the start of the year and I thought it was pretty clear then what constituted a high free kick versus giving up your opportunity for prior opportunity.
“But as the year went on, it became a little bit more grey, which was going to happen at times as the umpires have a tough job, so to have a little bit of clarity probably helps.”
Dogs coach accuses AFL of ‘flinch’ in headhigh rule tweak
- Russell Gould
Western Bulldogs coach Luke Beveridge says the AFL has flinched in its crackdown on headhigh contact and that players who get free kicks should not be “victimised”.
The AFL warned clubs yesterday players who tried to milk headhigh free kicks won’t be rewarded.
And Beveridge on Wednesday morning didn’t hold back in his disdain for the new umpiring focus.
“My point of view is let’s not change the game and the interpretations that have been there forever,” he said.
“It’s another flinch, Just reward the player who is hardest at the football and let’s not victimise that behaviour. It should be rewarded, not penalised.
“Just leave it as it is. Reward the player who has his head over the footy. Ultimately, penalise the guy who hasn’t tackled like he should have tackled. I’m happy for the ones that are right on the edge or marginal to play on.
“But let’s not change things again.
“Just leave it as it is. “It’s another flinch (from AFL).
“Reward the player that goes harder at the football.”
Beveridge also added: “Who knows how the game will be umpired this week now that message has come through.”
But Melbourne coach Simon Goodwin threw his support behind the move saying it’s “not something we coach” despite one of his players being caught up in the controversy.
The AFL’s memo re-emphasised a directive to umpires to not reward players that duck, drop or shrug into a tackle to draw high contact with a free-kick.
Among three examples from last weekend’s round of games was one involving Demon livewire Kysaiah Pickett who was awarded a free kick for high contact after being tackled by Port Adelaide captain Tom Jonas.
But it was identified as incorrectly adjudicated and that Pickett was in fact responsible for the high contact after dropping his shoulders so the taller opponent took him high, and ‘play on’ should’ve been called.
Goodwin said that the specific area of the game was “tough to adjudicate” but also incidents of players ducking for free kicks needed to be eradicated from the game.
“We’ll show our players and educate our players. It’s not something that we coach within our playing group,” he said on Wednesday.
“I think it’s fantastic (the AFL) have been able to come out and say this is what they are going to be focusing on from an umpiring perspective. And no doubt it’s challenging for umpires.
“I don’t think it’s a great look for our game where we try and draw free kicks, but it’s a tough thing to umpire. For them to come out and send a message … and we can pass that message on to players hopefully we can try and eradicate that stuff from the game.
In the edict sent to the clubs. AFL Head of Umpiring Dan Richardson said while players trying to win the ball had to be protected, they also had a “duty of care to not put themselves in a position for high contact”.
“Ultimately, the rules do not reward players for putting themselves in vulnerable positions to draw a free kick. This is something we prefer not to see in our game at any level,” he said.
“We want to be clear, if the umpire believes the ball carrier is responsible for the high contact, then they won’t be rewarded.”
The focus on players ducking to get headhigh free kicks has come in the wake of Collingwood’s Jack Ginnivan going unrewarded in recent matches for tackles which appeared high, but ultimately were put down to his own actions.
It has left some former players confused, including West Coast premiership defender Will Schofield who said players “aren’t statues” and the crackdown had only made umpires’ jobs had just been made tougher.
“I’m not happy, because players aren’t statues when they’re holding the football and the people that are trying to tackle them aren’t statues either,” Schofield told Fox Sports News’ AFL Tonight on Tuesday.
“These are moving objects, there’s lots of decisions being made at the same time and we’re asking umpires now to make further interpretations into the rule? I don’t think you can expect players not to try and avoid a tackle. I don’t know if you can assess in the heat of the moment what a player’s trying to do.”
AFL: PLAYER EXPLOITATION FORCED HEADHIGH CRACKDOWN
Nick Smart
The league doubled down on its high contact stance on Tuesday with a memo to clubs and players, in which AFL umpires’ boss Dan Richardson reiterated that whistleblowers have been instructed not to reward players who attempt to milk free kicks.
It came after questions arose whether Collingwood young gun Jack Ginnivan was being umpired differently following a string of controversial no calls in last Saturday’s win over Adelaide.
McLachlan on Tuesday night said the rule was clarified to stop coaches taking advantage and also to protect players.
“I don’t like the exploitation of the rule … the rule is there to protect players’ heads and they are actually putting themselves in harm’s way,” McLachlan said on Fox Footy’s AFL360.
“The secondary part is just as bad as the first.”
The outgoing AFL supremo said clubs and fans now had better “clarity” on what constituted a high contact free kick and what did not.
“What I accept is there’s a set of rules and the coaches are there in part and players are to try and drive a truck through them and to use them to their advantage,” McLachlan said.
“That is actually what happens in sport and that’s what they do, and this is one that’s being exploited and people are trying to take advantage of it and you’ve got to tighten and clarify and communicate with the players and the clubs and the supporters.
“And that’s happened here.”
In the memo sent to clubs, Richardson said players who tried to milk free kicks would not get away with it any longer.
“We want to be clear, if the umpire believes the ball carrier is responsible for the high contact, then they will not be rewarded,” Richardson said.
“First and foremost, players attempting to win the ball must be protected and the onus of duty of care is on the tackler.
“However, having won the ball, the ball carrier has a duty of care to not put themselves in a position for high contact.
“Ultimately, the rules do not reward players for putting themselves in vulnerable positions to draw a free kick in our game at any level.
“Our umpires strive to get every decision right every single time, however there are instances where, just like players, decisions are made at full speed at ground level without the benefit of slow-motion replay.
“The health and safety of players is the primary concern of both the AFL and the clubs, and we will continue to work with clubs, their coaching panels, as well as players to ensure the safety of the game.”
As part of its message, the league also issued a video explanation of three tackles from the past fortnight, which involved Ginnivan and Melbourne premiership forward Kysaiah Pickett.
The league said the Ginnivan tackle was correctly called play on as “he lowered his body and raised his arm.”
On the Pickett tackle, a free kick for high contact was awarded but the league said it should not have been as the Demon raised his arm to milk the free.
The AFL said the instructions to its umpires were as follows:
• Where the tackle is reasonably applied, there is no prior opportunity and the ball carrier is responsible for the high contact via a shrug, drop or arm lift – play on should be called.
• Where the tackle is reasonably applied, and there is prior opportunity, and the ball carrier is responsible for the high contact via a shrug, drop or arm lift – holding the ball should be called.
• If a player has their head over the ball and trying to gain possession and contact is high, a free kick for high contact will be called.”
More Coverage
Originally published as AFL news: League warns clubs, players to stop drawing headhigh free kicks
Why not Port, Ken? Swans show exactly why with finals lesson
Ken Hinkley asked his side pre-game, why not us? The answer was shown on the field at the SCG, which is as simple as they’re not good enough to take that last step, writes Matt Turner.
Port fans go scorched earth on Ken Hinkley
The Swans have marched into another grand final, but Ken Hinkley was the name on many lips after he fell short yet again.