<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rules road test</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.aflonline.com.au/opinion/2009/03/15/rules-road-test/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.aflonline.com.au/opinion/2009/03/15/rules-road-test/</link>
	<description>Football is Everything</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:05:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: London Bloke</title>
		<link>http://www.aflonline.com.au/opinion/2009/03/15/rules-road-test/comment-page-1/#comment-1189</link>
		<dc:creator>London Bloke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:21:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aflonline.com.au/?p=1095#comment-1189</guid>
		<description>Cool blog post, was curious if you would allow me to link to it in a post im currently writing for my own site? Cheers</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cool blog post, was curious if you would allow me to link to it in a post im currently writing for my own site? Cheers</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Nicholls</title>
		<link>http://www.aflonline.com.au/opinion/2009/03/15/rules-road-test/comment-page-1/#comment-568</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Nicholls</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:01:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aflonline.com.au/?p=1095#comment-568</guid>
		<description>Molly

Regarding the rushed behind rule - it did its job well, as an avid supporter of the game it frustrated me when rules are brought in that aren&#039;t black and white. It often leaves umpires guessing/assuming what is and isn&#039;t a free kick and can decide the outcome of games. 

I liked watching how players were more conscious around there defending goal but not the rule wasn&#039;t really a problem until Bowden and the Hawthorn team used it in a ridiculous manor. I&#039;m happy to change the rules to stop teams from using it the same way bowden/hawthorn used it but If a player is under a lot of pressure deep into defense he should be allowed to concede a point without giving away a free kick.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Molly</p>
<p>Regarding the rushed behind rule &#8211; it did its job well, as an avid supporter of the game it frustrated me when rules are brought in that aren&#8217;t black and white. It often leaves umpires guessing/assuming what is and isn&#8217;t a free kick and can decide the outcome of games. </p>
<p>I liked watching how players were more conscious around there defending goal but not the rule wasn&#8217;t really a problem until Bowden and the Hawthorn team used it in a ridiculous manor. I&#8217;m happy to change the rules to stop teams from using it the same way bowden/hawthorn used it but If a player is under a lot of pressure deep into defense he should be allowed to concede a point without giving away a free kick.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phillip Molly Malone</title>
		<link>http://www.aflonline.com.au/opinion/2009/03/15/rules-road-test/comment-page-1/#comment-567</link>
		<dc:creator>Phillip Molly Malone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 06:47:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aflonline.com.au/?p=1095#comment-567</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t agree with your outcome on rushed rule. I think whether the umpires get it right or wrong, it does its job and I would rather see a player wear a bad decision then get away with some of the rushed behinds from last year. As I said on my &lt;a href=&quot;http://afl.mollyzine.com/2009/03/14/mmm-podcast-nab-cup-rules-review-rushed-behind-ad-pay/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;AFL Podcast&lt;/a&gt; this week, bring it in, say you can&#039;t assure you will get it right and it will still achieve its goal. 

The holding up of players rule probably didn&#039;t work for 2 reasons:
1) Even giving the 50m penalty still holds up play too much
2) People don&#039;t get what the rule is trying to stop. Hawthorn are pretty much the only team that uses it as a tactic well enough for it too become and issue. If more teams use it as a tactic, people will see the problem and probably notice that there needs a bigger penalty. Probably needs to be a 50m from where the ball is when the free is paid not from were the play was held up. Should also be that the player with the ball can run on and doesn&#039;t have too wait for the mark to be set. 

JMTC
Molly</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t agree with your outcome on rushed rule. I think whether the umpires get it right or wrong, it does its job and I would rather see a player wear a bad decision then get away with some of the rushed behinds from last year. As I said on my <a href="http://afl.mollyzine.com/2009/03/14/mmm-podcast-nab-cup-rules-review-rushed-behind-ad-pay/" rel="nofollow">AFL Podcast</a> this week, bring it in, say you can&#8217;t assure you will get it right and it will still achieve its goal. </p>
<p>The holding up of players rule probably didn&#8217;t work for 2 reasons:<br />
1) Even giving the 50m penalty still holds up play too much<br />
2) People don&#8217;t get what the rule is trying to stop. Hawthorn are pretty much the only team that uses it as a tactic well enough for it too become and issue. If more teams use it as a tactic, people will see the problem and probably notice that there needs a bigger penalty. Probably needs to be a 50m from where the ball is when the free is paid not from were the play was held up. Should also be that the player with the ball can run on and doesn&#8217;t have too wait for the mark to be set. </p>
<p>JMTC<br />
Molly</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

