A couple of Technical questions

[The Who]

1. When defending a bomb, would it be legal for a second defender to lift a teammate to catch the ball, like a rugby union lineout?
2. The Berries showed, again, how easy it is to score from a chip kick from a scrum. Why don;t we use that move?

 

[globaleagle]

I think it would be ok.

There may be some rule about moving to impede a tackler but with some angle tweaking, etc it's easily over come.

I've thought the same myself now and then + whenever someone from the storm catches the ball with their arms over their heads, the commentators go on for hours about how amazing that is and afl influence etc etc....

But I remember doing this a thousand times myself, it's frikken easy!

edit: as for '2' I dunno,

Seems last year there were a lot more 'amazing' moves from us.

 

[jbb/james]

probably easier if a centre positioned himself for a wing or fullback to go up the backs afl style, but at the moment the refs have just given the rule regarding knocking the runners over a convenient miss, so may as well play that until they remember its in the rulebook.

 

[Stevo]

Depends who's playing. If anyone did it to us. TRY. If we did it NO TRY!

 

[Rex]

I like your thinking The Who. The union boys do it, the netballers do it. It carries some risks (dropping the player) and can be misjudged easily. It can be disrupted when the opposition knows it is coming up and puts a player between the target and lifters. But IMO there is nothing in the rules to prevent it (confirm that with the referees first). And it is particularly worth a go as a surprise planned attacking move. A few metres out from the line put the ball crossfield into the middle of the in-goal, lift away and score!

 

[NFN2IT]

1. When defending a bomb, would it be legal for a second defender to lift a teammate to catch the ball, like a rugby union lineout?
2. The Berries showed, again, how easy it is to score from a chip kick from a scrum. Why don;t we use that move?

Ive thought the same thing before aswell, except im thinking it might be useful when defending a short 10 kick in a tight game.

2. I think that would class as low percentage play wouldnt it? not only do you need a cronk-like accurate kicker but a good chase too

 

[swoop]

Getting the 2nd defender in place for the lift would be a huge problem and would leave a big gap in defence if the catcher drops the ball.

 

[Masked Eagle]

Would the opposition be allowed to tackle him in the air? If not once caught than the two blokes doing the lifting should just carry him the length of the field, he can't be tackled because he's in the air and they can't be tackles because they haven't got the ball.

 

[StuBoot]

1. Probably legal, but if you've enough time to get another player in there to lift, then you've got enough time to take a clean catch anyway, so don't really see the point.
2. The Berries made it look easy because it was. Jorge had no idea it was coming.

 

[mickqld]

Unlike union where you know the ball is coming to you from a lineout throw or netball where they are standing still it would be virtually impossible to get 2 players into position in time when a bomb is coming down. We can't judge where the ball is with 1 player let alone 2.

 

[byso]

It's rare 2 players would be close enough to do it and also have the time to work out out how.

Union do it in set plays like line outs.

 

[Wolfpack]

1. I suppose you could, though it would be nigh impossible to actually pull it off. Also, all those other reasons that people have stated above.

2. It's not easy, Horhay's just a bit slow.

 

[Manly til i die]

Would the opposition be allowed to tackle him in the air? If not once caught than the two blokes doing the lifting should just carry him the length of the field, he can't be tackled because he's in the air and they can't be tackles because they haven't got the ball.

HaHa

Not quite, the defending team is allowed to make a mid-air tackle on a player from the attacking side

 

[Chip and Chase]

Technically they may call it obstruction as the lifters may be deemed to be interfering with the oppositions ability to contest the ball.

From a practical point of view I think trying to get a lifter postioned in the right spot would be the issue, given that there isn't a lot of time.

 

[Mal Cochrane]

if the lifter is already there and doesn't change his line ( which he won't because he will also be under the ball ), it is no different to providing protection.

Anyway. i think it is a ludicrous idea. 🙂

 

[Jatz Crackers]

So long as we arnt playing the dogs or the storm. They are shirt lifters making this partcular strategy unworkable.

 

[The Who]

if the lifter is already there and doesn't change his line ( which he won't because he will also be under the ball ), it is no different to providing protection.

Anyway. i think it is a ludicrous idea. 🙂

Many of the great innovators were ridiculed initially. Catching the ball AFL style with arms outstretched is something relatively new. We were always taught to cradle the ball to the chest. And soccer-style goal kicking was innovative at the time.
Besides, my original post asked if it would be legal; it didn't suggest it was practical.

 

[bazeagle]

Very risky and gutsy topic The Who. The use of the word "Technical" in the heading threatens to unleash a detailed and lengthy lecture from Technical Coach.

 

[DSM5]

My guess is that the only time this could be feasible is on a short kick-off. The reason the berries used it is that Morris is a very tall man and can catch and Jorge is useless when under the high ball. Robbo was good at the jumping game.

 

[DSM5]

My guess is that the only time this could be feasible is on a short kick-off. The reason the berries used it is that Morris is a very tall man and can catch and Jorge is useless when under the high ball. Robbo was good at the jumping game.