Thursday night, March something, 2026. Essendon-Hawthorn. Round 1, first game of the new AFL season.
The ball is tossed high in the air. Mike Fitzpatrick and Kevin Bartlett sit quietly weeping in the stands saying a quiet prayer for the lost bounce. Mostly no one notices.
Lloyd Meek’s ability to wrestle with ruck opponents will be somewhat nullified by the change to the centre-square ball-up rule.Credit: AFL Photos
The two rucks jump at one another. Or one does. The other is Lloyd Meek. He realises, cussedly, he cannot jump. Damn the old-is-new ruck rule. Ned Reeves smiles from the bench. “I’m a chance again,” he thinks.
The ball falls straight to ground and a pack falls on it. Zach Merrett is held without the ball. The whistle blows, but the umpire isn’t sure which way to point. Which side is Merrett on? He didn’t do the toss earlier.
Another ump calls out “stand”. Three Hawthorn players have run to defence, one stands.
The ump calls “50”.
“What for?” a Hawk squawks.
“I called stand.”
“But he stood,” he says pointing to his ram-rod straight teammate who had, in fact, stood.
“You all had to stand.”
“What? All of us?”
“You heard me, Day.”
That is the new stand rule as it is written and released on Wednesday. A player – any player – within five metres of a player who is paid a mark or a free kick must stand.
It does not specify the closest one – and besides, which player is to decide who is closest? – and it does not say a single player, it says players inside the five-metre protected zone.
So if a free is paid in a pack all players on the offending team must theoretically stand and not run forwards.
Likewise, if a pack flies for a mark and one player comes down with it. All opposition players must stand.
This is patently absurd and clearly not the intention of the rule. But it is how it is written.
Explaining the new change Greg Swann said: “If they are in the vicinity some bloke will stand on the mark and the umpires can call ‘hey Pete, you’re on the mark or whatever’. I think that’s easily umpired.
Footy fans can expect to see more players standing the mark in games next year. In fact, any opponent within five metres of a mark or free kick is expected to stand.Credit: Getty Images
“The players will adjust to it. Having been not long coming out of [a] club [I know] it’s amazing how quickly they do adjust to whatever rule changes. The coaches drum it into them. We have umpires come out and practice it. They’ll probably have all this under control by Christmas.”
Magnificent optimism.
The video attending the rule-change announcement, which was probably the most critical change announced, didn’t countenance multiple players within the five-metre zone and how that would be policed.
It explained that if a single player is within the five-metre zone they no longer have the choice to back out of the zone and instead must just stand. The design is to better favour the player with the ball being able to play on and get the game moving, which is meritorious.
You can understand what they want here, but they can’t find the words to explain it.
Given there is now no option of not standing or moving out of the zone, it has not anticipated what to do in the confusing scenario of multiple players trying to flee the scene.
Do they all stand? If not, which one?
Pity the player who thought the umpire meant for him to stop when, in fact, the instruction was meant for a teammate, and so he lets his opponent run merrily away. He’ll have to sheepishly scuff his way to the bench for a very understanding debrief with the coach, explaining like a guilty kid “the ump told me to”.
Or just as bad, the player who assumes the ump meant his teammate had to stand, so he runs off, thus giving away a 50m penalty and shot at goal.
Working out how to police the change will fall to umpires. They already have a bit on their plate, like where’s Matt Rowell? Was that him? Put him down for three votes.
The idea that a rule is announced with wording that is quite precise but with vague application gives it the impression it was drafted by The Castle’s Dennis Denuto. It’s the vibe, stand.
The other rules the AFL introduced are good. Many of them have the feel of the new head of footy, Swann, arriving with his list of things that annoy him in footy and ticking them off. That’s not a bad thing because most of them seem to accord with what annoys fans or clubs.
It is doubtful that within the changes, the suggestion to make this change to the stand rule came out of the amorphous “clubland”. I can’t see many coaches or players saying, “you know what we need? Everyone within five metres being told to stand? Yeah yeah, do that.”
The other changes? Not nominating rucks? Excellent change. It is not Auskick.
The centre bounce ruck change? Good. Big blokes jumping into one another looks better than them wrestling, though PCL injuries are a risk.
Hurrying up kick-ins? Didn’t know it was a problem, but apparently it is, so whatever.
The shrug rule, or the Hawthorn-small-forward rule change which means a shrug will count, like an attempt to duck under a tackle or break, as prior opportunity? What a fine change.
The last-touch-out-of-bounds rule between the arcs? It sounds the most dramatic and profound change, but in all likelihood it won’t alter things terribly from how the insufficient-intent rule is applied now.
Sadly, the list of changes didn’t include a tightening of push-in-the-back in marking contests. That doesn’t need an actual change to the rules, so hopefully it’s still coming.
Stand.
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
Most Viewed in Sport
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: www.smh.com.au
