I agree with those who have emphasised the value of a format that allows prospective rule changes and their impact to be observed.
This is not an unreasonable tinkering with our game as some suggest - it is the vital context in which ideas to improve our game can be tested without interfering with the real thing.
However I'm disappointed we haven’t seen proper application of the experimental rule to penalise players who drag or hold the ball under an opponent who has been tackled.
Whatever your view on such experiments, there is no point in giving the rules committee this outlet and declining to use it, which is what has happened with the refusal to apply the rule punishing those who trap the ball beneath a tackled player.
The rules committee devises these experiments in response to imbalances that develop as the game evolves. The tackle rule is a decent attempt to address a problem that we see 100 times every game - one, two or more tacklers doing everything they can to hold the ball in on a player foolish enough to put himself closest to possession of the ball.
We regularly see the ball-winner penalised for having not made a genuine effort to dispose of the ball. Clearly the umpires on their visits to club training nights in pre-season need to ask for a players'-eye view of what it feels like to have multiple opponents squashing you into the turf and pinning both your arms, while at the same time holding the ball underneath you.
At the moment the law says that if you initiate the process by pulling the ball in, or diving on it, you deserve what you get even if the ball is held in.
Unfortunately things have evolved beyond this, so that now, even when the ball is not under a player, he can be penalised for holding the ball despite his arms being pinned, and the ball being trapped under his body by multiple tacklers.
This does not encourage players to attack the ball - a feature of our game the laws are intended to protect.
During the pre-season matches there have been some blatant incidents in which this rule could have been applied, but wasn’t.
Do umpires not agree with the rule? Have they not been suitably trained?
Players who didn’t properly understand the last-touch boundary rule were criticised. What do we say to those whose fail in their key task - to be on top of the rules?
Had this law been properly applied, tacklers would immediately have been challenged to modify their technique - pin arms and press ball handler into turf, but don't hold the ball in. And this rule would have helped ease the ever-increasing pressure of defensive football.
Rules must keep pace with this trend of our game.
Please keep this experimental rule for the 2012 version of the pre-season competition, but Mr Gieschen, kindly make sure your umpires use it conscientiously to show us its potential - or otherwise - to help our great game.
The views in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of the AFL or its clubs
Open Space is a platform for news, commentary, and debate and is now inviting readers to have their say where we will publish regular essays from readers.
Keep your submissions concise and address them to editor@afl.com.au.
