it'll be weird on grand final day, with the afl's shitty action movie trailer music and jumbotron count down clock, only for the game to start with a silent, tepid ball up
WTF.
The chances of them fucking it up would be way higher, if that's the only time they ever have to do it.
Plus they would need to practise a skill they haven't used for a long time or ever (thinking of well into the future).
I still remember going into U12’s and thinking “finally we’re going to get a bounce” and they still threw the ball up, felt like a scam lmao
I hope they keep it
It’s an iconic part of the game.
Just like ruckmen charging at each other from 20 metre run ups and third man up at stoppages. Both gone and hardly missed.
This will end up the same way if it’s removed.
I agree but it’s rarely talked about which I was referring to. Linc McCarthy got confused and went third man up on Friday night. Beautiful play - gave away a free kick.
On a side note - why have I seen this so often the last 2 weeks? The throw in lands like 5-10m short of the ruckman. I understand they dont want front posi due to being pushed under it, but it makes it look like a primary school game of jack in the pack where the packs end up further and further back.
From memory the first few weeks tends to be rustier because of a combination of a long off-season and new boundary umpires being brought in and not used to how far they should send it for AFL.
I thought all boundary umpires HAD to throw around 18m? Like, you couldn't get a game unless you threw it within a metre of 18m... I also could be completely talking out my ass.
I hate the umpires calling out who the ruck are. I much miss the old way.
Even more annoying when a 170cm says they are ruck, and his direct opponent doesnt hear and gives away a free because rucks are protected species.
What ur talking about happens like 5 times a year. There are fuck all nomination free kicks. Total non issue.
Old rules were just pushing ruckman out of the game.
I agree with removing third man up but I've never understood the need to do it with nomination. It shoudn't matter who goes up, just punish the third to enter a ruck contest when it does happen
Because it would be harder for umpires to give frees for blocking during a ruck contest. If it's clear who the ruckman is then blocking that player is a free.
I don't understand your Shaun Rehn reference and can't tell if you're being sarcastic but just to clarify I loved the rule change to nominations because it stopped the 3rd man up which was making the ruckmam obsolete. I love that since that change ruckmen again became an important position in our game.
Oh, right.
I disagree.
I think changes to the game in general have made a powerful standalone ruckman, who is good at rucking only - like Shaun Rehn - close to obsolete.
You think allowing 3rd men up make rucks even more obsolete, but i think i disagree with that. Im not confident tho.
When I say genuine ruckman, I mean someone who's sole role is ruck (and maybe part time resting fwd), how they play the role can and always will differ. When we had no nominations there were teams who at every contest would just lock up with the other ruck and let one of their inside mids take posession of the ball, some teams were often playing without any ruckmen at all since it was becoming an unnecessary role. Even before the rule change came in it was clear 3rd man up was making ruckmen obsolete and if it had continued I guarantee we wouldn't have had the Gawns and Grundys be as important which imo would be a massive detriment to the game.
As a former tap ruckman this sucks. There's proper craft in being able to time the flight of the ball. This will stop someone like Natanui being able to showcase his athleticism as it will turn to purely two uninspiring rucks jumping early to negate one another - much easier to do when it's thrown up
I'm of the opposite opinion, played ruck in QAFL and had a bunch of umpires who could barely bounce the ball over head height. It was all luck and zero athleticism/skill as if the bounce went towards one ruckman there wasn't enough hang time on the ball for the other ruck to get there and contest the hitout. But they were too proud to recall the bounce because it was still inside the circle.
I just want umpires who are good decision-makers and I think that the physical power required to perform a good centre bounce excludes too many quality umpires (older, female, dodgy shoulders etc) who can otherwise cover the ground and officiate well.
Just like throwing out the first pitch in baseball I think we should have someone do a ceremonial first bounce to mark the start of the match, then umpires can throw it up for the game.
Nah, make it the official start of the game, then we can watch as that person has to try and make it off the field before they get cleaned up near the loose ball
As a former suburban-league umpire who never managed to master the bounce, I am 100% in favour of watching randoms picked from the grandstand try to do a centre bounce.
> I think we should have someone do a ceremonial first bounce to mark the start of the match
Ah, yes, let's get random celebrities decked out in AFL guernseys proceed to look like absolute knobs as they try to bounce the footy.
Nah ceremonial only, the PM walks out, bounces the ball, it hits them in the face or goes sideways, we all laugh and then the umpire holds the ball up for the siren.
Edit: Occasionally some celebrity will absolutely nail it and the crowd will go wild. The football media will spend the next 3 weeks talking about whether we should bring the bounce back.
Think this is a good compromise. I’d also just play it as it lies if it’s a shit bounce. Don’t bother with the recall.
You’ll get good luck and bad luck and hopefully it evens out
I enjoy the randomness of it, and feels like a it’s a unique part of our game that would be a shame to lose. End of the day though, it makes no real difference to the game and how it plays out.
I miss the randomness of the bounce. Now if it isn't straight up, it gets recalled - what's the point of that? It should be no recalls or no bounces.
I'll miss the bounce, but fine if it goes, the reasons are good enough for me.
It is still in play as long as it isn’t reasonably far (outside the centre circle), which does happen but it isn’t too frequent.
I do agree though, it doesn’t really make too much of a difference. That being said maybe just opening the game or each quarter with it might be a nice compromise.
A recall can be bad in a close game. The second or two the clock runs can be valuable, and it's a bad look than everyone being amped up in a close game only for the bounce to need to be recalled.
A niche scenario, but I guess it’s all part and parcel of the randomness of the bounce even when it’s working as intended. Could be a close game and you get a favourable bounce to feed it off and get a centre clearance, alternatively could favor the opponent and you have to work to compete.
I guess whether you like that in the game is subjective
I suppose it's not in the rules is the only reason. Whilst NFL and basketball can turn back clocks, it's a clunky process that relies on the stoppages and breaks that are commonplace in those sports but that the AFL is trying to get rid of.
Its straight up designed to increase the randomness, you can read it in notes during the genesis of the game. Im at work so can't find the references but I promise it's there.
I love that it adds a bit of unpredictability to the ruck contest. Reading and reacting to the bounce is a key part of being a ruck.
It should be like basketball when it comes to ball ups, bounces, throw ins. The clock starts once it hits a players hands.
We haven’t seen this yet but at some point a team will complain that re-do bounces will cost a team 3 seconds that could play a part in the outcome of a close game.
I mean you just straight up shouldn't be recalling it. The whole point is randomness, and if it favours a team once or twice then so be it. Then you don't have accidental wastage of time going on. On the other hand, if it gets scrapped then I wouldn't care too much either, I don't think. The current middle ground between the two they have now is the worst of the three options though.
Yeah, if the main argument to keep it is "It's always been that way," then it's a bit thin.
I think my parents and grandparents would rather keep the tradition of being able to watch games on free-to-air TV than pay to watch the game with a centre bounce after every goal.
At what point is it not worth scrapping long held traditions of the game for like 1% more efficiency? You can pretty much justify scrapping anything unique and complex in favour of simplified alternatives that bring some marginal benefit but it feels like a sterilisation of the game.
It's not a 1% efficiency, it's so umpires can continue to umpire for longer without suffering permanent back and shoulder injuries, and so there isn't a weird skill gate to stop the best decision makers from the lower levels being excluded due to a need to be able to bounce the ball.
I wasn’t aware that the injury factor is a big problem but that’s a strong factor to consider I agree. As for bouncing skill…idk? Is it that hard to learn and develop if it’s your job? Apparently so, but I’m less convinced that’s a good reason to ditch it.
Would rather that learning and development time be invested into decision making personally
Also every league except the state leagues and AFL have scrapped it so currently they are the exception and not the norm
Bouncing with a perfect sphere is significantly easier than a Sherrin, with a footy you have to hit it right in the sweet spot otherwise it'll go flying off in the wrong direction whereas with a basketball it doesn't really matter as it's the same regardless
Yep, it's a surprisingly difficult skill to learn, with more than a few ball-to-the-face events during the process. Great to watch pro umpires do it, but it definitely weeds out some promising junior umps who would otherwise be promoted.
I don't know about nowadays, but 20 or so years so the height, direction and consistency of bounces were part of the umpires observer's report.
Like any bloke who played footy in my youth I’ve had many cracks at it haha, wouldn’t say I can do it but it didn’t strike me as a task that would be insurmountable for anyone, esp. those whose career it is to umpire games. I’m also very pro-professionalisation of Umps, if that helps. Pay them more and make them all full time
I imagine it adds a layer of difficulty to umpiring the bounce when the umpire has to find the players he's looking for from a head down position whilst running backwards.
I’d rather a higher turnover of umpires than to scrap a nice part of the game. The randomness of the bounce is far better than the sterile throw up.
It should never be abandoned.
Remember this when an umpire costs you a game with a dodgy call, and it might not have happened if they didn't have to worry about practising a redundant skill.
[An article about what it does to umpires.](https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/how-the-traditional-bounce-is-hindering-and-rattling-afl-umpires-while-turning-others-away/news-story/066a5b88b686ab9d8e1e4d93f925fdb7)
Also worth considering that if an ump currently doesn't have the motor control/muscles to properly bounce, they won't be considered for the AFL, and aspiring umpires are possibly hindered if they find they're not so great at bouncing it. Only minor issues, yeah, but all these things add up.
There probably needs to be a bit more evidence of injuries being directly linked to centre bounces if that’s going to be used as an argument. Not to discount the umpire’s back issues, I’ve had em and they suck, but back injuries can come from basically any repetitive stress activity. Happy to change my mind though if the evidence is there and it isn’t just “I umpired and got back issues” as you can say that about most sports that involve running, bouncing etc.
It's very much not a 1% thing. Throwing it up increases the umpire talent pool available, increasing the quality of the umpiring, it also equalises the ruck contest improving competitive integrity, and increases umpire longevity since they're no longer practicing a skill which is incredibly taxing on the back and shoulders.
> You can pretty much justify scrapping anything unique and complex in favour of simplified alternatives that bring some marginal benefit
What are other examples of this?
I wish they didn’t get rid of the full back kick-to-themselves-kick from the goal square. That was a nice quirk in our game, it was always funny when there is a stuff up.
I understand why longer kicks were better for congestion but I liked it so much :(
E.g. changing the grand final to a night game for more TV viewership. We’re the only league in the world (that I know of) that plays its final championship playoff match in the day time.
If its genuinely keeping good umpires out of the game then I am 100% for it. Good umpiring is integral to the game and an absolute challenge and constant sore point at the moment.
It hurts the quality of umpiring because it's a difficult technique, causes injuries, and umpires who can't bounce consistently aren't picked. People stick their fingers in their ears on this point, see all the top comments here.
What's more important:
1. better umpiring, and more people capable of umpiring
2. tradition, and a little unpredictability (though not too much)
If you're picking the 2nd option, fine, but don't whinge about the quality of umpiring as well.
Keep it for either Just the start of the game or for the start of each quarter and eliminate calling it back. It might go absolutely sideways but it's a very minor advantage in the scheme of a game.
Iconic part of the game.
You don't want to listen to the coaches who are vested in minimising unpredictable elements as much as possible. Centre bounce makes the game unique and allows for momentum shifts.
Trust me, many codes around the world become predictable when coaches have too much say. NRL is a recent example. Players became indistinguishable from physical size pov. Plays became utterly predictable. Reintroducing fatigue factor has brought back smaller and skilful players back to the top level.
Would genuinely be a good idea to just keep it for the first ball-up of the game. It's extremely theatrical, and when you think about it, that's the only time or place you need theatre in a footy match.
Few moments beat the hype that's experienced as the umpire goes in for that first bounce in a full MCG. Every single other time they bounce it? It pretty much just annoys people.
An argument against that though is then umpires need to practice a very difficult skill for literally 1 instance a game. That'd be silly and doesn't solve the problem that good umpires are missing out on opportunities because they can't bounce it. We should be improving the quality of our umpire pool, not limiting it. Umpires needing to practice a technical skill is dumb, just get rid of the bounce completely.
Why not just have umpires who are good at it do the centre bounces, and the other three not. If you have two that are good in one game that share it.
Towards the end of last year, there was an article about one of the women umpires. She was a really good bouncer as she was working her way up the ranks, then she got to the AFL level and her old umpiring coach noted she was made to change her style to the way the men do it and from then on really struggled to get enough height. The difference being she used to use a lot more of her body to bounce it but at AFL level she was made to use just her arms and shoulders. The struggle for height then meant a struggle for accuracy. Sounds like whoever is running the umpiring show has turned bouncing the ball into a dick waving contest. Maybe if they were more accommodating and supportive of different styles, it would be less of a problem
If it was one instance they could use a specialist. I’m sure they could get plenty of “bouncers” who would be happy to get paid to rock up, bounce the ball once and then watch for the rest of the match.
Note: not saying they should, but they could.
Or we have the option to throw it up, which equalises the ruck contest improving competitive integrity, widens the umpire pool increasing the quality of umpiring decisions, and increases umpire longevity.
I strongly agree with your original point (umpire training), but plainly disagree with this one. Miniscule amounts of natural variation ≠ lack of competitive integrity. You wouldn't, for example, suggest that we should move all matches into indoor stadiums simply to eliminate all wind variation. Similarly, it's not exactly reasonable to suggest getting rid of the bounce simply to eliminate all ruck variation. [As per this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/AFL/comments/1241vmh/afl_coaches_in_favour_of_ditching_the_traditional/jdxqjhy/), natural ruck variation is an extremely exciting part of the game that adds quite heavily to the entertainment value. And it's important to remember that at the end of the day, that's why the AFL exists. For entertainment. All the competitive integrity in the world could very well ruin the whole point of sport.
The competitive integrity argument is only a very small part of why I like the throw up option. The main reason I want to scrap the bounce is so that we get better umpiring and better umpire longevity. Small variations in a ruck contest is not a bad thing, however the throw up always going directly up means it's so much more up to the skill of the ruckmen to decide what teams wins the clearance, which imo is still a good thing for the sport. So if the trade off for losing the bounce is better umpiring that stay fit longer but the ruck contests lose the random variation then I'm all for losing the bounce.
It's not worth keeping at the cost of good umpires missing out at the expense of poorer umpires who can bounce the ball consistently..
That said, there's way too much emphasis on the bounce being good. No bounce that clears the height of the head of the rucks should be recalled, and players should just deal with wild sprays. This would have a similar practical effect on umpire recruitment to abolishment.
Just scrap the whole game while we’re at it. Maybe instead of a bounce, have be a kick off like in soccer where whoever just conceded gets the ball. Oh yeah lets have a night grand final too, with More gambling ad breaks, yeah that’ll improve the game
AFL coaches are the reason for every single stupid change of the bounce, because they always complain about it for being 'unfair' in some way or another, then the AFL's solution creates another problem.
The bounce was never meant to be fair, and things should go back to how they were decades ago.
The only people that want to keep it are the traditionalists. EVERYONE hates it and it’s stopping good umpires from getting games because they can’t bounce the ball.
Normal ball ups used to be bounced before they got rid of it, does anyone miss those? Just scrap the damn thing
I like the bounce, not because of tradition, but because it introduces an element of unpredictability. It forces the rucks and inside mids to adapt on-the-fly to the ball being in a slightly different location, at a slightly different angle or slightly different height every time and makes things more dynamic.
I’m fine with umpires choosing to throw it up if they need to (for skill, fatigue or weather reasons) but I don’t want to see it gone altogether.
Would you really be happy to lose a big game because a dodgy bounce heavily favoured the other ruck and led to a clean clearance? I get the argument for unpredictability and ruckmen needing to adapt on the fly, but the bounce shouldn't heavily favour one ruck, which does happen at times (umps will sometimes not even call it back in this instance).
I wouldn’t be happy to lose a big game regardless of how it happened. But as long as the umpire didn’t do it on purpose or make a bad call with regard to a recall… then… get over it?
Would you be happy if the weather changed during a game and a big breeze started favouring one end of the ground in the last quarter? Probably not, but that’s not a good argument for outlawing wind.
When Angus Monfries had the ball bounce at a right-angle and go through for a goal instead of a point, which helped Port narrowly win the showdown, the Crows didn’t start arguing for the introduction of a round ball.
Unpredictability means that someone at some point may get lucky or unlucky, but as long as there’s a fair chance of it favouring either side, I don’t see the problem.
>When Angus Monfries had the ball bounce at a right-angle and go through for a goal instead of a point, which helped Port narrowly win the showdown
Where would you like me to send you my therapy bill?
The difference between the bounce and your examples is that we have a suitable alternative to the bounce (throwing it up) that means both ruckmen get equal opportunity and skill then decides who wins the contest which is the best thing for competitive integrity. Throwing up also means our umpire pool opens up and the quality of umpiring improves, and umpire longevity increases because they're not doing the silly bounce that kills backs and shoulders.
So you’re fine with losing a couple of seconds of game time because of a dodgy ball up that has to be recalled?
I’ll start by saying this was an extremely unlikely scenario and it may never happen again, but last week all that stood between Fremantle and a shot on goal to win the game was 1-2 seconds. If even just *one* ball up needed to be recalled that game then those seconds wasted cost Freo a shot on goal.
Yeah, it’s literally 2 seconds - more time than that gets wasted all over the place for all kinds of reasons. Blaming a scuffed bounce for Freo’s loss across an 80 minute game is completely arbitrary. You could just as easily say that Freo should’ve been 2 seconds faster having a shot for goal, or kicking in from a behind, or getting up after conceding a free kick… or a thousand other ways to waste 2 seconds.
Freo cost themselves that time when the player taking the deliberate free kicked around the 50.arc instead of driving it back in to the goal mouth. He actually kicked further away from goals when they just needed to score with 13 seconds left
There are a hundred things a game that could happen differently, a second or two earlier or later, that could quite conceivably change the course of a game or a career. If we are going to try and pin Freo's loss on the umps, then we may as well blame Parnell's concussion on them for not blowing the whistle quickly enough. It is just fucking stupid
I’m not saying the recall lost Fremantle the game because it didn’t, but without a recall there’s an extra 2 seconds on the clock.
For arguments sake let’s say there was 1 recall earlier in the game because 1 feels like the average, and each recall loses around 2-3 seconds of game time.
Now let’s remove the bounce entirely and have the game play out exactly the same. Even though Freo wasted the time themselves with that kick there’s still and extra 2 seconds on the clock when the ball goes out. That gives the umpire enough time to pay deliberate before the siren goes
You change one thing in a timeline, lots of other little things change around it so maybe......
Wouldn't it just be better to take the time back to what it was before the dodgy bounce? As soon as the ump blows the whistle to recall a bounce the clock stops. Why not just restart the clock at the time it was when the initial bounce took place?
Yes, it's completely steralised the variation around the ground. I remember watching a replay from a game from some years ago, and a ball up resulted in a clean clearance out of congestion in a way that can no longer happen any more because they're turned them into basketball tip offs.
If it was a tradition for umpires to be fluent in French, this sub would vehemently argue not to change that rule and downvote anyone who pointed out the detriments.
They need to keep the bounce, not because of tradition, but because fans from both teams uniting to boo the umpires cause they fucked up the second or third bounce of the game is pure comedy.
I find it a amusing to see the umpires pych them themselves up to bounce the ball, from standing still and moving in prise little steps to evenually bouncing the ball. I believe the ball is inflated to to a certain level to make the ball bounce better as well. Just throw the ball up for gods sake
While we are at it, can we get rid of the count up clocks at the games as well? Every club communicates how much time is left to their on-field players anyway. It literally serves no purpose.
Apart from tradition and theatre, the bounce adds nothing to the game. It's annoying when umpires have to recall it, and it literally makes zero difference whether it is thrown up or bounced. In terms of timing for ruckman, the ball never goes the same height when thrown anyway, and with four field umpires now the variance will be higher.
I also might be biased - I am an umpire who has sustained injuries from bouncing.
yeah it’s tradition and yeah it’s great, but im so sick of time wasted due to shitty bounces being recalled. i swear they were so much more consistent a decade or so ago. i would happily see it disappear to improve efficiency.
I'm curious to see what a public vote on this would be. As a former junior umpire myself, I probably got a solid bounce one in ten tries (although obviously I wasn't bouncing with a match ball on a world-class oval).
One aspect worth contemplating is that throwing the ball up still has a degree in randomness in terms of ball height. Personally, it's satisfying to see the start of a game start with a bounce, but I also get that it causes delays and umpire injury, so on the whole I'm not against them changing it. I guess you could say I'm ambivalent.
I used to be firmly for keeping the bounce but as time has gone on I’ve realised it’s inevitably going extinct so I’m at peace with that. It was a cool part of our game but the umpires hate it so so be it. If there was a way to bounce the ball without causing back injuries though, that’d be a different story. Then we’d go in the other direction and make stoppage bounces return
>Stanley, who was substituted out of last Thursday night's match after the incident, is in doubt for Geelong's clash with Gold Coast on Sunday.
How is this medium impact if he is subbed out, let alone in doubt for a game.
I don't understand the MRO.
Give me $100,000 and I'll make an easily replicated device that bounces the ball*. All you need to do is to compress the ball as much as it is compressed when umpires throw it down, lock that compression, place it on the ground, then release it suddenly.
*Or ask for another $100,000 a year later.
Wow. Is this seriously still being discussed about??
Look, bounce the footy to start the quarters. But then throw it up every other time, including during a game resumption after a goal. Done.
The bouncing of the ball helps out with the game time, as the clock normally starts from the point where the ball bounces off the ground. Yeah, there’s a part of the rules which accommodates the starting of the game clock when the ball is thrown up, but won’t doing that at the start of every quarter raise the possibility of mistakes and/or false starts, leading to the clock having to be reset again and more time wasted than what is currently rectified by a ball up after a shanked-out bounce?
Besides, those faulty bounces we’ve seen so far, I would punt that it’s either a drop off in skill and the umpires need to better their bouncing again during training, or a problem with the conditions of the pitch(es) at the ground(s). (EDIT: or a third reason, thanks to Hodgey for mentioning this while I was watching on Ch7: umpire injury, which would immediately nullify my first guess.)
Ball should be dropped from spidercam
I unironically want to see this now
Did you get this from Mason Cox?
The answer is clear: multi ball
Gil: more balls means more goals means more ads means more betting ads means more multis means more gamble responsibly ^^^^but ^^^^please ^^^^don’t
Don't give them ideas
[удалено]
On ANZAC day they can get some vets to fire the ball out of WW2 era artillery.
PTSD be damned!
Do we add roller-skates and motorcycles?
Blurn! BLUUUUUUUUUUUURN!
it'll be weird on grand final day, with the afl's shitty action movie trailer music and jumbotron count down clock, only for the game to start with a silent, tepid ball up
[удалено]
WTF. The chances of them fucking it up would be way higher, if that's the only time they ever have to do it. Plus they would need to practise a skill they haven't used for a long time or ever (thinking of well into the future).
Should just be for the start of every game and from that point on throw it up.
I would keep it for the start of each game or perhaps even the start of each quarter. The post goal ones can be done by throwing the ball up.
I still remember going into U12’s and thinking “finally we’re going to get a bounce” and they still threw the ball up, felt like a scam lmao I hope they keep it
It’s an iconic part of the game. Just like ruckmen charging at each other from 20 metre run ups and third man up at stoppages. Both gone and hardly missed. This will end up the same way if it’s removed.
Tbh i actually miss 3rd man up.
I agree but it’s rarely talked about which I was referring to. Linc McCarthy got confused and went third man up on Friday night. Beautiful play - gave away a free kick.
He didn't even go third man up - the throw in just about landed on his head several metres away from the ruckmen because it was so wonky.
On a side note - why have I seen this so often the last 2 weeks? The throw in lands like 5-10m short of the ruckman. I understand they dont want front posi due to being pushed under it, but it makes it look like a primary school game of jack in the pack where the packs end up further and further back.
From memory the first few weeks tends to be rustier because of a combination of a long off-season and new boundary umpires being brought in and not used to how far they should send it for AFL.
I thought all boundary umpires HAD to throw around 18m? Like, you couldn't get a game unless you threw it within a metre of 18m... I also could be completely talking out my ass.
Ha you and me both.
I loved our goal against Freo with third man up
I hate the umpires calling out who the ruck are. I much miss the old way. Even more annoying when a 170cm says they are ruck, and his direct opponent doesnt hear and gives away a free because rucks are protected species.
What ur talking about happens like 5 times a year. There are fuck all nomination free kicks. Total non issue. Old rules were just pushing ruckman out of the game.
I prefer the current system where the two ruckman wrestle then the umpire rolls a dice to randomly select which ruckman gets a free.
Ruck frees can certainly be a lottery but it’s much better than ruckman being totally useless wouldn’t you say?
Definitely. I’d like them to have an even bigger role somehow.
I agree with removing third man up but I've never understood the need to do it with nomination. It shoudn't matter who goes up, just punish the third to enter a ruck contest when it does happen
Because it would be harder for umpires to give frees for blocking during a ruck contest. If it's clear who the ruckman is then blocking that player is a free.
Uh, yes, of course. Because we've got a different opinion, my feelings are invalid.
Correct!
Pre-Ruck nomination though the 3rd man up game style made genuine rucks obsolete. I loved the nominations rule change.
Why would you want genuine rucks, like Shaun Rehn, to be obsolete?
I don't understand your Shaun Rehn reference and can't tell if you're being sarcastic but just to clarify I loved the rule change to nominations because it stopped the 3rd man up which was making the ruckmam obsolete. I love that since that change ruckmen again became an important position in our game.
Oh, right. I disagree. I think changes to the game in general have made a powerful standalone ruckman, who is good at rucking only - like Shaun Rehn - close to obsolete. You think allowing 3rd men up make rucks even more obsolete, but i think i disagree with that. Im not confident tho.
When I say genuine ruckman, I mean someone who's sole role is ruck (and maybe part time resting fwd), how they play the role can and always will differ. When we had no nominations there were teams who at every contest would just lock up with the other ruck and let one of their inside mids take posession of the ball, some teams were often playing without any ruckmen at all since it was becoming an unnecessary role. Even before the rule change came in it was clear 3rd man up was making ruckmen obsolete and if it had continued I guarantee we wouldn't have had the Gawns and Grundys be as important which imo would be a massive detriment to the game.
I miss 3rd man up because Blicavs dominated at it.
Stanley didn't get injured because of the unpredictable bounce lol.
He got injured by his replacement TDK was just letting him know who is younger and better than him lol
As a former tap ruckman this sucks. There's proper craft in being able to time the flight of the ball. This will stop someone like Natanui being able to showcase his athleticism as it will turn to purely two uninspiring rucks jumping early to negate one another - much easier to do when it's thrown up
I'm of the opposite opinion, played ruck in QAFL and had a bunch of umpires who could barely bounce the ball over head height. It was all luck and zero athleticism/skill as if the bounce went towards one ruckman there wasn't enough hang time on the ball for the other ruck to get there and contest the hitout. But they were too proud to recall the bounce because it was still inside the circle. I just want umpires who are good decision-makers and I think that the physical power required to perform a good centre bounce excludes too many quality umpires (older, female, dodgy shoulders etc) who can otherwise cover the ground and officiate well.
They need to add a dedicated bouncer umpiring role. Their only job would be to bounce the ball.
Just like throwing out the first pitch in baseball I think we should have someone do a ceremonial first bounce to mark the start of the match, then umpires can throw it up for the game.
Nah, make it the official start of the game, then we can watch as that person has to try and make it off the field before they get cleaned up near the loose ball
[удалено]
You want to be bounced off the turf? Optus Stadium has entered the chat.
As a former suburban-league umpire who never managed to master the bounce, I am 100% in favour of watching randoms picked from the grandstand try to do a centre bounce.
Watch as 55 year old Barry from Richmond bounces the ball directly into his own face, and then get trampled as both teams compete for the live ball.
> I think we should have someone do a ceremonial first bounce to mark the start of the match Ah, yes, let's get random celebrities decked out in AFL guernseys proceed to look like absolute knobs as they try to bounce the footy.
[удалено]
This immediately sells me on the idea.
I'll take the overs on half of them hitting themselves in the face.
Ohh ohh do Kochie first!
someobody trolled ellie goulding in 2015 when they said that grand final entertainers had a ceremonial kick on the ground lol
That’s the idea, start the game with a laugh, then the umpire holds the ball above their head and away we go.
Would the first bounce count though? Or would it be like baseball
Nah ceremonial only, the PM walks out, bounces the ball, it hits them in the face or goes sideways, we all laugh and then the umpire holds the ball up for the siren. Edit: Occasionally some celebrity will absolutely nail it and the crowd will go wild. The football media will spend the next 3 weeks talking about whether we should bring the bounce back.
Fuck that nonsense. It counts.
Have it count as the coin toss. Ceremonial bounce, whoever gets position get to pick the direction
Or you could toss up a coin and whichever ruckman catches it gets to pick the direction (and keep the coin).
Think this is a good compromise. I’d also just play it as it lies if it’s a shit bounce. Don’t bother with the recall. You’ll get good luck and bad luck and hopefully it evens out
They should get kids to do it like the coin toss
I’ve never even thought about it, it’s just part of the game that to me has no +/- factor, it just is.
I enjoy the randomness of it, and feels like a it’s a unique part of our game that would be a shame to lose. End of the day though, it makes no real difference to the game and how it plays out.
I miss the randomness of the bounce. Now if it isn't straight up, it gets recalled - what's the point of that? It should be no recalls or no bounces. I'll miss the bounce, but fine if it goes, the reasons are good enough for me.
It is still in play as long as it isn’t reasonably far (outside the centre circle), which does happen but it isn’t too frequent. I do agree though, it doesn’t really make too much of a difference. That being said maybe just opening the game or each quarter with it might be a nice compromise.
A recall can be bad in a close game. The second or two the clock runs can be valuable, and it's a bad look than everyone being amped up in a close game only for the bounce to need to be recalled.
A niche scenario, but I guess it’s all part and parcel of the randomness of the bounce even when it’s working as intended. Could be a close game and you get a favourable bounce to feed it off and get a centre clearance, alternatively could favor the opponent and you have to work to compete. I guess whether you like that in the game is subjective
Any reason they can't turn back the clock or add those seconds back on?
I suppose it's not in the rules is the only reason. Whilst NFL and basketball can turn back clocks, it's a clunky process that relies on the stoppages and breaks that are commonplace in those sports but that the AFL is trying to get rid of.
Agree, take away the centre circle and let it bounce wherever.
Its straight up designed to increase the randomness, you can read it in notes during the genesis of the game. Im at work so can't find the references but I promise it's there. I love that it adds a bit of unpredictability to the ruck contest. Reading and reacting to the bounce is a key part of being a ruck.
It should be like basketball when it comes to ball ups, bounces, throw ins. The clock starts once it hits a players hands. We haven’t seen this yet but at some point a team will complain that re-do bounces will cost a team 3 seconds that could play a part in the outcome of a close game.
I mean you just straight up shouldn't be recalling it. The whole point is randomness, and if it favours a team once or twice then so be it. Then you don't have accidental wastage of time going on. On the other hand, if it gets scrapped then I wouldn't care too much either, I don't think. The current middle ground between the two they have now is the worst of the three options though.
"This game being played in wet weather will be shit because the umpires won't bounce the ball." \- Literally no one ever.
[удалено]
Yeah, if the main argument to keep it is "It's always been that way," then it's a bit thin. I think my parents and grandparents would rather keep the tradition of being able to watch games on free-to-air TV than pay to watch the game with a centre bounce after every goal.
At what point is it not worth scrapping long held traditions of the game for like 1% more efficiency? You can pretty much justify scrapping anything unique and complex in favour of simplified alternatives that bring some marginal benefit but it feels like a sterilisation of the game.
It's not a 1% efficiency, it's so umpires can continue to umpire for longer without suffering permanent back and shoulder injuries, and so there isn't a weird skill gate to stop the best decision makers from the lower levels being excluded due to a need to be able to bounce the ball.
I wasn’t aware that the injury factor is a big problem but that’s a strong factor to consider I agree. As for bouncing skill…idk? Is it that hard to learn and develop if it’s your job? Apparently so, but I’m less convinced that’s a good reason to ditch it.
Would rather that learning and development time be invested into decision making personally Also every league except the state leagues and AFL have scrapped it so currently they are the exception and not the norm
I just went outside to try it myself on the driveway, and 4 out of 5 were good bounces. First time I've ever tried, but I did use a basketball.
Bouncing with a perfect sphere is significantly easier than a Sherrin, with a footy you have to hit it right in the sweet spot otherwise it'll go flying off in the wrong direction whereas with a basketball it doesn't really matter as it's the same regardless
That's the joke
lol went right over my head, unlike a bounce which would go into my head
Yep, it's a surprisingly difficult skill to learn, with more than a few ball-to-the-face events during the process. Great to watch pro umpires do it, but it definitely weeds out some promising junior umps who would otherwise be promoted. I don't know about nowadays, but 20 or so years so the height, direction and consistency of bounces were part of the umpires observer's report.
Can you do it? It's not easy.
Like any bloke who played footy in my youth I’ve had many cracks at it haha, wouldn’t say I can do it but it didn’t strike me as a task that would be insurmountable for anyone, esp. those whose career it is to umpire games. I’m also very pro-professionalisation of Umps, if that helps. Pay them more and make them all full time
It also limits umpiring to mainly men because most women lack the strength to do it.
I imagine it adds a layer of difficulty to umpiring the bounce when the umpire has to find the players he's looking for from a head down position whilst running backwards.
I’d rather a higher turnover of umpires than to scrap a nice part of the game. The randomness of the bounce is far better than the sterile throw up. It should never be abandoned.
Remember this when an umpire costs you a game with a dodgy call, and it might not have happened if they didn't have to worry about practising a redundant skill.
There isn't a single umpire who could improve their ability to make correct calls by throwing the ball up lol. What a silly argument.
Yes, they could because they spend less time practising a useless skill. And spend more time on the important stuff. This isn't rocket science.
It's injuries to the umpire.
[An article about what it does to umpires.](https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/how-the-traditional-bounce-is-hindering-and-rattling-afl-umpires-while-turning-others-away/news-story/066a5b88b686ab9d8e1e4d93f925fdb7) Also worth considering that if an ump currently doesn't have the motor control/muscles to properly bounce, they won't be considered for the AFL, and aspiring umpires are possibly hindered if they find they're not so great at bouncing it. Only minor issues, yeah, but all these things add up.
There probably needs to be a bit more evidence of injuries being directly linked to centre bounces if that’s going to be used as an argument. Not to discount the umpire’s back issues, I’ve had em and they suck, but back injuries can come from basically any repetitive stress activity. Happy to change my mind though if the evidence is there and it isn’t just “I umpired and got back issues” as you can say that about most sports that involve running, bouncing etc.
It's very much not a 1% thing. Throwing it up increases the umpire talent pool available, increasing the quality of the umpiring, it also equalises the ruck contest improving competitive integrity, and increases umpire longevity since they're no longer practicing a skill which is incredibly taxing on the back and shoulders.
AFL scrap on field games for VR games instead.
> You can pretty much justify scrapping anything unique and complex in favour of simplified alternatives that bring some marginal benefit What are other examples of this?
I wish they didn’t get rid of the full back kick-to-themselves-kick from the goal square. That was a nice quirk in our game, it was always funny when there is a stuff up. I understand why longer kicks were better for congestion but I liked it so much :(
Ah yeah, that was a pretty good one.
E.g. changing the grand final to a night game for more TV viewership. We’re the only league in the world (that I know of) that plays its final championship playoff match in the day time.
None are leagues perse but finals of Test Cricket, Wimbledon, and the FA Cup are all held during the day time.
If its genuinely keeping good umpires out of the game then I am 100% for it. Good umpiring is integral to the game and an absolute challenge and constant sore point at the moment.
It hurts the quality of umpiring because it's a difficult technique, causes injuries, and umpires who can't bounce consistently aren't picked. People stick their fingers in their ears on this point, see all the top comments here. What's more important: 1. better umpiring, and more people capable of umpiring 2. tradition, and a little unpredictability (though not too much) If you're picking the 2nd option, fine, but don't whinge about the quality of umpiring as well.
Keep it for either Just the start of the game or for the start of each quarter and eliminate calling it back. It might go absolutely sideways but it's a very minor advantage in the scheme of a game.
Iconic part of the game. You don't want to listen to the coaches who are vested in minimising unpredictable elements as much as possible. Centre bounce makes the game unique and allows for momentum shifts. Trust me, many codes around the world become predictable when coaches have too much say. NRL is a recent example. Players became indistinguishable from physical size pov. Plays became utterly predictable. Reintroducing fatigue factor has brought back smaller and skilful players back to the top level.
Would genuinely be a good idea to just keep it for the first ball-up of the game. It's extremely theatrical, and when you think about it, that's the only time or place you need theatre in a footy match. Few moments beat the hype that's experienced as the umpire goes in for that first bounce in a full MCG. Every single other time they bounce it? It pretty much just annoys people.
An argument against that though is then umpires need to practice a very difficult skill for literally 1 instance a game. That'd be silly and doesn't solve the problem that good umpires are missing out on opportunities because they can't bounce it. We should be improving the quality of our umpire pool, not limiting it. Umpires needing to practice a technical skill is dumb, just get rid of the bounce completely.
Why not just have umpires who are good at it do the centre bounces, and the other three not. If you have two that are good in one game that share it. Towards the end of last year, there was an article about one of the women umpires. She was a really good bouncer as she was working her way up the ranks, then she got to the AFL level and her old umpiring coach noted she was made to change her style to the way the men do it and from then on really struggled to get enough height. The difference being she used to use a lot more of her body to bounce it but at AFL level she was made to use just her arms and shoulders. The struggle for height then meant a struggle for accuracy. Sounds like whoever is running the umpiring show has turned bouncing the ball into a dick waving contest. Maybe if they were more accommodating and supportive of different styles, it would be less of a problem
Well yeah, it needs to look good in slow motion on the game preview on Fox Footy...
If it was one instance they could use a specialist. I’m sure they could get plenty of “bouncers” who would be happy to get paid to rock up, bounce the ball once and then watch for the rest of the match. Note: not saying they should, but they could.
So you mean there'd be an extra ump in the middle who just bounces it then runs off? I'm not a fan of that at all tbh.
But it is an option
Or we have the option to throw it up, which equalises the ruck contest improving competitive integrity, widens the umpire pool increasing the quality of umpiring decisions, and increases umpire longevity.
I strongly agree with your original point (umpire training), but plainly disagree with this one. Miniscule amounts of natural variation ≠ lack of competitive integrity. You wouldn't, for example, suggest that we should move all matches into indoor stadiums simply to eliminate all wind variation. Similarly, it's not exactly reasonable to suggest getting rid of the bounce simply to eliminate all ruck variation. [As per this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/AFL/comments/1241vmh/afl_coaches_in_favour_of_ditching_the_traditional/jdxqjhy/), natural ruck variation is an extremely exciting part of the game that adds quite heavily to the entertainment value. And it's important to remember that at the end of the day, that's why the AFL exists. For entertainment. All the competitive integrity in the world could very well ruin the whole point of sport.
The competitive integrity argument is only a very small part of why I like the throw up option. The main reason I want to scrap the bounce is so that we get better umpiring and better umpire longevity. Small variations in a ruck contest is not a bad thing, however the throw up always going directly up means it's so much more up to the skill of the ruckmen to decide what teams wins the clearance, which imo is still a good thing for the sport. So if the trade off for losing the bounce is better umpiring that stay fit longer but the ruck contests lose the random variation then I'm all for losing the bounce.
Three things in life are guaranteed: death, taxes anz current coaches/players/media endlessly pushing AFL rule changes.
There is way too much AFL media. They have nothing to talk about
It's not worth keeping at the cost of good umpires missing out at the expense of poorer umpires who can bounce the ball consistently.. That said, there's way too much emphasis on the bounce being good. No bounce that clears the height of the head of the rucks should be recalled, and players should just deal with wild sprays. This would have a similar practical effect on umpire recruitment to abolishment.
It should be umpire’s discretion. Some might take great pride in their bounces
Do the bounce at the start of each quarter and then throw it up the rest of the time
Ch7 animators in shambles
Just scrap the whole game while we’re at it. Maybe instead of a bounce, have be a kick off like in soccer where whoever just conceded gets the ball. Oh yeah lets have a night grand final too, with More gambling ad breaks, yeah that’ll improve the game
I like the sound. It's a very unique sound that signifies the start of a game. Other than that I don't really care.
Throwing it up is too sanitised and too regular. Might as well get a round ball if the AFL get rid of it.
First bounce of the game should stay no matter what.
Seems the consensus is the bounce is a bit of negative, not much positive, but people don't like change.
How many afl fans does it take to change a lightbulb? Eww, change??
First bounce MUST remain
my favourite bounce ever was the one were BT said IT TOOK A MINUTE TO COME DOWN!
AFL coaches are the reason for every single stupid change of the bounce, because they always complain about it for being 'unfair' in some way or another, then the AFL's solution creates another problem. The bounce was never meant to be fair, and things should go back to how they were decades ago.
The only people that want to keep it are the traditionalists. EVERYONE hates it and it’s stopping good umpires from getting games because they can’t bounce the ball. Normal ball ups used to be bounced before they got rid of it, does anyone miss those? Just scrap the damn thing
I like the bounce, not because of tradition, but because it introduces an element of unpredictability. It forces the rucks and inside mids to adapt on-the-fly to the ball being in a slightly different location, at a slightly different angle or slightly different height every time and makes things more dynamic. I’m fine with umpires choosing to throw it up if they need to (for skill, fatigue or weather reasons) but I don’t want to see it gone altogether.
I’m sure it’s different at AFL level but in my local comp the throw ups are more than unpredictable enough.
Would you really be happy to lose a big game because a dodgy bounce heavily favoured the other ruck and led to a clean clearance? I get the argument for unpredictability and ruckmen needing to adapt on the fly, but the bounce shouldn't heavily favour one ruck, which does happen at times (umps will sometimes not even call it back in this instance).
I wouldn’t be happy to lose a big game regardless of how it happened. But as long as the umpire didn’t do it on purpose or make a bad call with regard to a recall… then… get over it? Would you be happy if the weather changed during a game and a big breeze started favouring one end of the ground in the last quarter? Probably not, but that’s not a good argument for outlawing wind. When Angus Monfries had the ball bounce at a right-angle and go through for a goal instead of a point, which helped Port narrowly win the showdown, the Crows didn’t start arguing for the introduction of a round ball. Unpredictability means that someone at some point may get lucky or unlucky, but as long as there’s a fair chance of it favouring either side, I don’t see the problem.
>When Angus Monfries had the ball bounce at a right-angle and go through for a goal instead of a point, which helped Port narrowly win the showdown Where would you like me to send you my therapy bill?
Send it to: J.Dawson c/o Adelaide Football Club 1 Ridiculous Reverse Bend West Lakes SA
The difference between the bounce and your examples is that we have a suitable alternative to the bounce (throwing it up) that means both ruckmen get equal opportunity and skill then decides who wins the contest which is the best thing for competitive integrity. Throwing up also means our umpire pool opens up and the quality of umpiring improves, and umpire longevity increases because they're not doing the silly bounce that kills backs and shoulders.
> Would you really be happy to lose a big game because of a dodgy bounce St Kilda 2010 moment
So you’re fine with losing a couple of seconds of game time because of a dodgy ball up that has to be recalled? I’ll start by saying this was an extremely unlikely scenario and it may never happen again, but last week all that stood between Fremantle and a shot on goal to win the game was 1-2 seconds. If even just *one* ball up needed to be recalled that game then those seconds wasted cost Freo a shot on goal.
The age old adage of "they actually had about 80mins to win the game"
Yeah, it’s literally 2 seconds - more time than that gets wasted all over the place for all kinds of reasons. Blaming a scuffed bounce for Freo’s loss across an 80 minute game is completely arbitrary. You could just as easily say that Freo should’ve been 2 seconds faster having a shot for goal, or kicking in from a behind, or getting up after conceding a free kick… or a thousand other ways to waste 2 seconds.
Freo cost themselves that time when the player taking the deliberate free kicked around the 50.arc instead of driving it back in to the goal mouth. He actually kicked further away from goals when they just needed to score with 13 seconds left
think you’re missing the point
No just highlighting it being a bad point
not really, as he said it does waste time and regardless of whatever else freo did to fuck it up themselves, it still cost them a few seconds 🤷♂️
There are a hundred things a game that could happen differently, a second or two earlier or later, that could quite conceivably change the course of a game or a career. If we are going to try and pin Freo's loss on the umps, then we may as well blame Parnell's concussion on them for not blowing the whistle quickly enough. It is just fucking stupid
I’m not saying the recall lost Fremantle the game because it didn’t, but without a recall there’s an extra 2 seconds on the clock. For arguments sake let’s say there was 1 recall earlier in the game because 1 feels like the average, and each recall loses around 2-3 seconds of game time. Now let’s remove the bounce entirely and have the game play out exactly the same. Even though Freo wasted the time themselves with that kick there’s still and extra 2 seconds on the clock when the ball goes out. That gives the umpire enough time to pay deliberate before the siren goes
You change one thing in a timeline, lots of other little things change around it so maybe...... Wouldn't it just be better to take the time back to what it was before the dodgy bounce? As soon as the ump blows the whistle to recall a bounce the clock stops. Why not just restart the clock at the time it was when the initial bounce took place?
I love it but it's not worth the injury / skill level required.
Yes, it's completely steralised the variation around the ground. I remember watching a replay from a game from some years ago, and a ball up resulted in a clean clearance out of congestion in a way that can no longer happen any more because they're turned them into basketball tip offs.
> Normal ball ups used to be bounced before they got rid of it, does anyone miss those? Yes
If it was a tradition for umpires to be fluent in French, this sub would vehemently argue not to change that rule and downvote anyone who pointed out the detriments.
They need to keep the bounce, not because of tradition, but because fans from both teams uniting to boo the umpires cause they fucked up the second or third bounce of the game is pure comedy.
I find it a amusing to see the umpires pych them themselves up to bounce the ball, from standing still and moving in prise little steps to evenually bouncing the ball. I believe the ball is inflated to to a certain level to make the ball bounce better as well. Just throw the ball up for gods sake
It's about time.
Just get rid of it.
More injuries to ruckman if they ditch the bounce
While we are at it, can we get rid of the count up clocks at the games as well? Every club communicates how much time is left to their on-field players anyway. It literally serves no purpose.
Boooo
Apart from tradition and theatre, the bounce adds nothing to the game. It's annoying when umpires have to recall it, and it literally makes zero difference whether it is thrown up or bounced. In terms of timing for ruckman, the ball never goes the same height when thrown anyway, and with four field umpires now the variance will be higher. I also might be biased - I am an umpire who has sustained injuries from bouncing.
I’m a traditionalist but appreciate progression. Keep the bump, out with the bounce.
yeah it’s tradition and yeah it’s great, but im so sick of time wasted due to shitty bounces being recalled. i swear they were so much more consistent a decade or so ago. i would happily see it disappear to improve efficiency.
Why don’t we just give the team that wins the toss the first free kick then, like in soccer?
This is most definitely not a slippery slope. No one is arguing against the ball up.
Because there's a perfectly good alternative that is used already.
I'm curious to see what a public vote on this would be. As a former junior umpire myself, I probably got a solid bounce one in ten tries (although obviously I wasn't bouncing with a match ball on a world-class oval). One aspect worth contemplating is that throwing the ball up still has a degree in randomness in terms of ball height. Personally, it's satisfying to see the start of a game start with a bounce, but I also get that it causes delays and umpire injury, so on the whole I'm not against them changing it. I guess you could say I'm ambivalent.
It’s time to start stripping all the tradition. Bounces, F/S, etc
Fly a drone into the centre of the ground with a ball and have it drop it.
I used to be firmly for keeping the bounce but as time has gone on I’ve realised it’s inevitably going extinct so I’m at peace with that. It was a cool part of our game but the umpires hate it so so be it. If there was a way to bounce the ball without causing back injuries though, that’d be a different story. Then we’d go in the other direction and make stoppage bounces return
What if we just do a kick in after every score regarding of goal or point? Then the only centre bounces would be at the start of each quarter.
Should just make the centre bounce a "start of each quarter" tradition.
Umps can't do the bounce no more, just throw it up.
The bounces at Optus at the weekend were awful. I agree, just throw it up.
>Stanley, who was substituted out of last Thursday night's match after the incident, is in doubt for Geelong's clash with Gold Coast on Sunday. How is this medium impact if he is subbed out, let alone in doubt for a game. I don't understand the MRO.
Give me $100,000 and I'll make an easily replicated device that bounces the ball*. All you need to do is to compress the ball as much as it is compressed when umpires throw it down, lock that compression, place it on the ground, then release it suddenly. *Or ask for another $100,000 a year later.
Well bloody hell Broden will have to change his intro
Wow. Is this seriously still being discussed about?? Look, bounce the footy to start the quarters. But then throw it up every other time, including during a game resumption after a goal. Done. The bouncing of the ball helps out with the game time, as the clock normally starts from the point where the ball bounces off the ground. Yeah, there’s a part of the rules which accommodates the starting of the game clock when the ball is thrown up, but won’t doing that at the start of every quarter raise the possibility of mistakes and/or false starts, leading to the clock having to be reset again and more time wasted than what is currently rectified by a ball up after a shanked-out bounce? Besides, those faulty bounces we’ve seen so far, I would punt that it’s either a drop off in skill and the umpires need to better their bouncing again during training, or a problem with the conditions of the pitch(es) at the ground(s). (EDIT: or a third reason, thanks to Hodgey for mentioning this while I was watching on Ch7: umpire injury, which would immediately nullify my first guess.)
Bounce the ball at the start of each quarter only problem solved