Geelong midfielder Max Holmes has been caught up in a controversial ‘protected area’ decision that has reignited debate about the AFL’s interpretation of its own regulations.
The incident occurred when Holmes was penalised for entering the protected area after Gold Coast’s Matt Rowell marked the ball 60 metres out from the Suns’ goal. Holmes, who was behind Rowell, held up his arms and tiptoed onto the mark, but by doing so entered “the protected area” and thus gave away the 50-metre penalty.
However, there was a clear issue with the decision because no Geelong player was close to Rowell at the time, and the players ahead of him did not want to approach for fear of being penalised under the AFL’s ‘stand rule’.
Umpire exchange reveals confusion
Channel 7 commentator Matthew Richardson called it the “collision of two rules”, and audio of the two umpires speaking to Holmes highlighted the confusion.
“I’m signalling can I go in,” Holmes said to umpire Hayden Meyer, and then suggested the controlling umpire, Nathan Williamson, needed to signal to him by putting his hand out and saying “stay out, stay out”.
“I’m like this,” Holmes said, showing how he entered the area with his arms up and tiptoeing around Rowell.
“It’s up to you to know ... (but) I get ya, mate,” Meyer replied.
Holmes: “Oh, it’s so harsh.”
Meyer: “Yeah.”
Holmes also pleaded his case to Williamson.
Williamson: “You come within 3 metres of him ... I understand you were saying I needed to (call) you out ... but because you’re out, you’ve just gotta go out straight away. I agree, it’s tough ...”
Commentators slam the rule
Richardson called the whole situation a “nonsense”.
“The hard thing in this is that what we want is for a Brownlow medallist to mark the ball 60 metres out, and no one can go near him,” Richardson said on Channel 7. “Like, you’ve got to be able to defend that. It’s 60 metres out (from goal). I don’t get it. I think it’s a stupid rule.”
While acknowledging the decision was likely correct according to the letter of the law, Richardson argued it prevented proper defensive play and effectively eliminated a Geelong player from the game.
“So we’re just going to let a Brownlow medallist basically play on and do what he wants. That’s not defending, that’s nonsense,” Richardson said.
Dale Thomas said the controversy highlighted ongoing concerns about the complexity of AFL rules, particularly where the protected area and stand rule intersect.
“The protected area was brought in separately, obviously, to the stand rule,” Thomas said.
Richardson: “We’ve got the collision of two rules.”
And Thomas agreed: “We do ... we have the atom-splitting of two rules (and it’s) turned into another big bang from Richo.”
