Marking Contests

12 March 2024

A field umpire shall award a free kick in a marking contest, against a player who:

a. holds or blocks an opposition player

b. unduly pushes or bumps an opposition player

c. deliberately interferes with the arms of an opposition player

d. makes contact to an opposition player from front-on and whose sole objective is not to contest or spoil a mark; or

e. makes an unrealistic attempt to contest or spoil a Mark which interferes with an opposition player.

 

The prohibited contact law also applies. In particular, we will pay a free kick where a player:

b. pushes or bumps an opposition player in the back

c. makes high contact to an opposition player (including top of the shoulders) with any part of their body

 

Incidental contact can be thought of as contact that only occurs because the player is reasonably trying to contest or spoil the mark, and that is the only thing that they are trying to do. An example is where a player taking a ‘speccy’, and their knee rests on top of the shoulder of their opponent.

 

1. Holds/blocks

A free kick will be paid against a player who holds or blocks an opposition player who is contesting the mark.

To pay a free kick for a ‘hold’, the player must be ‘held’, but that hold doesn’t need to affect the contest. Cues include:

• Arm or arms wrapped around the opposition waist
• Opposition arm or arms being held (where the player wants to compete for mark with both arms but cannot)
• Jumper flag
• Mismatched opponents

To pay a free kick for a ‘block’, we are looking for an intentional act to prevent or affect a player’s ability to contest the mark. Cues include:

• Eyes not on the ball
• Moving off the direct line to the contest
• Using arms in a shepherding motion
• 2 v 1 contest

A free kick shouldn’t be paid just because a player looks at their opposition. A block – preventing or affecting the player’s ability to contest the ball – must still occur.

 

2. Interferes with arms

A free kick will be paid against a player who deliberately interferes with the arm/arms of an opponent in a marking contest. Because knowing whether a player has done something deliberately is difficult, we rely on the following cues:

• Spoiling arm is not near the ball
• Sweeping motion (compared to a punch at the ball)
• Ball being marked at full arm extension against smaller opponent

We should be especially looking for where the contact is made. A spoiling arm that only ever reaches the bicep of a mark at full extension is likely to be considered interference, whereas an arm that is punching at the ball and makes contact to the forearm is likely to be a genuine and reasonable attempt to spoil.

 

3. Front on Contact

• A free kick will be paid against a player who makes front on contact in a marking contest, unless that player’s sole objective is to mark or spoil the ball.
• For marking to be considered the ‘sole objective’, the player must be clearly only attempting to mark. For spoiling to be considered the ‘sole objective’, the player must be clearly attempting to spoil by punching the ball, and must make contact with the ball.
• A player who is attempting to spoil from front on, but who only makes contact with the arms or body of the opponent (and not the ball) should be penalised.

 

5. Unrealistic attempt

A free kick is paid against a player who makes an unrealistic attempt to mark or spoil the ball and interferes with an opposition player. Our cues include:

• An uncontrolled leap that may be early
• The player is unable to contest the ball, or lands back on the ground before they do so
• Interference is with an opposition player (sometimes they will only interfere with a teammate)

 

6. High contact

High contact in a marking contest is a free kick unless the contact is incidental to the contest. The challenging part of this law is deciding when the contact is ‘incidental’. The following cues provide a guide:

• High contact by a player trying to take a ‘speccy’, such as placing hands or knee on top of shoulders/head is usually incidental.
• Glancing high contact by a player making a genuine and realistic attempt to spoil the ball is usually incidental.
• High contact that occurs while players are falling to the ground after a marking contest is usually incidental.
• High contact by an arm that is not used to contest the ball (like a high fend) is more likely to (but not automatically) result in a free kick.

 

Examples

https://www.loom.com/share/ec3b744b543a413d8662cb3032af5f35

1. A correct “hold” is paid in this example to the Frankston YCW player whose eyes are fixed on the ball. The Mt. Eliza player clearly holds the YCW player by the waist and possibly by the arms as well causing this free kick to be paid.
2. A correct free kick for a push in the back is paid to Frankston YCW. The Mt. Eliza players act is constituted as an unrealistic attempt and in doing so he causes interference to the YCW player. In this instance the Mt. Eliza players attempt makes him no chance of marking the ball. If he does the free kick would not be paid.
3. The correct free kick is paid to Dromana in this instance. The YCW player has no eyes for the ball and he hits the arms of the Dromana player whose full focus is on the ball. This is considered front on contact. The YCW player’s intention is not to contest the ball.
4. This is a missed free kick. The free kick in this instance should be paid to Frankston YCW whose full intention is to mark the ball. The Dromana player pushes the YCW player in the back with no intention to mark or spoil the ball. These free kicks can often be missed close to the goal or boundary line and full focus is required around these areas.
5. The correct free kick is paid to Frankston YCW for a block in the marking contest. The Dromana player’s intention is not to mark the ball. It is to stop the YCW player from doing so.
6. Similar to example no.4 this is a missed free kick. The Pines player has his back turned to the ball and his intention is to infringe the YCW player, not to mark or spoil the ball.
7. An excellent free kick. The YCW is denied an opportunity to contest the ball through being blocked by his Pines opponent. The Pines player does not have eyes for the contest and moves off his line to block the YCW player.
8. An excellent free kick paid to Karingal. His Somerville opponent moves off his line to prevent Karingal from contesting the ball. His objective is to allow his Somerville team mate to take an uncontested mark, not to contest the ball himself. Umpires in this instance need to have forward vision and good peripheral vision being 15-20m from the contest.