[Baptiste Fumaroli]

The process of identifying a marking infraction (such as Wrapping, Straddle, Disc Space) as a thrower is very distracting, they have to stop looking at the field for a brief moment (and completely lose their focus) to be able to check for a potential infraction. Most of the time it’s not worth the penalty (-1 stall). The current situation is that marking infractions are too rarely called (especially at lower level) because it takes too much energy to identify it as a thrower.

Suggestions for changes could be :
– Increase the penalty for a marking infraction
– Let other players call marking infractions
– Rule 1.8.5.3 to be more permissive and more precise
– Thrower decides if a marking infraction stops play or not (just like having the choice between “Foul” and “Contact” 17.6.1.3)

[Albin Sundstrom]

+1 Agree with this change, straddle is rarely called while affecting the game quite a bit.

[John Kofi]

I feel like the new increased distance of the mark is rarely respected. It should be called out more often, on the field, on the sideline, in the spirit circles (before and after the game), in the spirit score (play by the rules).

Although – 1 is not much of a threat, a marking violation would set the stall back to 0 (1), so it would be interesting to clarify and add more to the marking violation rule. 😉
(example : the mark makes a straddle – called by the thrower, on another possession the same player makes another straddle, this could be a marking violation – as the player was already warned)

[John Tofalis]

+ 1

[Baptiste Fumaroli]

The incident during the recent WBUC women semi-final universe point opposing France to USA really showed that issue, not only because of the fast-count but the numerous marking infractions at the mark before the French scoring throw and the stall-out call, too hard to identify and call under such pressure. This is a rule problem that has to be addressed imho.