AFL Third Man Up Rule: Changes and Impact

A Case Study in Tactical Evolution and the Ruck Revolution

---

The AFL third man up rule, formally introduced ahead of the 2017 season, represents one of the most significant tactical interventions in modern Australian rules football history. This case study examines the rule change that prohibited a third player from contesting a ruck contest, effectively mandating that only the two nominated ruckmen could compete for the ball at centre bounces and boundary throw-ins. The impact of this change has been profound, reshaping team structures, player development pathways, and the very fabric of how Australian football is played at elite levels.

For the uninitiated, understanding this rule requires first grasping the fundamental mechanics of ruck contests—a topic we explore in detail in our AFL rules for beginners guide. However, for the purposes of this analysis, we will assume a working knowledge of the game's basic framework.

---

Background: The Challenge of the Third Man Up

The Pre-2017 Landscape

Prior to the 2017 season, Australian rules football permitted any player from either team to contest a ruck contest. While each team typically designated a primary ruckman—often a tall, athletic player skilled in tapping the ball to advantage—there was no restriction on other players joining the contest. This created a tactical environment where the "third man up" became a specialised role.

The third man up referred to a player—usually a midfielder or a medium-sized forward—who would time their run to meet the ball at the apex of the ruck contest, often jumping over or around the primary ruckmen. This player's objective was typically to either:

1. Win the tap themselves if they could reach the ball before or at the same time as the ruckmen
2. Disrupt the primary ruckman's tap by making contact or altering the flight of the ball
3. Provide a secondary contest that created uncertainty for the opposition's midfield setup

The Tactical Arms Race

By the mid-2010s, the third man up had evolved from an occasional tactic into a systematic strategy. Coaches identified that having an extra body in the ruck contest could neutralise a dominant opposition ruckman or create scoring opportunities from stoppages.

Consider this hypothetical example: A team with a relatively inexperienced ruckman facing the league's premier tap ruckman might instruct a midfielder to consistently go third man up. The midfielder's job would not necessarily be to win the tap, but to make contact with the opposition ruckman, preventing a clean tap to his midfielders. This tactic, while effective, introduced significant safety concerns.

The Safety Imperative

The primary driver for the rule change was player safety. The AFL's medical and football operations departments had identified an alarming trend: ruck contests were producing a disproportionate number of concussions and head injuries. The third man up scenario was considered particularly dangerous because:

• Players contesting from different angles often made contact with each other's heads rather than the ball
• The third player frequently arrived late, creating a collision scenario where players were vulnerable
• The unpredictability of who would contest made it difficult for umpires to protect players

Reports from the AFL's injury surveillance system indicated that ruck contests accounted for a significant proportion of all concussions in matches, despite representing a small fraction of total game time. This concern reflected the genuine worries that prompted the rule change.

The Competitive Balance Problem

Beyond safety, there was a competitive balance issue. Teams with dominant ruckmen—players who could consistently win hit-outs to advantage—felt that their investment in developing specialist ruck talent was being undermined by the third man up tactic. If any midfielder could negate a ruckman's advantage by simply jumping into the contest, what was the point of developing a specialist ruckman?

This question resonated particularly strongly with traditional clubs that prided themselves on developing tall talent through state league competitions that feed the AFL.

---

Approach: The AFL's Strategic Intervention

Rule Design and Consultation

The AFL's approach to addressing the third man up issue involved consultation with clubs, players, the AFL Coaches Association, and the AFL Players Association. The process, which unfolded over the 2015 and 2016 seasons, considered multiple options:

1. Complete ban on third man up – The most drastic option, which would restrict ruck contests to two players only
2. Modified contest rules – Allowing third man up but requiring specific positioning or timing
3. No change – Maintaining the status quo with enhanced enforcement of existing dangerous contact rules

The AFL ultimately chose option one: a complete ban on any player other than the two nominated ruckmen contesting a ruck contest at centre bounces and boundary throw-ins. The rule was announced in late 2016 for implementation in the 2017 season.

The Nominated Ruckman System

A critical component of the new rule was the nominated ruckman system. Each team was required to nominate a primary ruckman before each match. This nomination would be provided to the umpires and, importantly, to the opposition. The nominated ruckman was the only player from that team permitted to contest ruck contests.

This system created several interesting dynamics:

• Transparency: Both teams knew who would be contesting each ruck battle
• Accountability: The nominated ruckman had to contest every ruck contest, limiting the ability to rest or rotate
• Strategic depth: Teams could choose to nominate different ruckmen for different matches based on opposition matchups

Implementation Timeline

The implementation followed a phased approach:

---

Implementation: Tactical and Structural Impacts

Immediate Tactical Adjustments

The implementation of the third man up rule forced immediate tactical recalibration across the competition. Teams that had built their stoppage strategies around the third man up had to fundamentally rethink their approach.

The Midfielder's New Role: Midfielders who had specialised in the third man up role now had to focus entirely on ground-level contests. Players who had built their game around reading the ruck contest from above had to develop new skills at ground level.

Ruckman Evolution: The rule placed greater importance on the primary ruckman's ability to win hit-outs and, critically, to direct those hit-outs to advantage. Ruckmen who could consistently tap to specific midfielders became more valuable than those who simply won hit-outs without direction.

Defensive Structures: Without the third man up, teams had to adjust their defensive setups around stoppages. Previously, a third man up could provide immediate defensive pressure on the opposition ruckman's tap. Now, defensive midfielders had to be more disciplined in their positioning.

The Impact on Player Development

One of the most significant consequences of the rule change was its effect on player development pathways. The role of the ruckman became more specialised and, arguably, more important.

The Specialist Ruckman Renaissance: The rule effectively mandated that every team must have at least one genuine ruckman on the field at all times. This created increased demand for tall, athletic players who could compete in the ruck. Development programs at state league level placed greater emphasis on ruck craft.

The Hybrid Player Challenge: Prior to the rule change, some teams experimented with using tall midfielders or key position players as part-time ruckmen. The third man up ban made this more difficult, as the nominated ruckman had to contest every ruck contest. However, it did not eliminate the hybrid ruckman entirely—players who could play as a key forward or defender while also rucking remained valuable, but their ruck work had to be more consistent.

The Umpire's Perspective

The rule change also affected umpiring. Umpires now had to identify and police the third man up infringement, which carried a free kick penalty. This required umpires to:

1. Identify the nominated ruckmen before each contest
2. Monitor for any additional player entering the contest
3. Judge whether a player had genuinely contested or was simply in the vicinity

The umpire signals for this infringement were standardised across the competition, with umpires using a specific hand signal to indicate a free kick for third man up.

---

Results: Observed Lessons and Outcomes

Statistical Impact

While specific statistical data is beyond the scope of this case study, the qualitative results of the rule change have been widely observed and documented by football analysts and commentators.

Reduction in Ruck Contest Injuries: Reports from the AFL's injury surveillance data indicated a reduction in head injuries and concussions originating from ruck contests following the rule change. This was the primary objective of the rule, and by this measure, it was successful.

Increased Ruckman Value: The importance of the specialist ruckman increased markedly. Players who could consistently win hit-outs and provide a contest became more valuable in the trade and draft markets. This shift was particularly evident in the development pathways, where young ruckmen received more attention and investment.

Stoppage Structure Changes: The elimination of the third man up changed the geometry of stoppages. Without an extra player in the air, midfielders could position themselves more predictably around the ruck contest, leading to more structured stoppage setups.

Tactical Adaptations

Coaches adapted to the new rule in several ways:

The Running Ruckman: Some teams developed ruckmen who could provide an extra number around the ground when not contesting ruck battles. These ruckmen would push forward to create mismatches or drop back to provide intercept marking.

The Dual-Ruck Strategy: Teams increasingly employed two genuine ruckmen in their 22-man squad, with one playing primarily as a forward or defender when not rucking. This allowed teams to maintain ruck dominance while also having a secondary option if the primary ruckman was injured or struggling.

The Midfield Ruck Rotation: Some teams rotated their ruck duties among multiple tall players, nominating different ruckmen for different matches based on the opposition. This created matchup problems for teams with only one genuine ruckman.

The Grassroots Impact

The rule change filtered down to community and junior levels of Australian football. While the specific implementation varied by league, the principle of restricting ruck contests to nominated players became standard.

At the grassroots level, the rule change had several effects:

• Safety Improvements: Junior football, where players are still developing coordination and awareness, saw particular benefits from reduced congestion in ruck contests
• Development Focus: Community clubs placed greater emphasis on developing genuine ruckmen rather than relying on tall players from other sports
• Simplified Coaching: Coaches at lower levels found it easier to teach ruck craft when the contest was simplified to two players

---

For Players and Coaches

1. Master the Fundamentals: The third man up rule has made ruck craft more important, not less. Ruckmen must focus on timing, body positioning, and tap direction.
2. Develop Versatility: While the rule restricts who can contest ruck battles, it has increased the importance of ruckmen who can contribute elsewhere on the ground. A ruckman who can take marks, kick goals, or provide defensive coverage is invaluable.
3. Understand the Matchup: The nominated ruckman system means that teams must carefully consider matchups. A smaller, quicker ruckman might be effective against a taller but slower opponent, while a physical ruckman might dominate a less experienced opponent.
4. Adapt Stoppage Structures: Without the third man up, midfield positioning around stoppages becomes more important. Teams must practice structured stoppage setups that account for the absence of an extra aerial contestant.

For Administrators and Rule-Makers

1. Safety First: The third man up rule demonstrates that rule changes driven by player safety concerns can be implemented without fundamentally altering the fabric of the game.
2. Consultation Matters: The AFL's consultation process before implementing the rule change helped ensure buy-in from clubs, players, and coaches.
3. Monitor and Adjust: The AFL's decision to review the rule after one season was crucial. Rule changes should never be considered permanent without assessment of their actual impact.
4. Consider Unintended Consequences: The third man up rule had effects beyond its primary objective, including changes to player development, team structures, and tactical approaches. Rule-makers must consider these secondary effects.

For Fans and Spectators

1. Appreciate the Ruck Craft: The rule change has made ruck contests more visible and more important. Fans should pay attention to the battle between ruckmen, which can determine the flow of a match.
2. Understand the Strategy: The nominated ruckman system adds a strategic layer to team selection and match-day tactics. Understanding who each team nominates and why can deepen appreciation of the game.
3. Recognise the Safety Benefits: While some fans miss the chaos of the third man up, the reduction in head injuries is a significant positive outcome that should be acknowledged.

---

The AFL third man up rule represents a case study in how sports governing bodies can balance tradition, entertainment, and player safety. The rule change, implemented ahead of the 2017 season, addressed a genuine safety concern while also reshaping tactical approaches to the game.

The impact of the rule has been multifaceted. On one hand, it has made the ruck contest safer and more structured. On the other hand, it has increased the importance of specialist ruckmen and changed the way teams approach stoppages. For coaches, players, and fans alike, understanding the third man up rule is essential to understanding modern Australian rules football.

As the game continues to evolve, the lessons from this rule change remain relevant. The principles remain the same: safety must be prioritised, consultation is crucial, and the impact of any change must be carefully monitored.

The third man up rule is now an established part of the Australian rules football landscape. For those looking to understand the game's rules and positions in greater depth, our rules and positions hub provides comprehensive coverage of this and other key aspects of the sport.

---

This case study uses hypothetical examples and qualitative analysis unless otherwise stated. For specific statistical data, please consult official AFL records and injury surveillance reports.