A DISCLAIMER first. The following is not to suggest a bad centre bounce cost Collingwood victory on Saturday night. Nor that the Magpies didn't also benefit from another bounce or two that went badly astray.

But that "Barry Crocker" of a bounce in the final hectic quarter of the Magpies' loss to North Melbourne — which landed straight in Adam Simpson's lap and led to Ed Lower's goal for the Kangaroos — highlighted, not for the first time, a couple of important points.

One, that the rule (11.3.5c for the pedantic) that directs an umpire to call play-on from even the most skew-whiff bounce isn't flexible enough, and also inconsistent. And two, that the let's "preserve a great football tradition" argument when it comes to the restarting of play is wearing very thin.

Why should a boundary umpire have the capacity to recall a throw-in that doesn't measure up, but a field umpire not the ability to call back the sort of bounce that left Damien Sully so red-faced on Saturday evening? Not logical, rulemakers.

Secondly, and importantly, can anyone explain just why the bounce-down is so important, other than to the egos of the field umpires? If it's such a great tradition, how come we never talk about it until an incident like Saturday night's occurs? When was the last time you watched a game and along with "great mark", and "unbelievable goal", yelled out "fantastic bounce"?

We've recently witnessed the introduction of new rules and interpretations that have had a far greater impact on the game's traditions than would an alteration to the bounce requirements. Hands-in-the-back, for example, which has changed the nature of marking contests. That's significant. An umpire slamming the ball into turf isn't.

Sure, there might be problems with a recall clause in the rules.

Firstly, at what point is a bounce deemed bad enough to have another go at it? Secondly, a horde of players charge into the area the moment the ball hits the turf. Blowing the whistle, clearing them out again so that only four from each side are in the centre square chews up more time.

Too much trouble? Maybe, maybe not. So if it is, bite the bullet, boys, and throw the bloody thing up. The AFL might care whether umpire Jim Bloggs is a better bouncer than umpire Joe Blow. But we don't. We just want to know that where humanly possible, both sides in a game are going to have the same opportunity when the ball is in a neutral state.

Getting rid of the bounce will give the umpires a bit more time to brush up on the not-inconsequential skill of making the right decisions. Perhaps give them a bit less back trouble, too.

Sure, we might never be able to talk about that amazing centre bounce in the third quarter of the 2010 preliminary final. But that's a loss most of us will be able to bear.