Embracing Possession Footy

[Adelaide Cows]

We are obviously going to see a fair bit of this during the year, which can be frustrating for the purest, but how about if we as supporters embrace it.

At the risk of losing this argument already, soccer fans actually cheer each possession when they know they are toying with the opposition, I think just by yelling “Oiy” every pass. I’m not saying I actually like the tactic but Craig certainly seems to use it each game, so let’s infuriate the opposition fans by embracing it.

For the purists who hate it and can’t embrace it, you can just yell to the opposition players “FFS man up”.

[Ain't No Chicken, Turkey!]

Hear hear!!

If we play a style of gameplan that wins games, regardless of how it looks asthetically, we as supporters should embrace it, and cheer the boys for playing to the gameplan.

[RoosterLad]

Sometimes when North are flogging the opposition and we are passing the ball around we yell "ole" when the mark is taken, or handpass received.. and a bit of a "woop woooooop" when the ball is in the air, followed by "ole!" when the mark is taken. It is pretty awesome and it would be great at footy park too.

[CrowHop]

Great idea, that'd be fantastic.

For the purists, who is really at fault ? Those teams that pull out the uber flood or those that hang on to the ball because there is 18 people in our defensive 50.

I remember Collingwood last year had the worst flood I had ever seen. I know most teams do it at one time or another, but jeez ...

[Carl Spackler]

At the risk of losing this argument already, soccer fans actually cheer each possession when they know they are toying with the opposition, I think just by yelling “Oiy” every pass. I’m not saying I actually like the tactic but Craig certainly seems to use it each game, so let’s infuriate the opposition fans by embracing it.
Soccer is a sport where if you are beating a team that is going to be relegated the entire crowd sings "Going down, going down, going down." Mocking the opposition is as much a part of the game as cheering your own team.

To me the whole chip around thing reeks of mocking the opposition. We're winning, you're gonna lose and there's nothing you can do about it. Nyah, nyah, nyah-nyah-nyha. Like a group of bullies playing keep away with a nerd's ventolin. Yes it is within the rules, yes you can blame the opposition for not manning up but I don't like it one little bit. I'm happy for us to do it but we should have to change out of our Crows guernseys first. :thumbsd:

[NikkiNoo]

Sorry Carl, you can't appreciate the discipline and teamwork it takes to play that type of possession game? Watch our players off the ball work really hard to create the 'hole' for another teammate to run into so that we can mark the ball and keep possession. I find it quite enthralling really and admire the skill that actually requires. It is used not as an arrogant bully type of mentality but as a way of breaking the momentum / run of the opposition, we control the game, not them.

[Mad Dog]

Possession Footy:

One skill error away from an opposition goal.

[Capitalist]

Possession Footy:

One skill error away from an opposition goal.

AFL

potentially 4 qtrs away from losing ;)

[Carl Spackler]

Sorry Carl, you can't appreciate the discipline and teamwork it takes to play that type of possession game? Watch our players off the ball work really hard to create the 'hole' for another teammate to run into so that we can mark the ball and keep possession. I find it quite enthralling really and admire the skill that actually requires. It is used not as an arrogant bully type of mentality but as a way of breaking the momentum / run of the opposition, we control the game, not them.
First of all, I know that I'm wrong. It is a tactically sound approach, it can take away another team's momentum and it does require a certain degree of skill to play in this fashion. Yee-haa.

It is also BORING. Should the Aussie test team play for draws once they have won the first match in a series? Yes we might win the game by playing this way but at what cost? Football is the loser. But as I said, I know I'm wrong. Craig is in the business of winning matches and that's all that counts. Greg Chappell has been unfairly criticised for ordering the underarm delivery too. Just doing his job within the rules. Nothing wrong with that.

[NikkiNoo]

It's refreshing to find a male that will admit he is wrong Carl, so all the best on saturday night ;)

[relapse]

All that matters is winning, you dont win a premiership by just playing attractive football you have to be able to win games.

That ugly gameplan Wallet used last year against us, yes it wasnt pretty to watch, but they won which is the most important thing to them. I have no issues with stuff like that, you do what you can to win as long as it complies with the rules of the game.

[Super Goalie]

Possession Footy:

One skill error away from an opposition goal.

Spot on.

I don't mind it so long as the execution is spot on, otherwise you're leaving youself as open as Paris Hilton after a bottle of Passion Pop

[nighthawk]

I realise the Adelaide board is dangerous territory for a supporter from another club, but this issue isn't club-specific, so I don't think it matters which club I support for the moment.

I agree that there is more glory in saying "I won a premiership" than saying "I play beautiful footy", but... personally I would rather see my team lose gracefully than compromise their integrity and have a "whatever it takes" attitude and scrape out a win.

Obviously it's not a view shared by many, but just out of interest, I wonder how many people on here would prefer it if there was some rule implemented whereby cheap chipping was banned. I understand it's not really possible, and that generally new rules flop, but if it were possible, who would be for it and who would be against it?

[topjars]

I realise the Adelaide board is dangerous territory for a supporter from another club, but this issue isn't club-specific, so I don't think it matters which club I support for the moment.

I agree that there is more glory in saying "I won a premiership" than saying "I play beautiful footy", but... personally I would rather see my team lose gracefully than compromise their integrity and have a "whatever it takes" attitude and scrape out a win.

Winning gracefully went out the window with aluminium studs. I'd rather win within the rules ungracefully

Obviously it's not a view shared by many, but just out of interest, I wonder how many people on here would prefer it if there was some rule implemented whereby cheap chipping was banned. I understand it's not really possible, and that generally new rules flop, but if it were possible, who would be for it and who would be against it?

Id love a moritorium on rule changes for at least two years before convening a summit whereby officials and supporters alike are canvassed on what they want.

Id be aginst the cheap chipping rule change - two words " man up"

[Markthirtytwo]

I realise the Adelaide board is dangerous territory for a supporter from another club, but this issue isn't club-specific, so I don't think it matters which club I support for the moment.

I agree that there is more glory in saying "I won a premiership" than saying "I play beautiful footy", but... personally I would rather see my team lose gracefully than compromise their integrity and have a "whatever it takes" attitude and scrape out a win.

Obviously it's not a view shared by many, but just out of interest, I wonder how many people on here would prefer it if there was some rule implemented whereby cheap chipping was banned. I understand it's not really possible, and that generally new rules flop, but if it were possible, who would be for it and who would be against it?


A year or so later perhaps you might feel that way, but it'l still show a loss in the record books no matter how the game was played.

Passing backwards should be play on IMO. But then the opposition still has the chance to 'man up'.

[RoosterLad]

I'd rather have a scrappy win than a graceful loss anyday!! What a ****ing idiotic statement that is!

[Ported]

At the risk of being unpopular, i don't think that style of football will win grand finals.

On the other hand, as we've seen in the past 2 seasons, i don't think it's Craigs primary gameplan. With a list of players out it's definitely a smart game to play.

[nighthawk]

I'd rather have a scrappy win than a graceful loss anyday!! What a ****ing idiotic statement that is!

Like I said mate, I realise it's not a popular view.

Whenever I see a team win a game they don't deserve to win, it just makes me angry, regardless of which team it is. Every team seems to be adopting to this strategy, and footy has become so ugly as a result. Nowadays there's maybe one or two exciting games a weekend that are worth watching, whereas the other games are just a waste of time, as all you get to see is a few players kicking it back and forward all day.

If the actual footy games are boring to watch, then why bother caring about who wins? Most teams aren't playing AFL anymore, they're playing kick-for-kick. That's not what I give up 3 hours to tune in and watch.

What good is it if your team is winning in a sport that's gone to the dogs?

Anyway, there's no point arguing this with you as it's simply a matter of opinion and there's no right or wrong way of viewing it. The above is simply my view, and you're entitled to yours.

[Crow-mo]

I realise the Adelaide board is dangerous territory for a supporter from another club, but this issue isn't club-specific, so I don't think it matters which club I support for the moment.


fair.
what might matter though is how long you've been watching footy.


I agree that there is more glory in saying "I won a premiership" than saying "I play beautiful footy", but... personally I would rather see my team lose gracefully than compromise their integrity and have a "whatever it takes" attitude and scrape out a win.

not long then.

bit ironic, that someone whose prime focus of attention on BF has been dreamteam/supercoach, now cares about the style of play.

how many points do you amass for style? :p

Obviously it's not a view shared by many, but just out of interest, I wonder how many people on here would prefer it if there was some rule
implemented whereby cheap chipping was banned. I understand it's not really possible, and that generally new rules flop, but if it were possible, who would be for it and who would be against it?

you'd have to convince the wider footballing fraternity it's really a problem before you could even begin to think about legislating styles of play.

[Crow-mo]

At the risk of being unpopular, i don't think that style of football will win grand finals.

at the risk of being unpopular, what game have you been watching?

not least of all, the last 2 grandfinals.

that's not being unpopular, that's just ignorant of what is going on around you.


On the other hand, as we've seen in the past 2 seasons, i don't think it's Craigs primary gameplan. With a list of players out it's definitely a smart game to play.

perhaps you need to discuss Sydney's gameplan as well.

[Southerntakeover]

Is possession footy really a 'gameplan' ive always just thought its a tactic which can be switched to if needed during a game, not an entire game plan itself.

[Crow-mo]

Whenever I see a team win a game they don't deserve to win, it just makes me angry, regardless of which team it is.

excuse me??????

what are you on. don't deserve to win?




Every team seems to be adopting to this strategy, and footy has become so ugly as a result. Nowadays there's maybe one or two exciting games a weekend that are worth watching, whereas the other games are just a waste of time, as all you get to see is a few players kicking it back and forward all day.

you might care to ponder that flooding was developed originally by Rodney Eade as an attacking measure to clear space further up the ground.



If the actual footy games are boring to watch, then why bother caring about who wins? Most teams aren't playing AFL anymore, they're playing kick-for-kick. That's not what I give up 3 hours to tune in and watch.


I think there are 2 things you've not considered:
1. whether you characterisation of kick to kick is accurate. just presuming your take is correct, is a little tenuous
2. the actual stats that matter, attendance and TV rights seem to suggest interest in the game has NEVER been higher. which strongly suggests your characterisation per point 1 is just flat out wrong.


What good is it if your team is winning in a sport that's gone to the dogs?


what good is it, saying a sport has gone to the dogs when all evidence says otherwise? ;)


Anyway, there's no point arguing this with you as it's simply a matter of opinion and there's no right or wrong way of viewing it. The above is simply my view, and you're entitled to yours.

true, true.

but you have to remember just because everyone is entitled to a view, it doesn't make every view correct. if it's your view that footy has become a kick to kick, and the game has gone to the dogs, then you're pretty short of substance on that front.

[Crow-mo]

Is possession footy really a 'gameplan' ive always just thought its a tactic which can be switched to if needed during a game, not an entire game plan itself.

also true. amongt other things it's a shock tactic designed to induce a response from the opposition.

[nighthawk]

fair.
what might matter though is how long you've been watching footy.

not long then.

bit ironic, that someone whose prime focus of attention on BF has been dreamteam/supercoach, now cares about the style of play.

how many points do you amass for style? :p

you'd have to convince the wider footballing fraternity it's really a problem before you could even begin to think about legislating styles of play.

hahaha, yeah mate, it's true most of my posts on BF are about dreamteam. But that doesn't neccessarily reflect my view of footy. In fact, on the contrary, I've said many times that anyone who considers DT more important than footy is a moron.

the reason i post mainly on that thread is that i can discuss many AFL issues with my real friends, whereas if i'm trying to find hot tips for a competition such as dreamteam i have to go outside my close circle of mates and search the net.

and lol, i'm hardly the first person to suggest flooding is making the game ugly... in fact, there has actually been official talk of how new rules could remove this tactic

[nighthawk]

excuse me??????

what are you on. don't deserve to win?

you might care to ponder that flooding was developed originally by Rodney Eade as an attacking measure to clear space further up the ground.

I think there are 2 things you've not considered:
1. whether you characterisation of kick to kick is accurate. just presuming your take is correct, is a little tenuous
2. the actual stats that matter, attendance and TV rights seem to suggest interest in the game has NEVER been higher. which strongly suggests your characterisation per point 1 is just flat out wrong.

what good is it, saying a sport has gone to the dogs when all evidence says otherwise? ;)

true, true.

but you have to remember just because everyone is entitled to a view, it doesn't make every view correct. if it's your view that footy has become a kick to kick, and the game has gone to the dogs, then you're pretty short of substance on that front.

mmm, but the reason the tactic was originally used has little relevance to whether or not it's currently changing the game, especially if it's being used in a different way now.

haha, mate, i'm certainly not saying i don't like AFL, or that it's gone to the dogs. and if i have said that, it's a bit more extreme that what i meant. however, you cannot possibly claim I'm the only person who finds this style of footy less attractive. more time spent chipping (which at best is simply unexciting) means less time spent taking impressive marks, going on impressive runs or shooting impressive goals.

and whilst the statistics are certainly strong, there are many other factors to consider. myself living in sydney, the amount of change in promotion of the game has increased tenfold within the past few years. improved efforts by the promotion side of it, as well as an increasing population are easily the main factors for the growing success of the game.

basically, it is widely accepted that this style of play is more "ugly". That is reasonably undesputed. You can only really argue whether or not it is unethical, and I wouldn't say it is unethical. All i've said is that it's making the game less interesting to watch. my only other point is that the statistics don't really prove that the game is becoming more interesting, but that more people are becoming interested in the game. and there is a difference.

[Crow-mo]

hahaha, yeah mate, it's true most of my posts on BF are about dreamteam. But that doesn't neccessarily reflect my view of footy. In fact, on the contrary, I've said many times that anyone who considers DT more important than footy is a moron.

the reason i post mainly on that thread is that i can discuss many AFL issues with my real friends, whereas if i'm trying to find hot tips for a competition such as dreamteam i have to go outside my close circle of mates and search the net.


ok, fair.


and lol, i'm hardly the first person to suggest flooding is making the game ugly... in fact, there has actually been official talk of how new rules could remove this tactic

and you'll discover in time, that people will be 'talking' about something else tomorrow and the next day.

[nighthawk]

and you'll discover in time, that people will be 'talking' about something else tomorrow and the next day.

yeah, that's true, and i'm sure there'll always be some issue that people are complaining about or whatever.

but at the moment it's flooding, so i'm gonna complain till a new issue arises :p

[Crow-mo]

yeah, that's true, and i'm sure there'll always be some issue that people are complaining about or whatever.

but at the moment it's flooding, so i'm gonna complain till a new issue arises :p

lol. touche. :thumbsu:

[Carl Spackler]

you'd have to convince the wider footballing fraternity it's really a problem before you could even begin to think about legislating styles of play.
I think it has been pretty widely argued (but not necessarily accepted by all parties) that the current style of play - uncontested football, flooding, kicking backwards - is an issue. We have even had Kevin Sheedy suggesting a half way line with limits on how many players are allowed in each half. Every single journalist, ex-player, coach and supporter has their own theory.

Personally I would hate to see any more rules introduced. I would hope that the AFL has faith in the game, that it is strong enough and dynamic enough to evolve and these 'problems' are temporary and will be solved naturally. The huddle, Pagan's paddock, third man up, flooding, loose man in defence, tempo football - these will all come and go as the tactical side of the game is developed, tested and experimented with. If the AFL starts interfering further with the rules I fear that the cure would end up being worse than the disease.

Whilst the television ratings and attendences are going up we have to remember that there is more money spent on marketing and promotion than ever before too. Is the game getting healthier/more popular or are we just getting closer to 100% of the game's potential audience?

People like us have already fallen for the game. It has become a part of our lives and we couldn't imagine life without it. We will watch footy no matter what style of game is played. The effect of this 'boring' football may not be seen in the short term. The long term viability of football will depend on whether the game is able to attract new participants/consumers in the future in order to compete with other sports and endeavours.

[Crow-mo]

blah blah blah...

game is too rough, blah, blah, mums won't let kids play blah blah.

don't make the classic error of thinking today's fashion is anything other than that.

there are always doomsayers decrying this or the other about the game. and as in this particular case, with precisely ZERO evidence to support them.

it will be something else tomorrow.