a wonderous wacky wookie thread

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

The way I see it there's only two ways to cure the game of too many stoppages.

1) Reduce team size (12-14 players), have 4-6 interchange players, no sub, unlimited rotations. Keep the game moving fast.

2) Keep current team size (18 players), have 3 interchange players only, no sub, limit rotations below 100. - introduce a fatigue factor.

I think the game has reached a point where it needs to evolve. I'm not talking about tactics coaches use or tinkering with rules, but the whole game structure. Too many players on the field IMHO. If a Kerry Packer type started an AFL super league I'd only have 12 players (4 forwards, 4 midfielder's -including the ruck, and 4 defenders.) I'd play it on a narrower field like the dimensions of Simonds Stadium oval, and make it so it encourages running, tackling, long kicking, contested possession, and marking. The aspects I like about the game.

 

[master bate]

I'm a fan of dropping down to 16 players a side.

Current stoppages on a wing will see 2 sets of:
On ballers - 4
Near side wingman - 1
Half forwards - 3
Half backs - 2

Up to 20 players at each stoppage with 3 forwards, 4 defenders and a wingman the only players not there making up the 16 on the field. Taking 4 players off the ground should at least drop that number down. The less numbers, the easier it is to clear the ball. Same thing goes for zoned defending that stops ball movement around the ground.

The other massive benefit would be that the fringe players at top clubs would likely miss out on games and go to lesser clubs for games. Distributing 32 fringe players from the top 8 sides in to the bottom 8 sides would close the talent gap and encourage free flowing footy.

 

[Thats Wright]

The way I see it there's only two ways to cure the game of too many stoppages.

1) Reduce team size (12-14 players), have 4-6 interchange players, no sub, unlimited rotations. Keep the game moving fast.

2) Keep current team size (18 players), have 3 interchange players only, no sub, limit rotations below 100. - introduce a fatigue factor.

The more you limit player movement around the interchange bench the more you encourage corridor football.

Players are always in numbers around the bench that naturally draws more boundary play.

10 interchanges per match would improve the game. 40 - 60 combined with last kick would also.

 

[Tas]

AFL/Umpires are rewarding the team second to the ball by not protecting the player who bends down to get the ball, that is going to encourage more congestion as you want to pile onto the bloke who makes an attempt to pick the ball up.

 

[Thats Wright]

I'm a fan of dropping down to 16 players a side.

Current stoppages on a wing will see 2 sets of:
On ballers - 4
Near side wingman - 1
Half forwards - 3
Half backs - 2

Up to 20 players at each stoppage with 3 forwards, 4 defenders and a wingman the only players not there making up the 16 on the field. Taking 4 players off the ground should at least drop that number down. The less numbers, the easier it is to clear the ball. Same thing goes for zoned defending that stops ball movement around the ground.

The other massive benefit would be that the fringe players at top clubs would likely miss out on games and go to lesser clubs for games. Distributing 32 fringe players from the top 8 sides in to the bottom 8 sides would close the talent gap and encourage free flowing footy.

I agree with that but think that's 10-20 years away.

Dramatic structural change should take more than coward coaching to occur.

These issues are more swatting the flies and should be easier now Malthouse is gone.

 

[GuruJosh]

Give free kicks at stoppages. We need the ball into the forward line fast before the cavalry comes to block the space.

 

[GuruJosh]

AFL/Umpires are rewarding the team second to the ball by not protecting the player who bends down to get the ball, that is going to encourage more congestion as you want to pile onto the bloke who makes an attempt to pick the ball up.

Give him the free kick "first hands" or 'won ball" and let's get on with it.

 

[Pessimistic]

Obviously reducing on fiield numbers would need to be tested seriously first. Its a massive change. But if it filtered down to lower levels, wouldnt amateru teams etc find it easier to field a team. You hear from time to time theres issues

 

[thegreig]

Obviously reducing on fiield numbers would need to be tested seriously first. Its a massive change. But if it filtered down to lower levels, wouldnt amateru teams etc find it easier to field a team. You hear from time to time theres issues

I believe it would. They should test it in the nab cup next year and continue it for a season at state level before introducing it to the AFL to see if it works

 

[the PILL]

Re watched that round table discussion and ohhhhh what a fail...

Friggen ego Central... Mick desperate to be relevant, Healy simply in love with his own voice (contradiction central), King is very analytical but has no clue except craving attention on his boundry zones and Anderson so far out of his depth with a clear agenda on his interchange lab rat project...

For God sake listen to Alistair Clarkson and in the same flavour Bomber Thompson who broke open the trends instilled by Roos and his protege coaches...

 

[cos789]

Another website wacked by wookie features.
















Another website wacked by wookie features.














Another website wacked by wookie features.
















Another website wacked by wookie features.
















Another website wacked by wookie features.

 

[cos789]

Another website wacked by wookie features.
















Another website wacked by wookie features.














Another website wacked by wookie features.
















Another website wacked by wookie features.
















Another website wacked by wookie features.

 

[Pessimistic]

So you are saying there will be less congestion only at the endo of quarters and the last quarter ?

Reducing player numbers would reduce it for the whole game

 

[pinot]

Divide the ground in three equal portions maximum players allowed in each zone is six players.

Kick backwards its "play on"

Kick it out of bounds by foot is a free kick even honest mis kicks...missed marks, tackles..generally when ball is in dispute and goes over the line its a throw in.

Improve the talent dilution.

 

[Pessimistic]

Divide the ground in three equal portions maximum players allowed in each zone is six players.

Kick backwards its "play on"

Kick it out of bounds by foot is a free kick even honest mis kicks...missed marks, tackles..generally when ball is in dispute and goes over the line its a throw in.

Improve the talent dilution.

Your first sentence, on first reading, sounds more restrictive than netball

 

[pinot]

Your first sentence, on first reading, sounds more restrictive than netball

Need more one on one contests rather than under 7 style football where 18 players run around chasing the ball with half decent skills.

 

[ThatsjustDappa]

Damn, i thought the OPs title of 'back to the future' meant building a time machine to allow the Geelong 07 team to come back and tear up the middle of the ground and lay stoppages to waste whilst pounding the sticks.............

.........gee I miss those times

 

[Pessimistic]

Need more one on one contests rather than under 7 style football where 18 players run around chasing the ball with half decent skills.

I think I am misreading you, but it theres a maximum of six out of 18 players in each of three seperate zones, there can never be seven, so no player can leave their zone

You cant mean six from both teams in each zone because thats a total of 18 not 36

 

[Pessimistic]

Damn, i thought the OPs title of 'back to the future' meant building a time machine to allow the Geelong 07 team to come back and tear up the middle of the ground and lay stoppages to waste whilst pounding the sticks.............

.........gee I miss those times

This hawks team would deal with them comfortably

 

[pinot]

I think I am misreading you, but it theres a maximum of six out of 18 players in each of three seperate zones, there can never be seven, so no player can leave their zone

You cant mean six from both teams in each zone because thats a total of 18 not 36

Yes you are correct...12 in each zone or 6 each team.
Mids don't get involved with defence nor attack they just fight it out in the midfield and that's it.

 

[ThatsjustDappa]

This hawks team would deal with them comfortably

Yeah....naaahhh......

 

[Thats Wright]

Re watched that round table discussion and ohhhhh what a fail...

Friggen ego Central... Mick desperate to be relevant, Healy simply in love with his own voice (contradiction central), King is very analytical but has no clue except craving attention on his boundry zones and Anderson so far out of his depth with a clear agenda on his interchange lab rat project...

For God sake listen to Alistair Clarkson and in the same flavour Bomber Thompson who broke open the trends instilled by Roos and his protege coaches...

It was awkward watching. Malthouse can't debate. Too senile now and just gets angry if they don't accept his rants.

Was a waste of time having him there.

Didn't he say something like 'change as many rules as you can' ? He's lost it. They all just tried to avoid saying he caused a lot of the problems.

King ridiculed him and shut him up for not making sense a few times.

Healy just sat on the fence not wanting to rub Mick up the wrong way.

 

[Pessimistic]

Yes you are correct...12 in each zone or 6 each team.
Mids don't get involved with defence nor attack they just fight it out in the midfield and that's it.

So no long goals from centre bounce ?

 

[Pessimistic]

Yeah....naaahhh......

Seven players involved in the 2008 flag, now in their prime ? Plus some concerning youf ?

 

[pinot]

So no long goals from centre bounce ?

Of course they can but not from inside 50 - even give 9 points if inside the square?? Or free kick they go inside 50? Just some ideas....need to make the game more pleasing to the eye more one on one or even three on three contests is a good start I reckon.