No Oppo Supporters General AFL and other clubs discussion thread. **Opposition fans not welcome**

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Ok, so we go back to the Sub way, and get rid of interchange. what happens in these instances??

1) Hodge goes into a contest, comes out with a cut head. Blood streaming. No concussion, no serious injury, just a bit of claret. Being he's not going to be subbed for that, does the game get held up whilst he gets some vaseline wedged into it and 3 metres of tape get wrapped around his head?? Considering the rules of no flowing blood, the trainer just can't come out and patch him up.

2) Play gets a tight hammy, and rather than go to the bench for a quick rub, like happens now. In this case, would it be just stiff and you play with a hammy that is likely to twang?? Do you sub early??

3) concussion. Guys gets a hit to the head, may or may not be concussed. currently they can bring him off, check him and bring him back on if fine. In the Subs case, do you lose the player completely??

Just think we are making changes to the game for the sake of making it. It's still completely different to Rugby or Soccer. Yes, tactics cross, but that will happen the more coaches look at other sports and hope to get an edge. The game is still very very different to the other codes.

 

[nickrebellious]

Brisbane have not won a quarter of football yet.

 

[Prudster]

Just think we are making changes to the game for the sake of making it. It's still completely different to Rugby or Soccer. Yes, tactics cross, but that will happen the more coaches look at other sports and hope to get an edge. The game is still very very different to the other codes.

I think the irony of all this, is the presented solutions may make the game more like soccer. Only a few subs that you can use throughout the game, teams simply playing kick to kick in defence, and almost always having defenders outnumber forwards could be regular things if these changes go ahead.

Seriously though, i hate the way people like KB, and historically the rules committee, predict what effect the rule changes have, but never consider what the effect will be if they're wrong. All these issues have been spurred on by the change of rules, and it is easy to say "i think reducing the interchange will reduce congestion", which it probably will, but what happens when it leads to teams having 2 or 3 spares in defence, or chipping the ball around to conserve energy? I'm not saying it will happen, but it certainly seems like a more likely alternative to clubs deciding to go back to 90's football and just bomb the ball to 1 on 1's and risk turning it over.

I wish they would just sit back for a few years and actually see what effect rule changes will have before they just change a few more rules to fix issues that were caused by previous rule changes.

 

[Argy]

I think the irony of all this, is the presented solutions may make the game more like soccer. Only a few subs that you can use throughout the game, teams simply playing kick to kick in defence, and almost always having defenders outnumber forwards could be regular things if these changes go ahead.

Seriously though, i hate the way people like KB, and historically the rules committee, predict what effect the rule changes have, but never consider what the effect will be if they're wrong. All these issues have been spurred on by the change of rules, and it is easy to say "i think reducing the interchange will reduce congestion", which it probably will, but what happens when it leads to teams having 2 or 3 spares in defence, or chipping the ball around to conserve energy? I'm not saying it will happen, but it certainly seems like a more likely alternative to clubs deciding to go back to 90's football and just bomb the ball to 1 on 1's and risk turning it over.

I wish they would just sit back for a few years and actually see what effect rule changes will have before they just change a few more rules to fix issues that were caused by previous rule changes.

Excellent point. I never thought of that.

Coaches will come up with ways the rules committee could never dream of when they change things. Let's just face the fact that it is an evolving game. Back in 05/06 when the Swans were putting on dour displays every week and strangling the life out of the game everyone thought we were heading down a dark path to boredom. Then up crops Geelong and totally turns things on their head.

The rolling scrum is hard to watch week in and week out, but even now I think it is evolving out of the game - courtesy of Hawthorn. Our matches have much more open, fast and exciting than most others in the first four rounds. Clarko hinted at this at the start of the season when he said the game would become more attacking and he has been right - at least as far as the Hawks are concerned.

 

[Brishawk]

I am happy enough with a moderate cap on interchange if, as you say, we give the game time to adjust to see what the outcome is rather than change them every year. If they do have capped interchange then I see no reason for the substitute rule. I felt at the time it was brought in it was just a low cost way of capping interchange. Now that we are capping interchange anyway I say get rid of it. It is an impost on tactics and can leave teams short handed for no reason if you sub out a player and then someone else gets injured.

 

[Bosk]

An 8 goal win would be nice, X.

I'll take 4 points and no injuries, anything more than a 1 point margin is a bonus.



Actually.... a 1 point margin would be superb.

 

[bris tarangau]

KB and his rules committee were clueless. They did not carry out proper causal analysis of the rule changes they brought in and that resulted in other problems/implications. Just leave the game alone!
The glaring issue for me is the interpretation and/or policing of the rules, especially by umpires. An example was the slide by a Suns player on Brad Hill on Saturday night that would have caused serious injury, and the free kick was not paid.

 

[SodaPop]

I'll take 4 points and no injuries, anything more than a 1 point margin is a bonus.



Actually.... a 1 point margin would be superb.

Yeah and after the siren.

By Simpkin

Banana kick from the boundary

 

[Cynic]

Yeah and after the siren.

By Simpkin

Banana kick from the boundary

After Joel Selwood ducks his head and gets caught holding the ball

 

[Rushed_Behind]

leave the F****** game alone.

 

[kimbopen]

I loved the way he said skills would impove if you reduced interchange. When Dunstall noted that Fatigue may be an issue, KB countered with that the game would open up and thus increase scoring, or something to that effect.

Made no sense at all.

Since when does ANYTHING KB says make sense?!?!?

 

[B&GBlood]

Perhaps the cap on interchanges could be expanded if you lose a player or two to allow more resting of players, just a thought to help take away the big dissadvantage through injury.

 

[Pessimistic]

The worst change was the rushed behind rule and allowing a quick kick out after a point.

When they trialled it in the NAB cup they had the foresight to see teams would rush on purpose for the quick kick out so put in a three point penalty to stop that.

Then they decided to put it in the season proper but for aesthetic purposes didnt add the three point penalty, which youd think would have been essential for the balance to work

Der !!! The result was joel bowden and hawthorn discovering a new tactic at the end of the season

 

[JustKickIt]

The problem is the people tinkering with the rules are nowhere near as smart as those that game up with the original Rules of the Game.

 

[Garf]

My wife (who is no great fan of football) said he looks like he's on crack.

Funny, I thought that after round 1 !

 

[Garf]

OTC also confirmed what we all knew, Kevin Bartlett has lost the plot.
Firstly he suggested the game should not have interchanges. Yep, good one Kev. It worked in the 70's and the game hasn't changed one bit, has it?

Secondly he reckons Geelong would've won the Prelim last year but Varcoe missed and Bartel ran into an open goal and tripped over a streamer or the orange carrier was late to the 3 quarter time huddle or something.

Thirdly he says that Hawthorn would be much, much scarier with Buddy in the side.

No they wouldn't, KB. No they wouldn't.

Here's my two-line ode to KB (and others):

As it says HAWTHORN on our shiny Cup
All you media hacks can STFU !

 

[Mitchell Madness]

The worst change was the rushed behind rule and allowing a quick kick out after a point.

When they trialled it in the NAB cup they had the foresight to see teams would rush on purpose for the quick kick out so put in a three point penalty to stop that.

Then they decided to put it in the season proper but for aesthetic purposes didnt add the three point penalty, which youd think would have been essential for the balance to work

Der !!! The result was joel bowden and hawthorn discovering a new tactic at the end of the season

Pretty much
Although, it was only Brent guerra that rushed the behinds, not the entire club

The problem with the afl, the powers in charge make a change to speed the game up, without foresight of what would occur
Rather than gong back to what worked, they introduce a rule to counter e rule, which subsequently, requires another rule to counter that rule

After one yr of the quick kick in, he escalation in interchange (it increased by 30 in just one season) should have been enough

 

[Thaihawk]

I'll take 4 points and no injuries, anything more than a 1 point margin is a bonus.



Actually.... a 1 point margin would be superb.

Not for my bloody raspberry, Bosk. Spare a thought for the old Hawk supporters. I want to see a few more flags before I leave.

 

[Fulgent]

I'm completely over all the Carlton stuff. I did enjoy seeing them lose their first 4 games but it's not like they're even good enough to hate anymore. They're a crap club with a crap side so what's the surprise? Even Malthouse was talking them down prior to their first game by going on about how many had interrupted pre-seasons. As others have noted, Ratten looks better by the week.

I accept Malthouse is a good coach but his media manipulation and deflection is masterful. A bit like Sheedy. To paraphrase Malthouse, I'm happy to take the heat etc but I can't take marks, go for marks one-handed blah, blah blah. So, I'm happy to take the heat for the players but it's their fault.

He's a real class act.

 

[Thaihawk]

I'm completely over all the Carlton stuff. I did enjoy seeing them lose their first 4 games but it's not like they're even good enough to hate anymore. They're a crap club with a crap side so what's the surprise? Even Malthouse was talking them down prior to their first game by going on about how many had interrupted pre-seasons. As others have noted, Ratten looks better by the week.

I accept Malthouse is a good coach but his media manipulation and deflection is masterful. A bit like Sheedy. To paraphrase Malthouse, I'm happy to take the heat etc but I can't take marks, go for marks one-handed blah, blah blah. So, I'm happy to take the heat for the players but it's their fault.

He's a real class act.

Edited for accuracy. In fact I look to MM interviews strictly for entertainment nowadays.

 

[Bosk]

Not for my bloody raspberry, Bosk. Spare a thought for the old Hawk supporters. I want to see a few more flags before I leave.

You don't think a one point win would be worth it for the look of disgust on Chris Scott's face and disbelief on Joel Selwood's?

 

[cryptor]

You don't think a one point win would be worth it for the look of disgust on Chris Scott's face and disbelief on Joel Selwood's?

Would be tasty. Giving them a thrashing with this current line up (missing quite a few faces) would be a lot more damaging to their belief though. Whilst it would be enjoyable to get any win against them it would be best to not have their players walking away from the game knowing it was just a kick in it or it was just a matter of who was in front at the right time. That was possibly the difference in our own players minds that allowed us to eventually crack them in the PF. Have them walk away wondering how they're going to make up a 6-10 goal difference next time. Seemed to work against the Swans last year.

 

[seysearles]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/brett-deledio-set-to-miss-23-weeks-20140415-zqv58.html

Richmond midfield gun Brett Deledio is expected to miss the next two to three weeks, meaning he should return against Geelong in round seven, or wait until after the Tigers have had the bye in round eight.

Deledio, whose absence due to an achilles injury has left a huge hole in the Richmond side, has not been able to train – besides some striding – as a result of a sore achilles.

Richmond football operations manager Dan Richardson said on Tuesday that Deledio was ‘‘two or three weeks away’’ from resuming.

Richardson said Deledio’s return was anticipated ‘‘possibly the week before the bye’’. Thus, Deledio will miss this Thursday’s game against the Lions at the Gabba and almost certainly the following the week’s game against the Hawks.

 

[Thaihawk]

You don't think a one point win would be worth it for the look of disgust on Chris Scott's face and disbelief on Joel Selwood's?

Not from the ER at the local hospital!
Jokes aside, I'd rather have him scratching his head, and saying what some other coaches have said. "I didn't see that coming."

 

[MrPremiership]

Why are attendances so low this season?

Surely its ticket pricing, rather than ASADA or the quality of the game.

thoughts?