Starting positions, bigger goalsquare a step closer

[Slats]

CENTRE bounce starting positions and longer goalsquares are one step close to being introduced after the AFL Competition Committee finalised the recommendations it will put before the Commission this month in a bid to reduce congestion.

AFL football operations manager Steve Hocking confirmed on Thursday the Competition Committee had signed off on recommendations that would see six-six-six starting positions enforced at every centre bounce and the length of goalsquares stretched from nine to 18m.

Hocking said the committee would also recommend the introduction of a mid-season player exchange period next year, but preferred not to divulge whether it had settled on a draft, trade period or both.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-09-13/afl-recommends-new-rules-to-reduce-congestion

They're also revising interpretations of the following

• Holding the ball
• Protected area
• Contact below the knees
• Marking contests
• Ruck contests
• Deliberate out of bounds
• Ruckmen grabbing the ball directly from ball-ups or throw-ins

 

[Slats]

Leave the game alone!

 

[living_in_syd]

Goal square thing looks ridiculous

 

[TheExtractorFactor]

 

[blckcaviar]

Let's hope the Commission says thanks but no thanks

 

[Quivorir]

Imagine all the ads they can fit in the 18m goal square.

 

[Colonial]

FFS

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Jaeger]

Kick outs from 18m out is going to really open things up after a point, which is obviously the idea, but it will lead to more rushed behinds.

 

[Tbonefreo]

Wowee.

A tunnell in the forward 50?

I dont like that one

 

[Beer n Skittles]

Longer goal square is great, right now I think it looks a bit goofy but I'll get used to it.

Starting positions are meh. They're trying hard to make tactics redundant I guess. Stops teams putting players behind the ball, also stops interesting stuff like Port lining players up off the back of the square to try and force a last minute score against Hawthorn that time.

Hopefully the changes to holding the ball, protected area, contact below knees, etc. remove some of the grey areas in interpretation.

 

[Teagueeee15]

Hopefully the commission doesn’t accept the competition committee’s recommendations. The “look” of the game was as a result of uncompetitive teams getting too much air time, rather than any problem with the game. Amazing how we’ve had a good finals series with strong crowds and ratings once we have better teams involved.

 

[Gralin]

Once again the AFL refuse to admit they may have got some of their tweaks, changes and interpretations wrong in the past and forge ahead with more changes to try and counter their own changes

 

[Ron The Bear]

Practically nobody is calling for these gimmicks.

They're also revising interpretations of the following

• Holding the ball
• Protected area
• Contact below the knees
• Marking contests
• Ruck contests
• Deliberate out of bounds
• Ruckmen grabbing the ball directly from ball-ups or throw-ins

... most of which need work.

However the stated objective of decreasing the size of the rule book by at least half in the next year is absolutely fraught.

 

[00Stinger]

So will local leagues now have 18m goal squares as well?

 

[Masqualero]

Piss off Hocking you pig, Gil can f off as well the money hungry grub.

More goals means more ads means more money.

They try to propose it as "fixing the game" only thing they want to fix is their wallets.

At least AFL X didn't mess with the real stuff...

 

[Tbonefreo]

Big reward for the other team missing a goal. Behinds will be strikes like frees against

 

[Damon_3388]

Great way to dumb down and devolve the game.

 

[Maddo11]

 

[PP34]

Anyone get the urge to KO Steve Hocking whenever they see his stupid face?

 

[legend166]

Hopefully the commission doesn’t accept the competition committee’s recommendations. The “look” of the game was as a result of uncompetitive teams getting too much air time, rather than any problem with the game. Amazing how we’ve had a good finals series with strong crowds and ratings once we have better teams involved.

I agree drastic changes aren't needed, but if this is your idea of a good finals series so far, then ehhhhhhhhhh.

Anyway, copying + pasting my thoughts from the Swans board:

The 6-6-6 thing is stupid. Starting positions is not what creates congestion so restricting them seems incredibly pointless. All you're doing is taking away tactical flexibility from a coach for not a lot of benefits. On the plus side it might end up with less Sam Reid down back.

I actually think the 18m goal square is a good idea. The evolution of zone defence means the kick-in has become too easy to defend. I would have preferred a much longer trial though. This will get a huge backlash just because it looks different even though it's not a big change.

Runners only allowed after goals is common sense.

Will have to see how the 'Tighter rule interpretations including incorrect disposal' plays out.

Was hoping for big cuts in interchange but oh well.

 

[blaisee]

I really have no idea how we actually got to this point.

How did we get here?

The 18 m goal square will be a joke, the 6 6 6 thing will have no effect.

All they needed to do was limit interchange , but they do not have the balls.

 

[Square Peg]

All they needed to do was limit interchange , but they do not have the balls.

That or simply get the umpires to start umpiring the rules we already have rather than creating new rule books. There's nothing wrong with the rules, it's how the umpires decide which ones they are going to enforce and which ones they aren't which is the problem

 

[living_in_syd]

Steve hocking being the new guy just trying to prove himself - lots of self interest here

 

[Boxhead_31]

Kick outs from 18m out is going to really open things up after a point, which is obviously the idea, but it will lead to more rushed behinds.

Does a player who gathers the ball from the bag of balls behind the goals then covers more than 15m before kicking the ball get a free kick paid against them or do they need to have a bounce before kicking?

Where does the ball up occur if a player happens to put their foot over a line whilst kicking in?

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Practically nobody is calling for these gimmicks.

They're also revising interpretations of the following

• Holding the ball
• Protected area
• Contact below the knees
• Marking contests
• Ruck contests
• Deliberate out of bounds
• Ruckmen grabbing the ball directly from ball-ups or throw-ins

... most of which need work.

However the stated objective of decreasing the size of the rule book by at least half in the next year is absolutely fraught.

All of those need work.

One hasn’t thought of but would like to see changed is Rick taking ball directly from throw ins, ball ups, without being holding ball if they dispose of it. With some teams just not competing in the ruck at all as a tactic this would sort that out. Would allow rucks to grab it and kick it forward and punish teams trying to use that tactic