I thought we were doing that now.
Analysis THE STAND. How is it working out?
- Thread starter arrowman
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I thought we were doing that now.
- Aug 31, 2018
- 803
- 2,742
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
As a Crows fan I love this new rule, as it should drastically reduce the chances of Tex and Lynch getting those dinky 45 degree kicks smothered by the man on the mark, each one of which would hurtle me closer to an early grave.
People who say ‘all rule changes are bad’ should watch a game from the early 90s. It’s almost a different game.
Now, what are you more attached to:- 1. the idea that footy should have some essential essence, some recognizable character, or
2. the very abstract idea that natural evolution of the game is the overriding goal.
if 2, fine, I think you’re crazy but at least you’re consistent.
but if you think 1, that the game should have some essential essence, then the debate is not over whether there should rule changes, but WHICH rule changes are good and which are bad for preserving or restoring the true essence of the game.
Now, what are you more attached to:- 1. the idea that footy should have some essential essence, some recognizable character, or
2. the very abstract idea that natural evolution of the game is the overriding goal.
if 2, fine, I think you’re crazy but at least you’re consistent.
but if you think 1, that the game should have some essential essence, then the debate is not over whether there should rule changes, but WHICH rule changes are good and which are bad for preserving or restoring the true essence of the game.
Deaneus!
We Await Silent Tristero's Empire
Bang and Blame?
- Jul 19, 2010
- 25,609
- 63,344
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
It’s a rule that makes the game harder to umpire (like 99% of new rules) which means more mistakes and worse umpiring.
Why would any of you trust that the AFL knows what the * they’re doing? Where is this amazing track record of successful rule changes that leads you to believe this?
Why would any of you trust that the AFL knows what the * they’re doing? Where is this amazing track record of successful rule changes that leads you to believe this?
- Jul 19, 2010
- 25,609
- 63,344
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Yeah people hated watching Friday night footy with Carey and Modra in full flight. What a horrible era that was
- Jul 19, 2010
- 25,609
- 63,344
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Fair call, but a lot of these rule changes are corrections of the symptoms of previous rule changes. I just don’t trust these bastards anymore.
SugarShane
C12 H22 O11
Yep that was insane. Effectively told Tex to stand aside so that old mate could just run directly towards goal with no one in the way. Then no more than 5 minutes later we took an OOF free on the other side of the ground and the Cat was told to stand right next to the line.
SugarShane
C12 H22 O11
Don't mind it, but didn't really think it was necessary either. Was funny to watch in nearly every game I watched on the weekend the thought of being able to take the advantage of being able to get close then wheel around and let loose psyched out more kickers than it benefitted, including our Tex. I nearly lost my s**t when he tried that and the commentators picked up on it too. This dude can kick 60m and he's trying to do the smart-arse arc to get 1-2 extra metres. Luckily he learned from that one then reverted to just running straight at the goals and kicking.
I think it's the best rule change in a decade or more. We'll see how the coaches adjust for it over the season but so far it's opened the game up to the extent it actually resembles the game that was played in the 90s. Like any new rule, the umpires need to find the sweet spot between enforcing the rule and being pedantic.
Now don't get me started on the new sub rule, which is an abomination.
Now don't get me started on the new sub rule, which is an abomination.
The issue there is that as soon as the umpires aren't black and white, we get severe inconsistencies. It's better that it's pedantic. Once ump says stand, you don't move until he says play on. There's no benefit to moving an inch or a metre, so just don't.
I love the "don't change the game" people! The rules of the game have never been stationary, so I'm not sure which moment everyone thinks is where it should have "stopped"?
It's simple to deal with the arc of the run up. If you move off the line, it's play on.
It's simple to deal with the arc of the run up. If you move off the line, it's play on.
Agree. It should be 25m for all man-on-the-mark / exclusion zone infringements. Then hand em out like lollies to anyone stepping over the line.
- Jul 19, 2010
- 25,609
- 63,344
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
If you only started watching the game around 2000, then sure, that would be an accurate statement.
So between the late 70s (when I started watching AFL) and 2000 you think the rules didn't change? Interesting angle.
<EDIT> Here's some light reading for you....
Restricted Content - The Mongrel Punt
Content from our archives commencing with the 2018 season is restricted to members only. Gotta look after the people that look after us. Want a peek?
themongrelpunt.com
- Jul 19, 2010
- 25,609
- 63,344
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
No, there were certainly changes, but I’d argue strongly they had minimal impact on the actual spirit of the game. Some of the changes starting around the turn of the century really did start to affect the spirit of the game, starting with that “Primus” ruck rule
Scorpus
Moderator
- Apr 16, 2014
- 58,310
- 151,368
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Moderator
- #46
So between the late 70s (when I started watching AFL) and 2000 you think the rules didn't change? Interesting angle.
<EDIT> Here's some light reading for you....
Restricted Content - The Mongrel Punt
Content from our archives commencing with the 2018 season is restricted to members only. Gotta look after the people that look after us. Want a peek?
So in the 20 year period between 1970 and 1990 these were the only major rule changes:
- Introduction of center square
- Interchange
- Can run 15m instead of 10m without bouncing
- 15m penalty replaced with 50m penalty
- Improvements to reporting system, tribunal and minor umpiring changes
The changes made in 20 years back then are the sort of things the current AFL administration are implementing every year
Then from 1990 to 2000:
- Playing time changed from 25 minutes to 20 minutes
- Expanded interchange bench (twice)
- More umpires
- Tripping becomes against the rules
- Change to protected area
- Introduction of prior opportunity
I'd say those changes in 30 years of football overall are similar to the changes made since 2017 to today
or you can request to start off line and arc to the actual line of the mark. But you can’t play on from where you’re set, you must get to the correct line before you’re back in play.
- Jul 19, 2010
- 25,609
- 63,344
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
The issue is that there’s a delay between the player moving off the mark and the reaction time of the umpire calling play on. This has been exposed already where players just waltz around the guy on the mark and he’s left stranded like a statue. There will always be a delay as long as the umpire is a human being. These split seconds matter, a lot.
So you’ve given the umpire two extra burdens. One, he has to be extra quick with calling play on, and two, he has to be watching the guy on the mark for lateral movement.
It stinks.
So you’ve given the umpire two extra burdens. One, he has to be extra quick with calling play on, and two, he has to be watching the guy on the mark for lateral movement.
It stinks.
Standing the mark benefitted defenders because it stopped the kicker cribbing extra metres. Now there's no benefit. It just takes a man out of the play for a crucial few seconds. So why don't teams just NOT stand the mark? Position the defending player elsewhere.
I didn’t see Port’s game on the weekend but in the Trials they almost never stood the mark and instead retreated 5m so they could move laterally. I remember being confused why the crows stood there holding the ball and didn’t play on.
