Strategy STAND rule

[box070]

LEPPITSCH FORECASTS THE COACH WHO COULD LOOK TO CLAMP DOWN GAME
Gerard Whateley was full of praise for the AFL, admitting he thought the game was beyond repair.

“I think across three years, it’s nothing short of genius. I didn’t think the game could be restored the way it has been now,” Whateley said.

“I salute those who have returned the game, because this is not a one-year project.”

Whately not on Radio today with a severe case of lock jaw

 

[Grrr]

How is the team without the ball playing a man down? Outside the guy with the ball and the man on the mark there are still 17 other players on the ground from each side.

Did you not notice Edwards instinctive reaction to try and cut of the handball when the 50 went against him the other night. He's made a career out of smart reactions like that. Now he has to stand still, not even the one step he took in anticipation. Absolute nonsense. As his man faked him, got the 50 and ran past he patted him on the bum as if to say well done dickhead. Pathetic.

 

[This Is Anfield]

They are all ****ing morons. The biggest change from last season is that we've gone from 16min qtrs with 90 rotations to 20min qtrs with 75 rotations!
Plus, as Geelong and Hawthorn proved with their crabfest yesterday, it's the intent of the players and coaches that matters.

 

[_RT_]

Did you not notice Edwards instinctive reaction to try and cut of the handball when the 50 went against him the other night. He's made a career out of smart reactions like that. Now he has to stand still, not even the one step he took in anticipation. Absolute nonsense. As his man faked him, got the 50 and ran past he patted him on the bum as if to say well done dickhead. Pathetic.

That is our first 50 against for not following the stand rule IIRC. The only reason we're forced to stand is because we run up to the mark. If we start hanging back 5m we're free to move as much as we want. Wouldn't be surprised to see us make an adjustment towards something like that to remove the stand rule.

 

[RobsJourney]

That is our first 50 against for not following the stand rule IIRC. The only reason we're forced to stand is because we run up to the mark. If we start hanging back 5m we're free to move as much as we want. Wouldn't be surprised to see us make an adjustment towards something like that to remove the stand rule.

Next minute they will amend the rule so someone MUST the stand the mark within a certain amount of time or it'll be 50. Everything is 50 these days.

Leppitsch said on SEN that we normally average 1.1 goals against for transition from defensive 50, right now we average 4.4 which is four times worse.

He wonders if it's because of the stand rule, given the man on the mark can't corral to help the defence behind him, but he also reckons the defenders aren't switched on enough at the moment to stop the easy chip passes.

 

[Grrr]

That is our first 50 against for not following the stand rule IIRC. The only reason we're forced to stand is because we run up to the mark. If we start hanging back 5m we're free to move as much as we want. Wouldn't be surprised to see us make an adjustment towards something like that to remove the stand rule.

I watched Gryan Miers on his mark 60m out run 45º until he was a meter inside the 50m line before his stationary defender was able to exert any pressure on his at all. Because he is such a crap kick he missed, but is this the sort of football we want to see, are easy rule assisted goals the measure of a game of football. The umps had a hand in about half the goals as was. It was a crap game played between arcs.

The football this year is no better than previous years, just the usual early season free flowing form until players get their fitness up and can harass and chase like normal.

 

[_RT_]

Next minute they will amend the rule so someone MUST the stand the mark within a certain amount of time or it'll be 50. Everything is 50 these days.

Leppitsch said on SEN that we normally average 1.1 goals against for transition from defensive 50, right now we average 4.4 which is four times worse.

He wonders if it's because of the stand rule, given the man on the mark can't corral to help the defence behind him, but he also reckons the defenders aren't switched on enough at the moment to stop the easy chip passes.

IMO coaches are taking the first month of the season to see any trends that emerge and will then start to make their adjustments. As Hardwick said on Saturday we learn more from our losses than we do our wins, so I expect them to go to school and study what happened on Saturday and how we got pulled out of our structure.

I also expect our current plan of using Astbury/Balta in the ruck is hurting us, especially with Vlastuin out. To me it seems like we're waiting for CCJ to become available so we can play him as the second ruck and extra tall forward to stretch opposition defences.

I watched Gryan Miers on his mark 60m out run 45º until he was a meter inside the 50m line before his stationary defender was able to exert any pressure on his at all. Because he is such a crap kick he missed, but is this the sort of football we want to see, are easy rule assisted goals the measure of a game of football. The umps had a hand in about half the goals as was. It was a crap game played between arcs.

The football this year is no better than previous years, just the usual early season free flowing form until players get their fitness up and can harass and chase like normal.

That's not the rules allowing that, but the umpires on the day not calling play on quick enough once players move off his line. I've watched pretty much every game this season and there have been times where umpires have been calling play on as soon as a player even fakes to play on and then there are times when players are clearly 1-2m off their line and everyone knows it and the umpire doesn't call it.

Like the teams, I expect the umpires, will start to adjust their interpretation of the rules and umpire the game more in the way the rules are intended to be adjudicated rather than being too inconsistent.

 

[Grrr]

IMO coaches are taking the first month of the season to see any trends that emerge and will then start to make their adjustments. As Hardwick said on Saturday we learn more from our losses than we do our wins, so I expect them to go to school and study what happened on Saturday and how we got pulled out of our structure.

I also expect our current plan of using Astbury/Balta in the ruck is hurting us, especially with Vlastuin out. To me it seems like we're waiting for CCJ to become available so we can play him as the second ruck and extra tall forward to stretch opposition defences.

That's not the rules allowing that, but the umpires on the day not calling play on quick enough once players move off his line. I've watched pretty much every game this season and there have been times where umpires have been calling play on as soon as a player even fakes to play on and then there are times when players are clearly 1-2m off their line and everyone knows it and the umpire doesn't call it.

Like the teams, I expect the umpires, will start to adjust their interpretation of the rules and umpire the game more in the way the rules are intended to be adjudicated rather than being too inconsistent.

As I said in another post, okay rule if the umps can be consistent, but players work out ways to fudge the rules. More umpire interpretation on an already impossible game to umpire as is.

 

[Defibrillate]

Just waiting for the flood to come back. The game will look like soccer - let the defenders chip the ball around at will, but crossing the centre they will have to traverse 16 defenders who hope for turnover and quick slingshot to the other end.

Sydney had an extra man behind the ball for most of the game and a group of gut running kids to power forward if the opportunity arose. If it didn’t, they chipped around until they hit our our 1v1 defence - something we are not used to (given our history of zone defense).

I think we really lost it around the contest - despite us having an extra man around stoppages, they still killed us - and a ruckman prepared to stretch Nank across the whole ground. He was exposed badly.

All of this is correctable. But the only way to stop end to end scores has to be further towards defence as teams can clear our forward zone with ease given the new kick in rule. We can’t lock the ball inside the 50 like previous years so we need a major readjustment which could take time.

New rules because one guy didn’t like the way we played? Farcical when you think about it...........

 

[biaseddustyfan]

ump and gimmicky rule assisted goals are my favourite thing in footy. i hope one day to see games that are entirely scripted by the rules and umps, the more 50s and 100s the better. probably only a few years off that

 

[Rayzorwire]

I watched Gryan Miers on his mark 60m out run 45º until he was a meter inside the 50m line before his stationary defender was able to exert any pressure on his at all. Because he is such a crap kick he missed, but is this the sort of football we want to see, are easy rule assisted goals the measure of a game of football.

Well said.

I think this is what irks me the most about the new rule.

Forwards who can't kick 55m are suddenly allowed to cheat the extra metres they need to make the distance. It's taken the skill and power required to make that kick legitimately under the rules which have always applied completely out of the game. Anyone who thinks that is a good thing is a massive flog, plain and simple.

Aside from that, any rule change which allows more 'open to interpretation' 50m penalties to be paid (and results inevitably decided by them) is a recipe for umpire slaughtering and rampant supporter anger. Anyone who thinks that is a good thing is a massive flog, plain and simple.

 

[Bojangles17]

They are all ****ing morons. The biggest change from last season is that we've gone from 16min qtrs with 90 rotations to 20min qtrs with 75 rotations!
Plus, as Geelong and Hawthorn proved with their crabfest yesterday, it's the intent of the players and coaches that matters.

I agree TIA I think we ve demonstrated at pivotal time in first couple of rounds that when we amp up the pressure the oppo wilt , we LOST the game in the midfield. Gimme 3 winners from Prestia, graham shedda Bolton Martin Cotch and we win , reality is on Saturday they ALL failed to impact

 

[Swanny69]

ump and gimmicky rule assisted goals are my favourite thing in footy. i hope one day to see games that are entirely scripted by the rules and umps, the more 50s and 100s the better. probably only a few years off that

Yep eventually we’ll be fed a diet of E J Whitten Legend matches that all come down the final kick ..

 

[Bojangles17]

Just waiting for the flood to come back. The game will look like soccer - let the defenders chip the ball around at will, but crossing the centre they will have to traverse 16 defenders who hope for turnover and quick slingshot to the other end.

Sydney had an extra man behind the ball for most of the game and a group of gut running kids to power forward if the opportunity arose. If it didn’t, they chipped around until they hit our our 1v1 defence - something we are not used to (given our history of zone defense).

I think we really lost it around the contest - despite us having an extra man around stoppages, they still killed us - and a ruckman prepared to stretch Nank across the whole ground. He was exposed badly.

All of this is correctable. But the only way to stop end to end scores has to be further towards defence as teams can clear our forward zone with ease given the new kick in rule. We can’t lock the ball inside the 50 like previous years so we need a major readjustment which could take time.

New rules because one guy didn’t like the way we played? Farcical when you think about it...........

Pretty good summary, Vlas is our most aggressive play maker in defence , bloody difficult to replace. Caddy was tried and in parts did ok , butchered the ball and maybe lucky to hold spot, prob will for now. I reckon shedda goes back , clever player reads it well good mark and has the dare to fill that void

 

[Waca Jr]

Probably answered my own question here, but can someone elaborate on how this new rule has, according to media nuffies, made us the worst defence in the league after one loss?

 

[VB_longneck]

Next minute they will amend the rule so someone MUST the stand the mark within a certain amount of time or it'll be 50. Everything is 50 these days.

Leppitsch said on SEN that we normally average 1.1 goals against for transition from defensive 50, right now we average 4.4 which is four times worse.

He wonders if it's because of the stand rule, given the man on the mark can't corral to help the defence behind him, but he also reckons the defenders aren't switched on enough at the moment to stop the easy chip passes.

leppa is doing more work at sen than he wouldve if he was still assistant coaching with us. not bad for someone taking a break

just come back and stop leaking information

 

[VB_longneck]

ump and gimmicky rule assisted goals are my favourite thing in footy. i hope one day to see games that are entirely scripted by the rules and umps, the more 50s and 100s the better. probably only a few years off that

and they'll change the name from afl to afe

australian football entertainment

 

[This Is Anfield]

and they'll change the name from afl to afe

australian football entertainment

They've already identified Gil's successor...

 

[muzhogg]

Proof of a conscious effort to stop our dominance....

View attachment 1094091
View attachment 1094092

The bit about this that really annoys me is the claim that we "encroached" on the mark.

I'm sorry but that word really suggest we went beyond the rules when, in fact, we were doing nothing more than the rules allowed.

So the correct word is "expert" -- unless we're going to start using the term "culprit" to mean somebody who plays the game within the rules.

It's kind of amazing that the only way the AFL could respond to our success is to first make it sound that we are successful because we're cheating, and then change the rules to try to stop us.

It's utter BS but also kind of a complement!

 

[VB_longneck]

They've already identified Gil's successor...

View attachment 1095856

thought he kicked the bucket

 

[Stars align]

The bit about this that really annoys me is the claim that we "encroached" on the mark.

I'm sorry but that word really suggest we went beyond the rules when, in fact, we were doing nothing more than the rules allowed.

So the correct word is "expert" -- unless we're going to start using the term "culprit" to mean somebody who plays the game within the rules.

It's kind of amazing that the only way the AFL could respond to our success is to first make it sound that we are successful because we're cheating, and then change the rules to try to stop us.

It's utter BS but also kind of a complement!

Just watched sounding the alarm from last year’s preliminary final ... gee the footy was so bad no wonder they want to turn it into netball

 

[TigerTime17]

thought he kicked the bucket

He would still be a better replacement, dead or alive!

 

[box070]

Watch how many hammys will start to ping once fatigue of the season sets in. Already been 7 or 8 for the season.

 

[Stars align]

The bit about this that really annoys me is the claim that we "encroached" on the mark.

I'm sorry but that word really suggest we went beyond the rules when, in fact, we were doing nothing more than the rules allowed.

So the correct word is "expert" -- unless we're going to start using the term "culprit" to mean somebody who plays the game within the rules.

It's kind of amazing that the only way the AFL could respond to our success is to first make it sound that we are successful because we're cheating, and then change the rules to try to stop us.

It's utter BS but also kind of a complement!

Am happy to accept the new rule if they make 1 allowance that being to allow the man on the mark to go as soon as the player with the ball goes and not wait for the umpires to call it
There is too much of a delay from the time the player goes until the umpires react

 

[Bojangles17]

Am happy to accept the new rule if they make 1 allowance that being to allow the man on the mark to go as soon as the player with the ball goes and not wait for the umpires to call it
There is too much of a delay from the time the player goes until the umpires react

Spot on , you could boil an egg in the time it takes for the ump to call play on , even longer when it’s us , absolute bs