What rule would you Add/Remove/Change to improve the game?

[bzparkes]

Make the umpires wear a frilly ballet dress if they pay a free kick for dissent for the rest of the match.

Don't ever watch the referees in Rugby then...

 

[Blackhawk42]

As somebody who still plays footy, I actually don't mind the stand rule.

As the person on the mark you get a breather, when in the past you were expected to 'work the mark' generally to no advantage.

And as the player with the ball, you suddenly have cleaner visual access ahead of you. Makes you consider taking the longer option every time.


I wouldn't mind if it was relaxed a bit though. I genuinely have no idea why it should matter if the player on the mark moves backwards.

 

[jwint43]

dont nominate rucks, but still punish 3rd man up. Just throw the ball up straight away without asking and if teams cant sort it out then too bad

 

[Kappa]

100% it's horrible and makes no sense

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

It makes perfect sense, you just don't get it.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

I would get rid of the MRO & MRP, spending hours combing and reviewing footage with the sole purpose of trying to find ways to suspend players is incredibly dumb.

If there is a major injury or concussion should be an investigation, but for everything else let it go.

 

[Kappa]

Remove the sub, 5 on the bench.

Why?

 

[Blackhawk42]

Why?

The sub is the worst thing ever introduced. The fact they brought it back was ridiculous.

Fans hate it.
The players hate it.
Fantasy and Supercoach players hate it.

Nothing more absurd than seeing a player doing a 30 minute training session on their own out on the ground after a game has finishe, just to meet some fitness requirements.

 

[Roddy]

They've actually already removed the worst ones in my book: hands in the back and no prior for a ruck grabbing the ball clean out of a ball up were both utterly ridiculous. Both not missed at all.

 

[captain cotch 9]

can the chopping of the arms.
defenders need help imo.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Whats the record for most rules changed in one season, I reckon the AFL should try and break that yearly.

 

[Cleansweep17]

I know it may be a little stupid but do you guys think we should add a rule where the named Full back(s) and Full Forward(s) can’t leave the D50/F50’s or it’s a free kick. Would make it a little like previous era footy and probably end up with more scoring.

 

[Billy ray]

no white number panels
no white shorts rule
white umpire uniforms, and goal umpires have coats

 

[HirdsTheWord]

not really a rule, but I'd be changing this umpire on a pedestal bullshit the AFL is garnering.

dont get me wrong, abuse shouldn't tolerate but this complete and wilfulness to not be allowed to criticize poor umpiring performances is a detriment to the game.

Should be treated exactly like players. have a stinker, go spend some time in the reserves.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

dont nominate rucks, but still punish 3rd man up. Just throw the ball up straight away without asking and if teams cant sort it out then too bad

Alright, but before you remove the ruck nomination rule, decide how it will be umpired if Team 1 blocks all of Team 2's players from participating in the ruck contest, so Team 1's ruckman gets an uncontested tap/punch? Or just grabs the ball out of the ruck at the top of the goal square and kicks an easy goal?

 

[Kappa]

The sub is the worst thing ever introduced. The fact they brought it back was ridiculous.

Fans hate it.
The players hate it.
Fantasy and Supercoach players hate it.

Nothing more absurd than seeing a player doing a 30 minute training session on their own out on the ground after a game has finishe, just to meet some fitness requirements.

Why is it bad for the game? You haven't provided any reasons.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Why is it bad for the game? You haven't provided any reasons.

I did. The last paragraph.

Players want to be involved for the duration of a contest. Not sit on the bench for 3 quarters waiting.

Fans wants to see new players put their best foot forward, not debut for only 10 minutes or be subbed out before having an impact.

Did anybody care at all when it was abolished at the end of 2015? I seem to remember everybody saying good riddance. Then it was brought back about a week before the 2021 season started and we're still dealing with it years later.

 

[Do the Dew]

I did. The last paragraph.

Players want to be involved for the duration of a contest. Not sit on the bench for 3 quarters waiting.

Fans wants to see new players put their best foot forward, not debut for only 10 minutes or be subbed out before having an impact.

Did anybody care at all when it was abolished at the end of 2015? I seem to remember everybody saying good riddance. Then it was brought back about a week before the 2021 season started and we're still dealing with it years later.

What's that. The AFL rushing in a rule change just days out from the start of the season, with absolutely zero trial or club consultation. Pretty much their standard operating procedure.

Seems to me that they make rule changes for the sake of it to justify their jobs. Imagine if they did a fan survey about the stand rule, it'd be something like 90% against it yet they still wouldn't change shit. We as the fans have to realise that the AFL admin doesn't give a flying **** about us, or else they would meaningfully engage with us and solicit our feedback.

 

[Kappa]

I did. The last paragraph.

Players want to be involved for the duration of a contest. Not sit on the bench for 3 quarters waiting.

Fans wants to see new players put their best foot forward, not debut for only 10 minutes or be subbed out before having an impact.

Did anybody care at all when it was abolished at the end of 2015? I seem to remember everybody saying good riddance. Then it was brought back about a week before the 2021 season started and we're still dealing with it years later.

Do you think it's fair if a team gets an injury 5 minutes into the match and they lose the game because they have 1 less player?

What about if a player from team A punches team B in the face 5 minutes in and they win because of the extra man?

The sub makes the game a lot more fair. Your reasons for not liking it are utter garbage, "whaa what if a young kid is upset he can only play 1 quarter" "what about supercoach???"

 

[Underarm]

I wouldn't mind if it was relaxed a bit though. I genuinely have no idea why it should matter if the player on the mark moves bacbackwards

The point of the rule is to give more benefits for taking a mark or getting a free kick.

They want to limit the player on the mark to choose between defending the player with the ball OR Defending the player running past looking for the quick handball. You pick 1, and then you can't change your mind.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Do you think it's fair if a team gets an injury 5 minutes into the match and they lose the game because they have 1 less player?

What about if a player from team A punches team B in the face 5 minutes in and they win because of the extra man?

The sub makes the game a lot more fair. Your reasons for not liking it are utter garbage, "whaa what if a young kid is upset he can only play 1 quarter" "what about supercoach???"

1. Yes. Footy is a war attrition and isn't always fair.

2. That doesn't happen anymore.

3. It's players livelihoods. Connor Downie, formally of Hawthorn, debuted as the sub in 2021 and never got on the ground. He wasn't given another opportunity until late in the season. 12 months later he was delisted. If the sub didn't exist and he was played outright in his debut game, he may have performed well enough to gain some confidence and could still be in the league plying his trade now.
Your response is incredibly short sighted and childish.

 

[Kappa]

1. Yes. Footy is a war attrition and isn't always fair.

2. That doesn't happen anymore.

3. It's players livelihoods. Connor Downie, formally of Hawthorn, debuted as the sub in 2021 and never got on the ground. He wasn't given another opportunity until late in the season. 12 months later he was delisted. If the sub didn't exist and he was played outright in his debut game, he may have performed well enough to gain some confidence and could still be in the league plying his trade now.
Your response is incredibly short sighted and childish.

1: What a terrible argument. Here's an opportunity to make it fairer, that's a good thing.

2: Players deliberating injuring other players certainly does happen, and they don't deserve to have a man advantage for that.

3: Gee this is a dumb argument. He was delisted because he wasn't good enough. Even if he wasn't delisted, someone else would have been? Removing the sub doesn't increase the amount of jobs available for AFL players

 

[Blackhawk42]

1: What a terrible argument. Here's an opportunity to make it fairer, that's a good thing.

2: Players deliberating injuring other players certainly does happen, and they don't deserve to have a man advantage for that.

3: Gee this is a dumb argument. He was delisted because he wasn't good enough. Even if he wasn't delisted, someone else would have been? Removing the sub doesn't increase the amount of jobs available for AFL players

Being 1 man down on the bench doesn't make that much difference over all. Why couldn't it be fixed by 5 on the bench and no sub? 4 interchange players is more than enough is one goes down.


Please tell me the last time there was a directive for a player to injure an opposition player. Or a player set out to remove an opposition player as a tactical move.


That isn't my point.
I'm saying that some players fight tooth and nail to get the opportunity to debut. That shouldn't come at the risk of only being given 10 minutes late in a game to prove yourself. There isn't much you can do as individual during that time. These are guys careers and they want the best opportunity to prove what they can do over 4 quarters of footy. You know... the actual length of a game of football.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Did anybody care at all when it was abolished at the end of 2015? I seem to remember everybody saying good riddance. Then it was brought back about a week before the 2021 season started and we're still dealing with it years later.

The AFL brought back the sub rule for a very specific reason. Concussion replacement. The AFL wanted to remove a "but we'll got down a player" pressure from making a decision about whether a player should try and get back on the field.

But then allowed the clubs to water it down to any injury, then watered it down to becoming a tactical sub as players were subbed out for "precautionary issues". The clubs are just pushing to get an extra player on the bench. If clubs had their way, they'd be able to access their entire squads on game day.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

Get rid of this stupid stand rule when standing on the msrk.I really hate this rule.

This is one of the worst rules ever, it removes the psyche-out element I miss seeing, it should never have been introduced, it hasn't increased scoring, so why was it even brought in?

 

[GoldbergsGold]

Umpire deliberate out of bounds like it was 15-20 yrs ago. Yes you can kick it 40m down the line and if it goes out, throw it in. I always thought it strange a team gets rewarded for not being able to collect a ball that travels 40-50m. Shouldn't they have a defensive player out there stopping the ball from going out, instead of clogging up the play? I'd make it like a kick for touch rule. Force the defending team to stop it happening instead of just handing them a free kick.

This, they should either be lenient and throw it back in, like they use to, or just do last touch. An objective rule, rather than rules based on subjectivity.