Zoning forwards and backs in 50 metre arc...will it come in ??

[speedpeck23]

Must admit I was not originally keen on this idea but the more you look for a simple answer to decrease congestion..this could be it.

It's only a starting position at each stoppage and will force packs to spread. Pretty much like the centre square effect brought in the early 70's. Now we just see this as part of the game.

Might as well use the arc for some reason.

 

[Pessimistic]

The arc is close to the center square so presumably all players could be a placed so close to the ball up they’d be 2-3 seconds sprint from the ball.

They’d continue to tinker with it until it was a farce.

Is one of the best parts of AFL the realitive absence of anything like offside rules?

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

Having your 6 forwards and backs start in the 50 ark at centre bounce downs will stop the + 1 in defence and flooding back when teams are up in the final quarter .
I can only see this as a positive step in reducing congestion .

 

[Pessimistic]

Fixed it for you

 

[speedpeck23]

Having your 6 forwards and backs start in the 50 ark at centre bounce downs will stop the + 1 in defence and flooding back when teams are up in the final quarter .
I can only see this as a positive step in reducing congestion .

Really only need full forward line and full back line within 50m line. ie. starting positions for each bounce would be a minimum of 3 players from each team behind the line.

 

[Pessimistic]

Really, is there ever any time when a team doesn’t have at least four in each arc at centre bounce?

 

[speedpeck23]

Really, is there ever any time when a team doesn’t have at least four in each arc at centre bounce?

That's true...but I was referring to every stoppage and ball up.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

They don’t need to add rules, but rather remove them.

The congestion issues started when teams were allowed to play on quickly from behinds, because no one wanted to be exposed on the rebound.
It got worse when they penalised long kicks down the line. Why would teams keep players in defence when there’s a bigger chance of deliberate being called?

If you remove deliberate (was originally ruled as time was not stopped) and the quick play on (which would also mean no longer need deliberate rushed behinds). Give it a few yrs and coaches will catch on

 

[speedpeck23]

They don’t need to add rules, but rather remove them.

The congestion issues started when teams were allowed to play on quickly from behinds, because no one wanted to be exposed on the rebound.
It got worse when they penalised long kicks down the line. Why would teams keep players in defence when there’s a bigger chance of deliberate being called?

If you remove deliberate (was originally ruled as time was not stopped) and the quick play on (which would also mean no longer need deliberate rushed behinds). Give it a few yrs and coaches will catch on

The main cause of congestion in my view is the interchange....allows more players more often at the ball. As a result the AFL are limiting rotations...hasn't helped all that much in my view.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

The main cause of congestion in my view is the interchange....allows more players more often at the ball. As a result the AFL are limiting rotations...hasn't helped all that much in my view.

And interchanges skyrocketed when they allowed players to kick in quickly...

 

[kickazz]

They don’t need to add rules, but rather remove them.

The congestion issues started when teams were allowed to play on quickly from behinds, because no one wanted to be exposed on the rebound.
It got worse when they penalised long kicks down the line. Why would teams keep players in defence when there’s a bigger chance of deliberate being called?

If you remove deliberate (was originally ruled as time was not stopped) and the quick play on (which would also mean no longer need deliberate rushed behinds). Give it a few yrs and coaches will catch on

I tend to agree. Another factor is ball ups. Now the umpire let's it go to long before calling it, then takes to long to ball it up.

Do both quickly and players will have to spead. Paying more HTM and HTB would help too.

 

[kickazz]

I do like the idea of 6, 6, 6 at centre bounces though.

I like to look at what rules make the game good for the neutral observer. When it is close ish with a couple of minutes left, the sight of one side sending heaps of players back is a massive wet blanket.

 

[HairyO]

Must admit I was not originally keen on this idea but the more you look for a simple answer to decrease congestion..this could be it.

It's only a starting position at each stoppage and will force packs to spread. Pretty much like the centre square effect brought in the early 70's. Now we just see this as part of the game.

Might as well use the arc for some reason.

There is the most basic fix to congestion. Start punishing players who incorrectly dispose of the ball when tackled.

Enforce a rule which has been in place for decades. No other fiddling is required.

And amazingly, it will improve the quality of the game because it will punish teams which drop or throw the ball when tackled.

 

[Pessimistic]

I do like the idea of 6, 6, 6 at centre bounces though.

I like to look at what rules make the game good for the neutral observer. When it is close ish with a couple of minutes left, the sight of one side sending heaps of players back is a massive wet blanket.

of the 50m arc comes within 10 m of the 50m centre square, this really does not prevent all the players getting within 40m radius of the centre bounce does it?
and if they go one further and implement for every stoppage, then it will favour in numbers the team whos defending goal the ball up is closer to
unless its a free kick then teams will conspire to get frees just outside the arc they are attacking

its a hint to me that these ideas are half baked

 

[kranky al]

View attachment 469390

Fixed it for you

If you could make the centre square players form a southern cross would make the bogons happy!!!

 

[D-N-R]

My biggest problem with this type of rule is enforcement.

The restrictions at centre bounces work because they have three umpires monitoring four, straight 50m lines making sure players don't cross before the bounce.

Offside works in soccer because the ground is smaller and the referee is looking along a straight line, not an arc.

Having restrictions for an entire game would be really hard to umpire. Players could leave and enter arcs from opposite sides of the ground making it difficult for umpires to know if there were enough players in the arc at any particular time. Very difficult to tell if a guy sprinting out of the arc at one side of the ground was replaced by his teammate in time. Slow-mo would show it but the umpires would be guessing half the time.

Reduce the amount of players on the field (to 15) or reduce rotations to encourage teams to rest players in positions before any changes like this. Or just deal with the fact that congestion will happen and let coaches and players evolve to combat it.

 

[Wacko23Jacko]

Agree re umpires needing to hurry up. Doesn’t make any sense re interpretation and goes against everything they try and achieve.

Usually it gets to a point where it can’t be holding the ball and can’t be a ball up because the umpire leaves it to long that both things occur during the same play.

Half the reason fans get so pissed because it opens up the interpretation further - more grey lines. Call it straight away and get the ball up and moving, kill a couple of birds with one stone.

 

[HairyO]

Agree re umpires needing to hurry up. Doesn’t make any sense re interpretation and goes against everything they try and achieve.

Usually it gets to a point where it can’t be holding the ball and can’t be a ball up because the umpire leaves it to long that both things occur during the same play.

If you watch footy from the 1980s the umpire would blow the whistle quite quickly, and either give away a free or ball it up. The ball would be stationary for only a short amount of time.

The problem now with waiting so long is not just the stoppage builds up as more players come in, the tackler then feels like he has to bring the ball possessor to ground - which then opens up the chance of dangerous tackles.

At the beginning of the tackle there is either prior opportunity or there isnt. If there isnt, then a ball up can be called straight away. If there is, then the player with the ball has to get rid of it with an actual correct disposal or its holding the ball.

Congestion issues gone.

And there was no need to change a single rule. Just enforce the ones already in the game for decades.

 

[Wacko23Jacko]

If you watch footy from the 1980s the umpire would blow the whistle quite quickly, and either give away a free or ball it up. The ball would be stationary for only a short amount of time.

The problem now with waiting so long is not just the stoppage builds up as more players come in, the tackler then feels like he has to bring the ball possessor to ground - which then opens up the chance of dangerous tackles.

At the beginning of the tackle there is either prior opportunity or there isnt. If there isnt, then a ball up can be called straight away. If there is, then the player with the ball has to get rid of it with an actual correct disposal or its holding the ball.

Congestion issues gone.

And there was no need to change a single rule. Just enforce the ones already in the game for decades.

My thoughts exactly. It’s fairly simple to tell at the start of a tackle what the outcome is. Would help a hell of a lot on the congestion and accuracy of decisions.

But we’d lose the great spectacle of Razor and co. prancing around and making big, slow, dramatic arm gestures, etc.

 

[HairyO]

My thoughts exactly. It’s fairly simple to tell at the start of a tackle what the outcome is. Would help a hell of a lot on the congestion and accuracy of decisions.

But we’d lose the great spectacle of Razor and co. prancing around and making big, slow, dramatic arm gestures, etc.

Imagine a world where we had no idea who the umpires are. They just turn up and do their job then off they go. They never get interviewed. They never get written about.

Now expand that to the people running the game. And go one step further and include media.

We only hear from players and coaches.