No runners allowed during gametime

[tony__montana]

Underrated new rule. Having runners out there during play was a blight on the game. Very happy to see they are only allowed on the ground between goals now.

Interesting some of the coaches are speaking out against this rule. Perhaps this will increase coacing from the bench especially coaches of young and inexperienced sides?

 

[Pessimistic]

If it’s opinion needed, I don’t mind runners. Our game is not like other games

 

[Buzzasto DaSilva]

I actually really liked runners, until coaches (ours was probably the worst offender) starting abusing the privilege by strategically using them to block up space and create congestion.

I am all for getting rid of them, at least for the time being, because the last five years of continued "crackdown's" on runners which were promised to fix the issue have done absolutely nothing to solve it.

 

[__Nantes__]

How long have the runners been used for in the VFL/AFL?

 

[Monkey King]

Would‘ve been better to have allotted 5 mins per quarter for runners to be on the ground. Overstay and you’re out for the rest of the game. Would’ve solved the problem without the significant gameday interference.

 

[hawkman]

They should be allowed to run around the outside the boundary during play

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

They should be allowed to run around the outside the boundary during play

Surely they are?

 

[RUNVS]

This is such a non-issue. Kevin Bartlett came up with the idea that runners were ruining the game somehow and for some reason some people took his words as gospel. I mean of all the issues in the game runners were barely on it. It just annoys me people were so quick to become outraged by something that a few years ago no one cared about or even thought about, all because Keven Bartlett told them they should be outraged.

 

[AvantGardener]

This is such a non-issue. Kevin Bartlett came up with the idea that runners were ruining the game somehow and for some reason some people took his words as gospel. I mean of all the issues in the game runners were barely on it. It just annoys me people were so quick to become outraged by something that a few years ago no one cared about or even thought about, all because Keven Bartlett told them they should be outraged.

I think KB is a nuisance and don't listen to a word he says, but there have been loads of instances runners have blocked space in recent years.

 

[D-N-R]

The AFL should stand firm on this. Coaches will come up with a way around this if they're given time.

There are plenty of interchanges - players can pass on messages.
More experienced players can provide some guidance on the field.
Whilst the high tech message boards have faltered (at least during daylight hours) a low tech solution might help get messages across or at the very least be used to indicate player numbers so they can come off.

One negative might be more teams playing down the bench side of the ground so they can hear direction directly from the coaches.

 

[Yojimbo]

As per usual a few coaches abused the use of runners to use them as extra men in their zone defence and we have
a new rule to stop it and fair enough too. Most of the issues in football stem from the mastermind coaches that
changed the game forever, but is it always for the better ? The AFLX one day extravaganza showed the game
without coaches, but the adaptation to the rules and use of the Gatorade game changer was clear and present
for all to see and it only went for a few hours.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Bit left field but I think it'll result in coaches asserting more control over the Captaincy and the keadership group. They'll want players who are an extension of their authority and less elected by the playing group I think.

Edit: The Caotains might need to attend the weekly "what if" scenaril meetings so they can implement changes immediately. If not attend then at be aware if the outcomes via a briefing.

 

[nick1408]

Can teams position coaching staff around the ground and wire them up? Have messages from the coach go to the guy closest to the player they want the message to go to then deliver it from the boundary closest to them? May look ugly but does stop runners on the field.

 

[Cripptonite]

Hope the AFL don't budge on this, it's one of the few changes I support. This is a professional game ffs, we can't have random people running around the ground who may impact the game by getting in the way (sometimes intentionally). A runner "could have" changed the result of last year's grand final.

Brisbane are now having a sulk about it, get over it. Every other team is on a level playing field and you have plenty of time to coach and communicate. The game plans and tactical plays should be set preparing for the game and any changes can be tweaked after a goal, at the quarter break, by passing on messages through the benched players or via these electronic signs.

Every other professional sport in the world would laugh at the prospect of a runner. Tennis players can't even communicate with coaches during a game. Stop overcoaching the game and bring it back to basics.

 

[juss]

This makes sense to me, deliver your messages at the goal and quarter breaks, or have senior players take more leadership on.

 

[Kappa]

Can teams position coaching staff around the ground and wire them up? Have messages from the coach go to the guy closest to the player they want the message to go to then deliver it from the boundary closest to them? May look ugly but does stop runners on the field.

No player is going to be sitting near the coaches listening to instruction during play, the only time that would work is during breaks like a goal which is when the runners can go out anyway

 

[blitzer]

I agree with this rule change, although i reckon they could have fixed it without changing the rules by actually punishing clubs that were blocking up space with their runners. Its not like it wasn't bloody obvious on video replay. It reminds me of when they started to name divers and threaten to punish them but then they lost their appetite for it after punishing like one player which did absolutely nothing.

Anyway I don't see an issue about inexperienced sides etc. Everyone has the same restrictions so they all need to optimise their gameplan and strategies with those same restrictions. Sounds fair to me. If your side is too inexperienced then bring in an older statesman or two to help out.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

And just like the interchange issue has anyone ever heard a supporter leaving the game discussing how many times the runner was on the ground?
Do people actually watch the footy these days when they go or are they focused on interchange numbers and runners?
Who gives a crap about any of it? Not football supporters anyway.
Runners are no issue at all, never have been and never would of been. Just change for the sake of change.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

I agree with this rule change, although i reckon they could have fixed it without changing the rules by actually punishing clubs that were blocking up space with their runners. Its not like it wasn't bloody obvious on video replay. It reminds me of when they started to name divers and threaten to punish them but then they lost their appetite for it after punishing like one player which did absolutely nothing.

Anyway I don't see an issue about inexperienced sides etc. Everyone has the same restrictions so they all need to optimise their gameplan and strategies with those same restrictions. Sounds fair to me. If your side is too inexperienced then bring in an older statesman or two to help out.

The problem is there's no objective measure though. It's become accepted lore that we did it with Nick Maxwell a couple of years ago. Maybe we did, but there's never been an objective finding we did. I think it may not be possible to make one.

You say he was blocking space, although the team will be penalised if he interferes with play. The ckub says he stayed on the field because he had a message to pass on and was staying out if the way during a kick in to avoid the team being penalised.

 

[Dazzler9]

I've always hated the sight of runners and waterboys all over the bloody ground. Great rule change.

 

[gavaniacono]

My ma used to run into the bathroom every 5 minutes asking if I was alright, proffering unwanted advice.

I agree with these guys.

 

[blitzer]

The problem is there's no objective measure though. It's become accepted lore that we did it with Nick Maxwell a couple of years ago. Maybe we did, but there's never been an objective finding we did. I think it may not be possible to make one.

You say he was blocking space, although the team will be penalised if he interferes with play. The ckub says he stayed on the field because he had a message to pass on and was staying out if the way during a kick in to avoid the team being penalised.

The nature of runners as an addition to the core game means they need to justify their continued presence on the ground and not the other way around. I don't think there's a need to codify a set of complex rules of interactions permitted or disallowed. If runners are seen to be impacting on the play (whether by intention or otherwise) then there is a problem. Anyone that watched various footy shows during the week would have seen many instances where runners were just hanging around out on the ground supposedly waiting to deliver their message. This is certainly not desirable from a game image perspective.

I suspect history will show that this rule probably makes things a little better without being a drastic change and is just another part of reducing congestion on the ground.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

The nature of runners as an addition to the core game means they need to justify their continued presence on the ground and not the other way around. I don't think there's a need to codify a set of complex rules of interactions permitted or disallowed. If runners are seen to be impacting on the play (whether by intention or otherwise) then there is a problem. Anyone that watched various footy shows during the week would have seen many instances where runners were just hanging around out on the ground supposedly waiting to deliver their message. This is certainly not desirable from a game image perspective.

I suspect history will show that this rule probably makes things a little better without being a drastic change and is just another part of reducing congestion on the ground.

Again not objective evidence their intent was to impact the game though.

I think restricting the runners access to the field is the right thing to do. It will probably result in players seeking unnecessary treatment from trainers though. That will be harder to manage.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Good rule change, they’re not needed and just used to fill space. In a few weeks it’ll be forgotten about.

 

[Professor Knowall]

... Runners are no issue at all, never have been and never would of been. Just change for the sake of change.

Was it just change for the sake of change when runners were first introduced (after 100 years of never having them)?

The constant interchange (yet another innovation for the worse) made the runners role essentially redundant for any competently coached and prepared team. They have been used tactically by coaches for years mainly just to clutter up open areas and they should've been rid of years ago. Well prepared teams don't need them.