18 m square in for next year ?

[BIRDBRAIN]

Just glad the mighty Eagles won the last legitimate AFL premiership before the commencement of ZONEBALL 18-metre. All future premierships will forever have an asterix beside their name and count for nought.

 

[Blackhawk42]

I don't think the extended goal square is going to get up.

Anyway, it's interesting going into next year due to the Eagles premiership. AFL is generally a sport of follow the leader. It's been happening for ages now.
Let's look at how West Coast plays...
A genuine full forward and centre half forward.
Small crumbing forwards at their feet.
Midfielders who also rest on the forward flanks.
A genuine tap ruck and usually a second ruck option.
A genuine intercept defender.
A genuine full back.
They use the ball by foot until their smalls can break open into space or their key forwards get a run at it.

They are the reigning premiers and play the game in it's most pure and traditional form. Follow the leader might revert the game back in a few key areas next season. Remember, the 'leader' before the Eagles played a manic game style focusing on their smalls, and next year they are adding a legitimate key forward. They've already adapted somewhat.

 

[Madtiger2006]

Hope we don’t see the 18m square. Embarrassing

 

[HTT]

Yep the GF was a despicable show, I fell asleep watching it. Clearly the game is ****ed

 

[Tbonefreo]

Hope we don’t see the 18m square. Embarrassing

Bloody oath

 

[ziad]

I was sitting at the GF and during the last quartyer it came to me - no a bad game but if only we had an 18m square.
I must like in the wrong bubble

 

[LightTower4]

Why can't people see that introducing the 18m will also fix the other issues like the current adjudication of the Lindsay Thomas rule, congestion, umpires not being able to bounce the ball properly and run throughs being destroyed in Grand Finals.
You know it makes sense.

 

[gbatman]

You watch all the great games like this year's grand final and the best part is the contest and passages of play.

So the AFL want to minimise the contests and make the passages of play shorter.

I watched the grand final and though, how on earth is the game broken? It's not, it is how it's always been. A few bad games a week, a few good games and some in between.

The AFL are turning everything into an advertising cash cow. Longer draft and trade period = longer coverage = more ads = more revenue.

More scoring = more ads = more revenue.

If Gil had his way the players would stop for an ad break at every stoppage.

This is a prime example of money ruining the game.

Who wants to watch a game where scoring is easy and teams score all the time or it's easy to move the ball from one end to the other. Basketball has that, that's it's thing. Sure we don't want to see a game where scoring is borderline impossible like Soccer and it isn't. Soccer owns that, that's it's thing. AFL is and always has been about the balance. Defence & Pressure V attack & Skill. I think it's balanced.

I don't mind the smaller rule changes but I think this one makes the game less recognisable. Having an 18m square is not Aussie rules football, it's some kind of joke.

The problem the game has is there are a few too many real weak sides. Brisbane, GCS, Carlton, St Kilda and at times Freo. Bringing in two extra sides has dilutes the talent, pressure has stayed the same but overall skill levels have dropped. There have also been less resources handed to real weak sides too but this is another matter for another thread. But still there has always been bad games and bad sides.

AFL has never been more popular, clubs have growing memberships, more people are watching and attending and watching then ever. There's no evidence that football supporters are finding that the game is bad. It's like everything, a few older guys are very vocal about it, statistics show that the game is in very good shape.

At the end of the day this is all about money.

 

[footyfan1978]

As expected got knocked back

 

[Dazzler9]

As expected got knocked back

Yeah but it's kind of been introduced by stealth, hasn't it? The opposition now has to stand back an extra 5m and the player kicking out can just play on.

So the effect on the game will basically be the same as if they had introduced the bigger goalsquare. But this way, they don't have to put up witheverybody complaining about it.

 

[footyfan1978]

Yeah but it's kind of been introduced by stealth, hasn't it? The opposition now has to stand back an extra 5m and the player kicking out can just play on.

So the effect on the game will basically be the same as if they had introduced the bigger goalsquare. But this way, they don't have to put up witheverybody complaining about it.

Cosmetically it had a hard sell. This is their alternative. I meant the square is knocked back. They still trying to achieve similar result without the cosmetic negative that never had it going to get up.

 

[footyfan1978]

Reckon the 18 m thing will not get past on Monday meeting.
6-6-6 will be only likely change and that in itself is very minor. That has it's pros and cons. A few aspects of it I not like but if they let it through happy to see how it goes for a full season. The diamond only lasted a year in mid 70's. It might too if not really what we want going into 2020's.

It should get past the Monday meeting as it is definitely going to promote scoring. All you need to do is look at this years finals series to see how scoring has dried up in the last decade.

I do not see it. Mind you, I am not fussed if they do try it for a season or two. Genuinely interested to see how it would go but I just think been too much talk by football industry people of players will be coached to not have shots at goal where previously they would have as they would feel the value of point is countered more in other teams favour to get ball beyond the centre and closer to their forward line next. I just feel they will be conservative and only go with 6-6-6 format and even that is very minor adjustment. The 18 metre thing is way more out there in so many ways.

I think the 18 metre goal square is going to make forming and holding a zone much harder for teams, and I for one think that is a good thing as while zones can be interesting, it does get a bit boring after a while when a team can't get the ball out of their own defence due to the other teams zone. The extra 9 or so metres means there are going to be a lot more gaps in a teams zone as they will have to cover more territory.

Oh, why they are thinking of it is logically but the challenge is in reality how it changes teams approach towards kicking goals and going out of their way to avoid kicking too many points. So unforeseen effects that some have already talked about is why I think it will be knocked back.

Well as expected the knock back happened but they sneaked all these announcements in at height of trade period I suspect most of us hardly digested the 9 "game adjustments" that got announced. I know I only glanced at first. Having heard more on the kick outs since, I did not forsee how they would introduce new things beyond what they trialled for 18 metre line but the 18 metre line was doomed cosmetically once it got seen a few times. Some are now saying the 10 metre square no longer serves a purpose but it still does as the 6-6-6- starting format after a goal and start of each quarter requires one player on each side start from within goal square when umpire bounces ball or tosses it up at centre. I am actually more fascinated how sides attack from a behind kicked against them. Will we see a Lachie Whitfield and Lochie O'Brien just sling shot from behind kick with massive run out to 20 metres, baulk guy on mark and just keep taking it on and then a lock king into their forward line ? I certainly think it would be tried out. Certainly hope Carlton give O'Brien licence to just go for it. He can really run and kick so he could be explosive with way he might take it on. Whitfield with more experience will naturally be able to have massive impact from start.

On the flipside I am really curious how coaching approaches to scoring adjust. Will coaches be hellbent on attacking via corridor beyond centre line to ensure shots at goal are concentrated more towards middle area and from boundary line they barely even attempt to shoot for goal for fear of giving opposing side such an advantage kicking out if it a behind. This may mean slow movement forward to pin point a shot from less areas.

 

[BIRDBRAIN]

If you're the full forward and you push the full back out of the goal square before the bounce do you get a free kick??

 

[juss]

If you're the full forward and you push the full back out of the goal square before the bounce do you get a free kick??

Chance the AFL has thought about this? Zero.

 

[dzussy]

I don't think the extended goal square is going to get up.

Considering the full back can just run out without kicking it too himself, there isnt really a need for a goal square at all. Why the hell they would change this is just ludicrous. The art of the full back having to find a target from the confines of the goal square was part of the games defensive fabric.

If they ever bring in the 9 point super goal, that'll be the last straw if it isnt already. The game has turned into Gil's circus. He is screwing it.

 

[footyfan1978]

If you're the full forward and you push the full back out of the goal square before the bounce do you get a free kick??

Yes. The full back's team will get the free kick from the centre.