- May 19, 2017
- 9,403
- 10,955
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
The problem is, if it dosent "work", whatever that is...they will not recall it. They are stubborn *s at the AFL.
18 m square in for next year ?
- Thread starter Mobbsy
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Mar 1, 2010
- 23,185
- 16,585
- AFL Club
- Richmond
First they dilute the talent pool to wafer thin proportions, then they complain the game isn't a spectacle any more.
So they empower a bunch of numpties to make changes to rules.
And that's exactly what said numpties do.
They meet, feel important, and make changes to the fabric of the game because that's what they're being paid to do, and they want to feel useful.
These are the same dips shits who altered the rushed behind rule, because a team used rushed behinds in one GF as a strategy.
The game quickly evolved by itself, so that teams want you to score behinds now, so they can set up, and keep you pegged inside their forward half.
And we're left with some shitty, grey area type rule on rushed behinds, that players don't understand, and didn't need to exist in the first place.
Instead of looking at that example, and saying 'hey, we kind of $#@$ed up there'...
They stick to their game plan, and ask the numpties for more rule changes.
Nice work G Mac and co....
Can't wait for a GF to be decided by someone being 'offside'....
In terms of people watching footy there are other factors. More immigrants less inclined to follow footy, world is tougher, people have less time more commuting. Generations are changing to. Places like Melbourne are really growing.
In terms of footy the super draft players are retiring, Pavlich gone, Richo gone, less characters, Reiwoldt And Judd in the media. We have new gun players but maybe not in the same quantities and many seem to be mids. Have elder statesmen like Selwood and Danger carrying teams.
The footy show has been in decline to and not even Eddie appears to be able to save it. So its a big call to suggest its necessarily about style
There is gold in this here thread.
The goal rectangle will eventually grow to the 50M mark. 18M wont be enough to achieve what they think they will achieve.
At least when this happens, Ben Brown will have enough room to take the kick-out.
"Laws of the Game Committee" is really the "Unintended Consequences Of Law Changes to Game Committee".
The goal rectangle will eventually grow to the 50M mark. 18M wont be enough to achieve what they think they will achieve.
At least when this happens, Ben Brown will have enough room to take the kick-out.
"Laws of the Game Committee" is really the "Unintended Consequences Of Law Changes to Game Committee".
bitadash
Senior List
- Mar 25, 2011
- 231
- 300
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Calgary Flames, Renault
Gee, you've copped a rough deal here, no likes or responses... Cheers for the info!
I for one think the extended square will break down some of the congestion and push forwards back deeper as fast rebounds are bound to occur...
Can see a lot more structured set ups, more one on ones, cleaner stoppages, more scoring... It seem to be the easiest fix tbh.
The 6,6,6 starting zone seems to be a ripper too. No more flooding when its a tight one
Plus as you've said its the traditional 'square'
Looking forward to this rule. I think it's a good one.
The "lock it in" style of footy that is played is not as entertaining and pure as some footy fans would have you believe.
If it spreads the game out and reduces congestion by even 5%, then i call that a win for this rule.
The "lock it in" style of footy that is played is not as entertaining and pure as some footy fans would have you believe.
If it spreads the game out and reduces congestion by even 5%, then i call that a win for this rule.
- Jun 14, 2015
- 17,703
- 38,626
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Port Adelaide Power
Broadcasters have openly discussed their desire for more goals.
That the AFL are evolving the game to suit commercial interests above what the supporters and players want is disgusting, I really don't understand why people aren't more angry about this. It's horrible.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl...s-more-beauty-in-the-afl-20180608-p4zk9t.html
Mmm I like the broadcaster speaking in terms of specific clubs like "if Collingwood and Sydney are up we get more ratings"
Sounds impartial.
Sounds impartial.
wowlace
Norm Smith Medallist
How's it going to work with marks and free kicks in the "goal rectangle"?
- Moderator
- #160
It may reduce the congestion but what we’ll see is a more keepings off possession game. Forget about shots from outside the 50m arc or from near the boundary to risky of conceding a point. Teams will just pass it around untill they find that perfect shot in front of goal like in Soccer or Ice Hockey. Defenders will also clog up the 18m square to make it difficult to mark so you can forget about the full forward kicking bags again!
Last edited:
- Mar 1, 2010
- 23,185
- 16,585
- AFL Club
- Richmond
What you suggest may be true.
Are we suggesting our predecessors where idiots???
Are we regressing back to an inferior version because we forget the progressive element that caused the 18 metre goal square to reduce?
TigerTime_89
4x Jack Dyer Medalist
- Apr 3, 2018
- 3,187
- 5,446
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Melb Storm, Liverpool, S Thunder
I totally agree.
The game has never been more popular or strongly followed yet apparently there is a problem with the game...
The old heads need to accept that most people like the modern game and the very few loudly outspoken ones are actually a very small minority.
I'm ok with a 6 6 6 setup but the goal square just changes one of the strong characteristics of the game.
I think making the game easier is not good for it.
The old heads need to accept that most people like the modern game and the very few loudly outspoken ones are actually a very small minority.
I'm ok with a 6 6 6 setup but the goal square just changes one of the strong characteristics of the game.
I think making the game easier is not good for it.
BlakeyNoFlakey
Brownlow Medallist
What I'm reading from the comments in the media here and there is the 18m square will come in, starting positions at centre bounces (and only centre bounces), and runners restricted. The starting positions is interesting as it means no stacking one area of the ground, so if a team is less than a goal in front with 20 secs to go and there's a centre bounce in play they'll have to line up in starting positions. Could be interesting.
Hard to chip it around if the opposition man up
Full forwards kicking bags... that is such a rare event these days it's not even a factor worth worrying about.
Beside that, i could argue with the extra 9m in the square, specialist goal kickers who stick closer to goal (i.e. full forwards) could become more valuable to have implemented into your team structure...
- May 27, 2017
- 6,368
- 9,800
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
I reckon it will be good.
More counter-attacking from the backline.
More counter-attacking from the backline.
Keep pushing the goal square out and in the end the AFL will have us adopting a soccer style rule, where after every point the opposition team kicks it from the center of the ground.
The answer to any of this is patience. Coaches are already figuring out how to find a way to reduce pressure, just like they did with the Hawks zone and chipping game, Pagan paddock, Geelongs play on tactic etc etc.
Changing rules to solve problems is a bit like bringing in Cane Toads to kill locusts. You just end up creating a new set of problems
The answer to any of this is patience. Coaches are already figuring out how to find a way to reduce pressure, just like they did with the Hawks zone and chipping game, Pagan paddock, Geelongs play on tactic etc etc.
Changing rules to solve problems is a bit like bringing in Cane Toads to kill locusts. You just end up creating a new set of problems
- Moderator
- #168
Hard to chip it around if the opposition man up
Full forwards kicking bags... that is such a rare event these days it's not even a factor worth worrying about.
Beside that, i could argue with the extra 9m in the square, specialist goal kickers who stick closer to goal (i.e. full forwards) could become more valuable to have implemented into your team structure...
Yeah we say that today but nobody does it. Why man up when you can flood the back line and not give the opposition any chance at scoring directly? let the opposition have as much possession as possible if you can't find a target in front of goal its worth the risk to let them go wide or take the shot from outside 50m and risk a behind or rushed behind is what the defending team will be hoping for and the % of that his highly probable to not be a goal!
As for the Full Forwards well that was my point that they are already made redundant and that these proposed changes ain't gonna bring team back! and how is an extra 9m gonna keep a full forward closer to goal? if anything it will reduce their impact because coaches will know that the perfect shot for goal will be within that 18m square just like it is within the 9m square.
Last edited:
Exactly - Needs more than 3 games to see what the impact is.
Currently teams score a goal less than 10% of the time from a kick in. What if this change results in good sides scoring a goal 20% of the time from a kick in. Or if teams get it inside 50 more than 50% of the time.
Teams may be more cautious when attacking or weaker sides getting thrashed by bigger margins.
This is absolutely garbage. If you make the goalsquare 9m longer, wouldn't that just mean the players stand back 9 metres further back ?
What a load of garbage this idea is! The AFL need to stop messing with the game.
If the game is so bad, then why have the AFL got one million members for the first time ?
What a load of garbage this idea is! The AFL need to stop messing with the game.
If the game is so bad, then why have the AFL got one million members for the first time ?
You are referring to flooding... we've already experienced that. One team successfully did what you said (Sydney in 05) and yet the next year an attacking team (WCE) topped them. If you think every team will adopt that defensive approach then you are being very one eyed about this.
What a ridiculous argument. Jesus, it's an extra 9 meters... not 50 meters.
You seriously think forwards will stop leading to the sidelines and stop taking shots at goal from the side lines? Teams will now just search for that "perfect shot"... Over 9m.... there is so much melodrama on this thread.
I'm sure they will think of six more new rules to implement in 2020 too.
- Moderator
- #173
how is it ridiculous? how many shots at goal are from within the goal square? Its the defenders job to reduce this, it will be just as hard within the 18m goal square once teams adapt.
I actually dont mind this one. Will be nearly reach half way and make it hard to defend.
This goal-square rule-change is a total load of s**t. If they bring it in that's it for me as far as AFL footy goes. It's being done at the behest of the TV moguls: * them and * the AFL rules committee 
Similar threads
