No Opposition Supporters 2019 General AFL Discussion

GotTheGoodes

Bloods
Mar 15, 2010
17,854
27,617
Australia
AFL Club
Sydney
It not the 6 6 6 rule that is causing issues. Its only in effect after goals and at the start of quarters so not as often to have much effect. Teams will still flood. The biggest rule change has been allowing teams to play on from kick in's after behinds. It allows team to bottle the ball in between the arcs and then set up defensively knowing if a goal is scored their defensive set ups will be unsettled for 30-40 seconds after the bounce.
This.

The 666 rule I don't mind as a "reset" type feature. It makes the final stages more interesting if it's close as there is open space if you can get a quick clearance & get the ball fwd quickly... There's been a few cracking final 5 minutes to games this season IMO. For that alone I like it...

As you say, the playing on from kick ins then completely reverses that idea by allowing teams to hold it between the 50s and flood a side of the field anyway...

I reckon get rid of that & establish a hard limit on interchange rotations.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The King!

Chosen One
Aug 3, 2004
96,837
77,314
Backwater
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Cavs, Redsox, Patriots
On 6 6 6 I think not having the plus one makes teams play keeping off more early after stoppages and creates less overlap attack
 

robbieando

Moderator
Oct 9, 2001
15,900
8,269
Spitting Bars
AFL Club
Sydney
On 6 6 6 I think not having the plus one makes teams play keeping off more early after stoppages and creates less overlap attack
I think that would happen regardless. Adding in about 5 rules changes in one hit and not even trialing them at the AFL level was always going to have a negative effect. Coaches will be more defensive by nature, but once they think they have figured out the effects that's when they will attack more which is what we are seeing with West Coast and Brisbane.
 

The King!

Chosen One
Aug 3, 2004
96,837
77,314
Backwater
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Cavs, Redsox, Patriots
I think that would happen regardless. Adding in about 5 rules changes in one hit and not even trialing them at the AFL level was always going to have a negative effect. Coaches will be more defensive by nature, but once they think they have figured out the effects that's when they will attack more which is what we are seeing with West Coast and Brisbane.
i would have liked to see a pre season game with some sort of forced full game zone

have to have 2 in the forward 50 at all times or something
 

scaryness

Moderator
Oct 19, 2008
11,647
13,812
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys/Trail Blazers
It doesn’t achieve anything

The interchange cap

All these bulls**t things the umps are watching
Bingo.

The statistical trends of scoring going down, goal accuracy going down, and clangers being at an all-time high every season? They all start when the interchange was lowered from 120 to 90.
 

S120

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 19, 2011
9,361
9,250
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Wallabies
Bingo.

The statistical trends of scoring going down, goal accuracy going down, and clangers being at an all-time high every season? They all start when the interchange was lowered from 120 to 90.
I hadn't thought of that. As I remember, that was brought in partly for aesthetics and partly because it was believed it would help congestion as the tired falter. Is that accurate?
 

scaryness

Moderator
Oct 19, 2008
11,647
13,812
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys/Trail Blazers
I hadn't thought of that. As I remember, that was brought in partly for aesthetics and partly because it was believed it would help congestion as the tired falter. Is that accurate?
AFL thought player fatigue would mean more long kicking which means more direct end-to-end movement and more oppurtunity for one-on-one contests if I recall.

The coaches obviously will only instruct their players to play the way they want them to play so they are playing the same way or even harder than before but the fatigue is now becoming a major problem and the #1 reason for the current issues in footy.

That's just my theory anyway. Still a small sample size overall but there is a correlatiom there.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

S120

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 19, 2011
9,361
9,250
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Wallabies
AFL thought player fatigue would mean more long kicking which means more direct end-to-end movement and more oppurtunity for one-on-one contests if I recall.

The coaches obviously will only instruct their players to play the way they want them to play so they are playing the same way or even harder than before but the fatigue is now becoming a major problem and the #1 reason for the current issues in footy.

That's just my theory anyway. Still a small sample size overall but there is a correlatiom there.
Makes sense to me.

I think player fatigue and the monumentally increased defensive pressure are the two biggest reasons we see so many errors in the current day game. Players have never been fitter or more hell-bent (on average) on tackling and defending as if their lives depend on it. Actual skill levels are probably about the same as they ever were or maybe better, I highly doubt they've deteriorated relative to previous decades. But the pressure has increased to such a level that the skills haven't been able to catch up to counter it.
 

mikey_san

Club Legend
Mar 17, 2012
2,976
2,755
AFL Club
Sydney
Instead of the AFL giving the Suns the No1 Pick (who will bolt anyway - and the picks they've had are ludicrous) they should give it to us.
We send JPK to Suns on a two year super nice payday (1 mill per) with JPK having the option to join the coaching staff on a 3rd year.
Everybody wins.
Hewett, Parker, Rowbottom, Rowell, can take our midfield from here.
GC get the glue they need to strengthen their team and a genuine gun.
AFL get to save the GC franchise.
Agreed?
 

GCB85

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 18, 2005
14,581
11,385
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Barely lifted his leg or touched him
He used a kicking action in the air and shifted him. In my opinion, the two actions seen in this one (raising the leg, then extending it) is exactly when the rule should be applied.

Re watched bits of the Essendon game last night. The Tippa free was a joke but the commentators said the hands went to the back so it was ok, despite there being no push. The absolute pisstake was in the last. Within less than one and half minutes of game time the following occurred.
1. Free kick out of the centre for a double action tackle against Parker. There was only one action and he let go of the player as soon as he disposed of it and well before he touched the surface.
2. Ruck infringement free against Allir for holding the man when he was being held, pushed high and then shifted off the ball illegal. Umpire had a clear line of sight and decided that all three of those weren't a free but a hold against Allir was justified.
3. Charging against McKernan. Sighted by the MRO and enough for a fine but not good enough for a 50 despite being late and making no attempt to actually spoil the ball.
4. Holding the ball against Blakey. No prior, both arms pinned, double action and head hitting the turf. Should have been a free to Blakey for a dangerous tackle (and how the fu** that wasn't sighted by the MRO i'll never know) or at the very least a ball up.

From that point onwards the Bombers took over. Four clear and blatant errors in a row. The Blakey and Parker ones being ruled in the exact opposite ways. There's a stench about what happened on the weekend and yet no a single mention in the media. It's a ******* joke and will continue to be while the club doesn't call it out. Seasons over anyway, put together a package of that sequence of play, release it publicly with questions on why they were considered correct decisions and demand a public response from the AFL. What are they going to do? Strip us of this years points?
 

Bloodied52

Premium Platinum
May 24, 2017
6,830
6,571
Old South Grandstand
AFL Club
Sydney
He used a kicking action in the air and shifted him. In my opinion, the two actions seen in this one (raising the leg, then extending it) is exactly when the rule should be applied.

Re watched bits of the Essendon game last night. The Tippa free was a joke but the commentators said the hands went to the back so it was ok, despite there being no push. The absolute pisstake was in the last. Within less than one and half minutes of game time the following occurred.
1. Free kick out of the centre for a double action tackle against Parker. There was only one action and he let go of the player as soon as he disposed of it and well before he touched the surface.
2. Ruck infringement free against Allir for holding the man when he was being held, pushed high and then shifted off the ball illegal. Umpire had a clear line of sight and decided that all three of those weren't a free but a hold against Allir was justified.
3. Charging against McKernan. Sighted by the MRO and enough for a fine but not good enough for a 50 despite being late and making no attempt to actually spoil the ball.
4. Holding the ball against Blakey. No prior, both arms pinned, double action and head hitting the turf. Should have been a free to Blakey for a dangerous tackle (and how the fu** that wasn't sighted by the MRO i'll never know) or at the very least a ball up.

From that point onwards the Bombers took over. Four clear and blatant errors in a row. The Blakey and Parker ones being ruled in the exact opposite ways. There's a stench about what happened on the weekend and yet no a single mention in the media. It's a ******* joke and will continue to be while the club doesn't call it out. Seasons over anyway, put together a package of that sequence of play, release it publicly with questions on why they were considered correct decisions and demand a public response from the AFL. What are they going to do? Strip us of this years points?
All spot on.

The media has bought into or been bullied to accept the AFL Edict that there be no discussion about umpiring.

I am not one to blame umps for losses. Our deplorable kicking for goal and abject general ball use consigned us to a loss. However I suspect poor and unfavorable umpiring gets in players' heads and makes them second guess tackles etc.

We copped execrable umpiring from half time on Saturday. Gil First Earl of McLaughlinland is so clueless on this issue I want to bring back Andy D. Mind you he did nothing about McLaren so maybe scratch that.

I am willing to bet C Scott and Geelong went berko about the umpiring they copped. I like to think Harley demanded an explanation but I'd bet against it.
 
Top Bottom