AFL Rule tampering nonsense

RUNVS

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 28, 2007
Posts
32,976
Likes
29,218
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
#26
What I find most annoying is that the AFL proposed a raft of big rule changes to improve scoring, and then there was a massive outcry, so the AFL scaled back their ideas massively. Now that those scaled back ideas are not working (which of course they aren't as they were massively watered down) people are again complaining.

If the people let the AFL at least trial the rule changes they had proposed maybe the game in 2019 would be better for it. I guess we will never know.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BRWB

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Posts
14,783
Likes
21,521
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
#27
666 will become a rule for every stoppage - the current rule is just to soften everyone up.

The below the knees rule goes against the basic tenet of footy of just getting the ball. The ruck nomination is just bizarre.

Been to quite a few games where fans of both sides are just puzzled by the umpiring a fair bit of the time.

Game has too many interpretive rules.

The hands in the back was clear but they bring back more grey and more puzzlement.
 

D-N-R

Club Legend
Joined
Apr 4, 2005
Posts
2,353
Likes
2,535
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
WCE
#28
What I find most annoying is that the AFL proposed a raft of big rule changes to improve scoring, and then there was a massive outcry, so the AFL scaled back their ideas massively. Now that those scaled back ideas are not working (which of course they aren't as they were massively watered down) people are again complaining.

If the people let the AFL at least trial the rule changes they had proposed maybe the game in 2019 would be better for it. I guess we will never know.
We've just had a 36 game trial. What conclusions would you draw from that?
 

Gaborone

Team Captain
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Posts
370
Likes
111
Location
North Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Norwich City FC
Thread starter #29
What I find most annoying is that the AFL proposed a raft of big rule changes to improve scoring, and then there was a massive outcry, so the AFL scaled back their ideas massively. Now that those scaled back ideas are not working (which of course they aren't as they were massively watered down) people are again complaining.

If the people let the AFL at least trial the rule changes they had proposed maybe the game in 2019 would be better for it. I guess we will never know.

But the question remains why did the AFL need to change the rules to 'improve scoring'. What vision do they have for AFL football? What is the agenda?
 

Dazzler10

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Posts
3,033
Likes
7,361
Location
Te Fiti
AFL Club
West Coast
#30
666 starting positions were never going to achieve much. Bouncedown happens, then run where you like.

The kick-in rule. I've noticed more kickers are taking on the defender to break a line and going for a bit of a dash. I think this rule is actually not bad.

However we are still seeing loads of congestion. The only way to fix that, if that is the desired outcome, is to reduce the number of players or reduce the number of interchanges.
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
4,253
Likes
2,767
AFL Club
Collingwood
#32
But the question remains why did the AFL need to change the rules to 'improve scoring'. What vision do they have for AFL football? What is the agenda?
The rules were changed to open the game up. The vision in a rules sense is the principles that were adopted in 2014
 

Struggle

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Posts
5,852
Likes
9,125
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
#33
The kick in rule is counterproductive to higher scoring. Allowing teams to easily advance to the wing limits the opportunity for repeat entries and building up of pressure. Removing 3rd man up only increases congestion.

As usual, the league implements more poorly thought out untrialled rules. Anything being considered should have at least 12 months at the lower levels before being considered in the AFL.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2004
Posts
1,290
Likes
263
Location
Under the Punt Rd Stand
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
#34
How is having a clump of players in forward line and a clump of players in the backline, not allowed to get involved in the play, attractive or useful?

It implies that there is less clear space to break to. That's about all.

What is next, players are spread out evenly and nailed to the ground so they don't group up or look untidy?
Why?
 

falcons2

All Australian
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Posts
797
Likes
644
Location
Melbourne OuterEast
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#35
Generally the rule tweaks are all good, but they have no relationship to the lack of scoring. The problem is the mindset of coaching. It appears to be don't lose or if you do make sure its by not too much. My observation is teams are not playing to win.

It has become a bit like a long distance bike race - hang in there, then position yourself for the sprint to the line.
 

Demonic Ascent

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Posts
14,148
Likes
9,619
Location
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
NY Jets, Boston Celtics, WADA
#36
Not sure why we needed to change the rules to create higher scores in the 1st place, were they losing crowds and money? And fwiw I personally enjoy lower scoring games as the goals mean more when they come.
Channel 7 wants more goals for more ad breaks
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lsta062

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Posts
9,337
Likes
17,687
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea
#37
Here’s what I have to say about it and I have a bit to say. I think the frequent rule changes that’s been happening lately is not only affecting the level of talent in the AFL, but also the level of talent in grassroot footy.

You grow up playing a certain way and with certain rules and then are expected to play with this strange formation and odd rules when you are drafted into the AFL. Mind you, you never had to account for some of these rules before. Surely it will impact your skill level at AFL level.

The way this game predominantly used to be is that the coaches tried to counteract each other’s strategy to try and win the Premiership. What the focus of the coaches seem to be nowadays is trying to counteract the rules set by the AFL so that their group of players are impacted by the rule changes the least. What in the world? Is there any other sport out there that drastically changes the rules so frequently? Banning the 3rd man up, introduction and removal of the sub, 6-6-6, deliberate etc. These are not minor changes because with most of these rule changes (specifically the ones that ban something) you limit the creativity the coaches can have.

The intention behind 6-6-6 was to produce a free-flowing and high-scoring game. However, its introduction just looks like unnecessary micromanaging since we are sitting here with the lowest scores we have seen in years after 4 rounds of the season. In general, it just looks like the players, coaches, umpires and supporters are just confused a lot of the time.

AFL, if supporters of the game say to leave the sport alone, then it is in your best interest to leave it alone because these supporters know why they were interested in this sport to begin with and why they have stuck with it. Don’t mess around with the consumers of your game.
 

Tiger Toffee

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 22, 2014
Posts
11,134
Likes
32,794
Location
Punt Rd to Goodison Park
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Everton
#42
666 will become a rule for every stoppage - the current rule is just to soften everyone up.
Bullshit it will. Would not last one JLT game, imagine the whole ground re-setting every 1 minute on a rain soaked ground, qtrs would go for an hour.

Throw in, reset
1 minute later a ball up, reset
ball goes out 45 seconds later, reset

Get ******. :rolleyes:
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2000
Posts
66,277
Likes
25,986
Location
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
#43
I'll have you know they stress tested these rule changes over a grueling 2 VFL matches, and a few clubs training match sims which showed them all they needed to see in regards to the benefits. Plus the AFLW trialled them, too.

Crazy, right?
Truth be told I'm glad it's blowing up in their ******* fatcat faces. I'm sick and tired of rule changes every year.
...then introduced a significantly different set of rules. What’s not to like. Plenty of effort was put into the PR games committees tame commentators etc
 

Boxhead_31

Rompinwins is my Chauffeur
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Posts
32,451
Likes
41,658
Location
This Drinking Team has a Football Problem
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
South BHFL, 49ers
#45
One of the problems with changing the rules is that the people doing it are trying to outsmart the coaches. Coaches don’t give a shit about aesthetics, their job depends on winning. Despite some outliers they are often pretty smart tactically.

For example, if I were in charge, I would lean towards severely restricting the interchange as I believe players would have to play more positionally to conserve energy. However, this would probably lead to club strategists recruiting endurance athletes, teaching them basic skills and we get the same congested crap only played with less skill and intensity.

The problem with AFL rule changes is that they are often implemented in a culture of corporate ignorance where key stakeholders such as fans, and those directly affected by changes like players, coaches and umpires are ignored. Rather than recognising this, when the new rules basically have the counter effect, the AFL introduces more changes to try and undo their own mistakes. It’s like they base their attitude to rule changes on the old lady who swallowed a fly.
Simple then, take the coaches out of it. Make 6-6-6 be in place for all bounces and throw-ins.
Coaches don't want goals now because it leaves their backlines exposed
 

Carringbush2010

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Posts
4,437
Likes
2,421
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
#46
Interesting conversation, my money's on if anyone goes back 6 months you'll find it wasn't about more scoring it was about less congestion.

Can anyone correct me here? No., how the F has everyone been sucked into the "more scoring" with sheep like mentality?

Has there been less congestion? Certainly at the centre bounces.
 

BRWB

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Posts
14,783
Likes
21,521
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
#47
Bullshit it will. Would not last one JLT game, imagine the whole ground re-setting every 1 minute on a rain soaked ground, qtrs would go for an hour.

Throw in, reset
1 minute later a ball up, reset
ball goes out 45 seconds later, reset

Get ******. :rolleyes:
Didnt say I liked it. Bet you the Afl will start pushing for zones. Guys like Matthews want it. 666 after goals is just the start. they will say it works but the rest of the game is f $cked and zones at stoppages will be the panacea for congestion and low scoring.
 

Carringbush2010

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Posts
4,437
Likes
2,421
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
#48
666 will become a rule for every stoppage
And clubs will no longer employ / draft footballers, they'll draft Kenyans instead, teach some uber basic ball skills to ensure they can get back to position for each stoppage and then make the next contest.

Also the game will now go for 9 - 12 hours because the umps will be waiting for every player to get back to position before the throw in / ball up.
 

sorted

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Posts
4,981
Likes
6,290
AFL Club
Geelong
#49
Apologies - only -7 points per team per game from 2018 and -9 (have corrected the original post) from the average but having said that what the dickens were Hocking and AFL inc. thinking when they decided to meddle with the rules to create 'a more high scoring game'. What needed changing? Your correction of the maths actually highlights the fact that the decision didn't make sense in the off season and makes even less sense now.

Was the decision ideological - ie. a preference for one type of football over another, for example, the Geelong/Essendon style c.f the Hawthorn/ West Coast style?
We're only talking about an average difference per team of just over a goal per game. I don't think it's a big deal in itself especially after only 4 rounds. Let's see how it plays out over a season.

I think the AFL would be more concerned that several games have been absolutely dreadful to watch. They will tinker with the game rules if it continues. What they won't admit is that this could be due to the wider AFL policies. Equalisation means that teams are closer in ability than ever before - so could be able to cancel each other out in games. And expansion means that 80 players are now on lists that previously would not have been good enough to get an AFL contract.
 

Tiger Toffee

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 22, 2014
Posts
11,134
Likes
32,794
Location
Punt Rd to Goodison Park
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Everton
#50
Didnt say I liked it. Bet you the Afl will start pushing for zones. Guys like Matthews want it. 666 after goals is just the start. they will say it works but the rest of the game is f $cked and zones at stoppages will be the panacea for congestion and low scoring.
Crowds and tv viewers would plummet, i would be done with AFL if they introduced that. It would be like NFL and that game is as boring as batshit with the stop start nature of that game.
 
Top Bottom