AFL Rule tampering nonsense

BRWB

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Posts
14,783
Likes
21,521
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
#51
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.
They just demand say 4 players per side stay in each 50 and pay frees at every stoppage when it doesnt happen. Coaches will learn to decongest.

Dont say they cant or won't do it. Or its stupid. We already have below the knees contact and the ruck nomination rules.

The AFL does stupid.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Do the Dew

Senior List
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Posts
156
Likes
145
Location
US and A
AFL Club
Richmond
#53
They introduced counter-productive rules a while back. A few years ago the whole point of rule changes was to speed up the game. Players taking a kick-in could play on pretty much straight away. However then the AFL got technical and:

No 3rd man up: Introduced to limit injuries, resulted in making it harder to clear congestion
Ruck nomination: Extra time pointing around for ruckman means more players get to the contest, instead of the ump just throwing the bloody thing up
Score review: Sorry defender, you can't take advantage of a point and play on quickly, you need to wait for the 90 second review to be inconclusive and for the other team to set up

If they rescinded some of these changes and threw the ball up quickly at a stoppage (or called for a ball up quicker), it would help a lot in easing congestion. All the little changes they make stifles organic growth of strategy that we see as certain game styles fall in and out of favour.
 

Carringbush2010

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Posts
4,437
Likes
2,421
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
#54
They just demand say 4 players per side stay in each 50 and pay frees at every stoppage when it doesnt happen. Coaches will learn to decongest.

Dont say they cant or won't do it. Or its stupid. We already have below the knees contact and the ruck nomination rules.

The AFL does stupid.
Well then that would be akin to forced zoning wouldn't it? Way to clear a stadium!, let's go watch netball with zones.

Not even HQ is that stupid.
 

SunshineTiger

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Posts
19,928
Likes
30,358
Location
Somewhere in Queensland
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea FC
#58
I can’t get over the scoring test, lower than 1968 which was played on sodden grounds , with waterlogged balls, it must the rain we have had in the first 4 weeks, now they want to call play on for a backwards pass, Gilligan and his team have royally ****** up our game it’s time to get like the vegans and organise a 1 game boycott to send them a message , leave our game alone
 

SunshineTiger

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Posts
19,928
Likes
30,358
Location
Somewhere in Queensland
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea FC
#59
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:
And yet as crazy as it sounds......netball has areas that some players can’t go into, and shot for brain dips Hocking is talking about it
 

Struggle

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Posts
5,852
Likes
9,125
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
#60
I can’t get over the scoring test, lower than 1968 which was played on sodden grounds , with waterlogged balls, it must the rain we have had in the first 4 weeks, now they want to call play on for a backwards pass, Gilligan and his team have royally ****** up our game it’s time to get like the vegans and organise a 1 game boycott to send them a message , leave our game alone
Play on from a backwards pass will only result in kick to kick long down the line, causing, you guessed it, more congestion and stoppages

Sounds exactly like something thei would bring in
 

Wallaby

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 8, 2007
Posts
8,290
Likes
8,700
Location
vic
AFL Club
Richmond
#61
Interchange baby.
Bingo. :cool::cool::cool::cool:

It all goes back to that - in 1978. Thats what led to the high-possession, flooding, athletes-instead-of-footballers, endless 20-metre chip kicks, stoppage congestion game we have today. Increasing it from 2 to 4 on the bench only made it worse. (We may still have had some of those now, but we'd be a lot less down the track).

If I had a time machine, the first thing I would do (well, after killing Mal Brown, re-hiring Tommy Hafey, and drafting Pav and Buddy;)) would be to stop interchange happening.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gaborone

Team Captain
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Posts
370
Likes
111
Location
North Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Norwich City FC
Thread starter #62
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.
Apart from the closeness of many of the matches and the inevitable excitement in the last few minutes when that happens MOST off the matches have been dreadful to watch. The matches consist of running mauls and short kicking.

If as Carringbush 2010 wrote: 'if anyone goes back 6 months you'll find it wasn't about more scoring it was about less congestion', then the rule changes have been a total FAIL.

AFL football is a TEAM game and great defence is just as exciting as great attacking play. It is ying and yang. Unfortunately, and once again, the AFL has been caught yang in hand.
 
Joined
May 20, 2009
Posts
1,429
Likes
608
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
29,327 posts
#64
666 will become a rule for every stoppage - the current rule is just to soften everyone up.
.
Can we get an ad break in for every stoppage reset? That would be cool. Or maybe some loud obnoxious music over the PA system you know cos the kids might get bored while they wait 5 seconds for a reset. Fireworks, smoke bombs... would love to see the AFL commission get penetrated between stoppages
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 20, 2009
Posts
1,429
Likes
608
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
29,327 posts
#65
Watch the game with an open mind this weekend. The new rules are helping to create new movement lines for the game. I tell you, it looked very very similar to rugby on the weekend, the ball movement from stoppages is rugby. The way players and numbers push forward into opposition tacklers ahead working for a stoppage for a few metres gained is rugby. The new kick in rule creates rugby style cluster similar to when they kick in. Our game can never be fixed now it’s ruined for good . RIP Aussie Rules Football.
 

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
#67
The 6-6-6 isn't even an issue compared to the rest of our ill-thought out rules that encourage opposite behaviours

For example

Protecting the legs free kick = discourages getting lower

Protecting the head free kick = encourages getting lower


Now we have this shitshow where multiple players go after the ball, keeping their feet with their torso bent parallel to the ground to
a) avoid giving away a free below the knees
b) drawing a head high free kick

Its dreadful to watch. Players need to be able to get down low and grab the ball if their opponent is haunched over it and trying to pick it up.

We praise players for 'keeping their feet' so often, but sometimes the right thing to do is not to do that. The Cyril Rioli effort on the wing in the 2008 Grand Final would have been a free kick to Max Rooke under the current 'protecting the legs' free kick arrangement.
Agreed I don't really have that much of an issue with the 666 it's all the other poor umpiring/rules that are the issue.

If it were up to me I'd remove some players from the field. Ovals are the same size as 120 years ago but the players are now elite athletes both burst and endurance yet we still have 18 players covering a field. Removing players from the field will open it up and also make zoning close to impossible due to the spaces between the zone being too large to cover. This will force teams to go 1:1.

For some reason this is anathema to supporters and ex-player commentators even though it wouldn't alter the fundamental rules of the game at all. The game would still be played the same way just with 2-4 fewer players per team.

Fewer players also means fewer fringe players getting a game and a chance to spread the talent more evenly across the competition.
 
Last edited:

greatwhiteshark

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Posts
9,470
Likes
8,426
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
#68
I can’t get over the scoring test, lower than 1968 which was played on sodden grounds , with waterlogged balls, it must the rain we have had in the first 4 weeks, now they want to call play on for a backwards pass, Gilligan and his team have royally ****** up our game it’s time to get like the vegans and organise a 1 game boycott to send them a message , leave our game alone
To late, needed to do that in 1990 while the sport was still Aussie Rules Football.
 

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
#71
Removing prior opportunity after a teammate has handballed you the ball would solve a lot of issues.
This keeps getting a run, I think it would be absolutely ridiculous. So the bloke dives in to win the hard ball and hands it off to a teammate with the opposition just sitting off/scragging waiting to tackle and get the holding the ball free kick?

This "team prior opportunity" is a shitthouse idea promoted by nuffies.
 
Last edited:

Tiger Toffee

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 22, 2014
Posts
11,134
Likes
32,795
Location
Punt Rd to Goodison Park
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Everton
#72
This keeps getting a run, I think it would be absolutely ridiculous. So the bloke dives in to win the hard ball and hands it off to a teammate with the opposition just sitting off/scratching waiting to tackle and get the holding the ball free kick?

This "team prior opportunity" is a shitthouse idea promoted by nuffies.
It really makes you wonder if people actually think things through, some of the suggestions on here are mind boggling and that handball thing is one of them.
 

SunshineTiger

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Posts
19,928
Likes
30,358
Location
Somewhere in Queensland
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea FC
#73
Watch the game with an open mind this weekend. The new rules are helping to create new movement lines for the game. I tell you, it looked very very similar to rugby on the weekend, the ball movement from stoppages is rugby. The way players and numbers push forward into opposition tacklers ahead working for a stoppage for a few metres gained is rugby. The new kick in rule creates rugby style cluster similar to when they kick in. Our game can never be fixed now it’s ruined for good . RIP Aussie Rules Football.
I reckon it’s a union and league hybrid now , totally ******
 

SunshineTiger

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Posts
19,928
Likes
30,358
Location
Somewhere in Queensland
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea FC
#74
Agreed I don't really have that much of an issue with the 666 it's all the other poor umpiring/rules that are the issue.

If it were up to me I'd remove some players from the field. Ovals are the same size as 120 years ago but the players are now elite athletes both burst and endurance yet we still have 18 players covering a field. Removing players from the field will open it up and also make zoning close to impossible due to the spaces between the zone being too large to cover. This will force teams to go 1:1.

For some reason this is anathema to supporters and ex-player commentators even though it wouldn't alter the fundamental rules of the game at all. The game would still be played the same way just with 2-4 fewer players per team.

Fewer players also means fewer fringe players getting a game and a chance to spread the talent more evenly across the competition.
And you will end up with AFLX is that what you want?
 

dumb

i shit blue
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Posts
9,907
Likes
3,169
Location
Vic
AFL Club
Carlton
#75
if a rule lowers scoring it will very quickly be on the scrapheap. can't have a rule created for the benefit of sponsors that ends up costing them.

as for other rules... you could toss a coin as to whether the afl actually give a shit. a lot of rule changes are based on public sentiment, afl fans often only have themselves to blame.
 
Top Bottom