Strategy AFL will assess new rules for another season
- Thread starter THE THIN MAN
- Start date
- Tagged users None
We will go undefeated
Jack5
Cancelled
Richmond Tigers - Josh Gibcus Player Sponsor 2022
Richmond Tigers - Kamdyn McIntosh Player Sponsor 2022
- Sep 15, 2017
- 929
- 3,442
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Longer quarters, less rotations, longer season, back at the G, a massive advantage for our endurance / repeat sprint machines.
Manning the mark from behind is going to be interesting - standby for some soft frees against us and allowing oppo to get away with way worse. This will be one of those rule changes where Dickhead pulls out one of his made up stats half way through the season to justify the change. What a flog.
On balance, allowing for major injuries to key players at the pointy end of the season hard to see us going worse than this year.
Manning the mark from behind is going to be interesting - standby for some soft frees against us and allowing oppo to get away with way worse. This will be one of those rule changes where Dickhead pulls out one of his made up stats half way through the season to justify the change. What a flog.
On balance, allowing for major injuries to key players at the pointy end of the season hard to see us going worse than this year.
JackGraham
If he kicks it we win
- Nov 1, 2017
- 296
- 3,017
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Soberian Tiger
Borat's cousin twice removed from village
- Jul 25, 2018
- 1,118
- 5,997
- AFL Club
- Richmond
I bolded the two points that are EXTREMELY relevant to congestion, yet are never talked about in AFL circles (and it does my ******* head in).
sHocking is worried about congestion, yet brings in the ruck nom rule. All of a sudden, the ump spend an extra 5+ seconds looking around, directing traffic, and calling for the ruck nomination. In those 5 seconds, players can easily cover 30-40m, and often in the background of contests prior to the ball up (or ball in), you see a lot of players streaming in to the contest.
I heard that his pets Geelong were intentionally nominating a couple of players to go up (anyone of Stanley, Ratugolea, Blicavs, Porkins), all of who are genuine ruckmen. While they decide, it allow more players to run to the contest, creating more congestion around the ball.
The answer as you say, is to just throw the thing up faster. If the ruckmen aren't there, or if there is only 1, tough s**t for the other team. If a 3rd man goes up, free kick against. And if players can't work out between themselves who is rucking, then that's their problem. As long as the competing ruckmen are in front of the umpire (i.e. a ruckman can't sprint in from 20m away and crash into a bloke), then it's all good. I also do like your idea of the ruckmen engaging each other and how this needs to be adjudicated.
Again, why has throwing the ball up faster never even been raised as a possible solution? The only time I've ever heard any AFL media talk about it, was when Nick Riewoldt brought it up on AFL360 back in the 2018 state-of-the-game arguments. And for whatever reason, he was quickly shot down and never given the chance to raise the issue again by Slobbo and Whateley. I don't believe there's a Geelong-central conspiracy going on, cause that's quite frankly ridiculous, but I can't fathom why throwing the ball up faster hasn't ever been an answer, instead of these bullshit little tinkering rules (that are proven to not increase scoring) and the push towards zones
Soberian Tiger
Borat's cousin twice removed from village
- Jul 25, 2018
- 1,118
- 5,997
- AFL Club
- Richmond
There may not be a Geelong rules conspiracy, but there's definitely a strong attachment to clearances as they stand. Richmond was the odd one out of the top teams - the one that didn't give a tinker's cuss about clearances, although that changed in the prelim and grannie this year.
One only has to look at how Geelong set up for the bounce, with Dangerfield often facing away from goal so that he either had to handball or wheel round towards goal to see how critical clearance structures are to C Scott.
Throw ins or ball ups are, of course, more chaotic than centre bounces, but every second of delay there is crucial for around the ground clearance set pieces.
If the ball was simply put back into play quickly with no ruck nomination, I am quite certain that this would favour Richmond, as the chaotic structures that would eventuate should find them more adaptable and able to crank the pressure up by keeping the ball in play more often.
It is ironic that given all the rule changes that have supposedly 'helped" Richmond, the one that hasn't been introduced is the one that could make the biggest difference to both the game and the Tiges.
One only has to look at how Geelong set up for the bounce, with Dangerfield often facing away from goal so that he either had to handball or wheel round towards goal to see how critical clearance structures are to C Scott.
Throw ins or ball ups are, of course, more chaotic than centre bounces, but every second of delay there is crucial for around the ground clearance set pieces.
If the ball was simply put back into play quickly with no ruck nomination, I am quite certain that this would favour Richmond, as the chaotic structures that would eventuate should find them more adaptable and able to crank the pressure up by keeping the ball in play more often.
It is ironic that given all the rule changes that have supposedly 'helped" Richmond, the one that hasn't been introduced is the one that could make the biggest difference to both the game and the Tiges.
- Feb 14, 2014
- 5,272
- 12,733
- AFL Club
- Richmond
All these rule changes have me thinking that the wrong staff members from AFL House were let go due to COVID. Worst ******* rule changes ever. All it is going to do is make the players never actually man the actual mark and then the ump will make a mistake and get abused by all and sundry. I expect this rule to be forgotten or gone by the bye.
After it gifts Carlspoon 7+ goals Rd 1...they'll still lose by 30.
Jack5
Cancelled
Richmond Tigers - Josh Gibcus Player Sponsor 2022
Richmond Tigers - Kamdyn McIntosh Player Sponsor 2022
- Sep 15, 2017
- 929
- 3,442
- AFL Club
- Richmond
The man on the mark rule can't work without other supporting details. As others have already pointed out, stand 1 m behind the mark and run laterally where you want. They would have to have an exclusion zone.
And there are other situations where a literal interpretation will be dumb. Player gives away free kick for a late bump, free kick downfield. Offending player has to man the mark but cant come from behind to man the mark, how is he going to get there. How long has he got to get there. Would not be surprised if an ump gives 50 against us in R1 in this situation and marches oppo all the way to the goal square before they realise what a mistake they've made. The "make AFL great again" (as so aptly described by Niall) team at AFL house are idiots.
And there are other situations where a literal interpretation will be dumb. Player gives away free kick for a late bump, free kick downfield. Offending player has to man the mark but cant come from behind to man the mark, how is he going to get there. How long has he got to get there. Would not be surprised if an ump gives 50 against us in R1 in this situation and marches oppo all the way to the goal square before they realise what a mistake they've made. The "make AFL great again" (as so aptly described by Niall) team at AFL house are idiots.
- Oct 11, 2003
- 9,464
- 11,384
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- tigers
afl are a bunch of moronic bed wetters
- Oct 4, 2016
- 7,397
- 11,648
- AFL Club
- Richmond
don't mind changes so long as they're thought through and if they don't turn out the improve the game ditch them. some have been positive. 6.6.6 for instance.
The problem is puts the heat on umpires and they always cop it to unfairly because of theses changes yearly hate to be in there boots.
RiskingHead
Premium Platinum
- Aug 2, 2019
- 196
- 419
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Hocking: "We just want more time and space back in the game, the fans are looking for a better balance between defence and attack, and the game has definitely swayed to towards defence. My role in that as custodian of it is to make sure the right things are introduced to open the game back up, and to have more Dustin Martin moments that he did in the Grand Final, where he was able to find space, and we would like to create more of those – that's my role and I'm committed to finding that space."
He really hasn't a clue. This is Dusty, just prior to kicking each of his goals. He had neither time nor space. Which was exactly what made them Dustin Martin moments. Can Hocking really be so obtuse?
He really hasn't a clue. This is Dusty, just prior to kicking each of his goals. He had neither time nor space. Which was exactly what made them Dustin Martin moments. Can Hocking really be so obtuse?
- Jul 26, 2018
- 1,044
- 4,405
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Can some one tell me if the new rule for man on the mark mean that what Vlas is doing will be 50m next year? (44 Secs in)
Was just watching the 2017QF Highlights as you do, and saw it.
Was just watching the 2017QF Highlights as you do, and saw it.
Foley#41
Tin Foil Hat
Sir_Loin
🏆🏆🏆
love the AFL. Make you think they’re giving you something when it shouldn’t have been taken away in the first place
Sir_Loin
🏆🏆🏆
good question. Not 100% sure. But I suspect vlas will get a 50 in that example because:
a. He plays for Richmond
b. There’s enough wriggle room to penalise the tiges any chance the AFL gets
Similar threads
