Congestion and the rules

[JoondalupJ]

Just read where Nthan Buckley thinks the new idea od a cleared area at ball ups and some new ideas about the game wil stop the flow of the game?????
Seriously I cannot believe that he would think that, for starters the rules that are used to call frees that are more or less fouls like in basketball they are so mild , in a speed game with big people running and contesting most of the frees called , YES MOST OF THEM, are accidents or incidental touching.
Every second or sio a whistle goes and the game STOPS!! How can a coach say that zoning will stop flow, it is a ridiculous comment just in itself , the stop start of the game now days by the rules creates congestion and unfair free kicks and it needs to be fixed up right now! Not next year. We already have umpiring decisions change the game outlook for different sides on lots of occasions.
To a point of winning or losing and momentum destroyed bu free kicks that are sop minimal in effect that the player getting the kick should NOT BE GETTING IT, if others do not witness this then you are blind.
I have a lot of time for Bucks , I was really pleased when he was given the benefit and left as senior coach, he is good , but calling out a zoning start at bounces that may cut congestion as wrong, is crazy.

The rules as called by umpires now is appalling , and on I believe at least yes at least, 50% unfair.

We always had reasons over the decades to make fun and have fun with umpires , but noe days its wrecked the contest , and Bucks is looking at the wrong thing.
STOP STOP STOP is the rule of the game these days, with umpires too much in control. Including hurrying players up who are having a shot.

 

[JoondalupJ]

Just read where Nathan Buckley thinks the new idea of a cleared area at ball ups and some new ideas about the game will stop the flow of the game?????
Seriously I cannot believe that he would think that, for starters the rules that are used to call frees that are more or less fouls like in basketball they are so mild , in a speed game with big people running and contesting, most of the frees called , YES MOST OF THEM, are accidents or incidental touching.
Every second or so a whistle goes and the game STOPS!! How can a coach say that zoning will stop flow, it is a ridiculous comment just in itself ,.
The stop start of the game now days by the rules, creates congestion and unfair free kicks and it needs to be fixed up right now! Not next year.
We already have umpiring decisions change the game outlook for different sides on lots of occasions.
To a point of winning or losing, then momentum destroyed by free kicks paid for so minimal offence to the point where the player getting the kick should NOT BE GETTING IT, the frees are in the main UNFAIR. And grey! And get called all the time it makes you want to give up. This is not a contest!

I have a lot of time for Bucks , I was really pleased when he was given the benefit and left as senior coach at the Pies, he is good .

But calling out a zoning start at bounces as wrong , and saying that it may not cut congestion, and saying its going to stop the flow well thats wrong, it is crazy.

The rules as called by umpires now days is appalling , and I believe at least, yes at least, 50% unfair.

We always had reasons over the decades to make fun and have fun with umpires , but now days they wreck the contest, and continually STOP the game .

Bucks is looking at the wrong thing, THE TERRIBLE CALLS FOR ANY SLIGHTEST THING THATS THE PROBLEM .

STOP STOP STOP is the rule of the game these days, with umpires too much in control. Including hurrying players up who are having a shot.
THAT IS JUST GOING OVER BOARD , THIS GAME IS NOT ABOUT UMPIRES, either.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Question:

Was he commenting as a coach? Or as a viewer?

 

[Americanpies]

Many of the rules are abused by coaches, and if the free kicks aren't given then how can the game be played.

An example is the chopping of the arms. It is a deliberate tactic concocted by some coach at some point to prevent big full forwards from marking the ball. It is only a recent phenomenon. Why didn't it happen 50 years ago? Sportsmanship. A lot of the BS like this that happens these days is because coaches are all about the win and could care less about sportsmanship... in other words sports.. all sports have gone ugly because of this 'nothing is more important than the win' attitude. Sportsmanship and fair play are actually more important than winning and because of the dilution of these values in sport, we find ourselves at the point we are now with all major sports. Neymar in the World Cup was just horrible to watch with his writhing around like he had just been shot. It's the same as the dropping the knees for the push in the back. Same as ducking the head into the tackle. And the same as dropping the shoulder so the tackle goes high. This is all coming from coaches to get some kind of edge. I don't know how you can stop giving away free kicks when players are going to be doing tactics like this. Nobody will ever mark a ball again if arm chopping is free reign.

 

[deck]

Many of the rules are abused by coaches, and if the free kicks aren't given then how can the game be played.

An example is the chopping of the arms. It is a deliberate tactic concocted by some coach at some point to prevent big full forwards from marking the ball. It is only a recent phenomenon. Why didn't it happen 50 years ago?

Are you kidding. I grew being taught to chop the arms when defending a marking player. And yes it was happening 50 years ago.

 

[PhatBoy]

It has probably been noted numerous times but I'd assume that the sheer superhuman fitness of the modern player has meant that just about everyone on the ground is capable of running almost non-stop in some capacity across four quarters - the interchange rule obviously aiding it.

It means players can commit to contests and areas of the field that they otherwise don't need to be in, knowing that they can quickly get back to where they need to be. Forwards roaming up to their HB area for example, defenders drifting right up the ground knowing they can chase back if need be and at least 50-50 a contest.

I would prefer to see the interchange number dropped dramatically before a zoning rule came in, just to try and force players to be a bit more judicial with how often they commit to getting near the ball and the congested area. Knowing they can't just duck off for a quick blow after making a big run up the other end of the field simply to match the numbers at a stoppage would probably discourage a lot of guys from doing it.

As stupid as it sounds, I'd also love to see a coach of one of the sides with nothing to gain in the last few rounds, to try a tactic where they simply don't ask their side to try and get numbers around every stoppage - back the contested ball winners to win the ball and make use of the numerical advantage you automatically have outside the area.

I very very much doubt it would achieve anything but I'd love to see how often, if at all, it could work.

 

[JoondalupJ]

Many of the rules are abused by coaches, and if the free kicks aren't given then how can the game be played.

An example is the chopping of the arms. It is a deliberate tactic concocted by some coach at some point to prevent big full forwards from marking the ball. It is only a recent phenomenon. Why didn't it happen 50 years ago? Sportsmanship. A lot of the BS like this that happens these days is because coaches are all about the win and could care less about sportsmanship... in other words sports.. all sports have gone ugly because of this 'nothing is more important than the win' attitude. Sportsmanship and fair play are actually more important than winning and because of the dilution of these values in sport, we find ourselves at the point we are now with all major sports. Neymar in the World Cup was just horrible to watch with his writhing around like he had just been shot. It's the same as the dropping the knees for the push in the back. Same as ducking the head into the tackle. And the same as dropping the shoulder so the tackle goes high. This is all coming from coaches to get some kind of edge. I don't know how you can stop giving away free kicks when players are going to be doing tactics like this. Nobody will ever mark a ball again if arm chopping is free reign.

Well look I played amatuer football many many years ago in the mid to late 70's, and the fact is that coaches used to say if you can't get to the ball and the bloke in front is too high "Punch his arms" .

It was very very common. It was introduced as a law to NOT PUNCH ARMS , only in the last few years, once upon a time a defender could defend, but the AFL thought we need more scoring, and the forwards were given a hit up by this rule that made it easier than to actually not hold a mark but get a free instead .
What happened then was the players changed and started sideway goals and dribble kicks and half the blokes can't kick a straight drop punt, two new clubs came in , the player pool diluted and the skill level dropped and the NO PUNCHING OF ARMS came in and defenders may as well have just not even tried.
Of course people like Jack Riewolt can take marks under any conditions , he is a real footballer, lots cannot handle the pressure , real pack marking and contested marking players are few and far between right now. Jack can not only jump and hold , he can hold his ground and take a chest mark to with blokes all over him!

Jason Dunstall used to, Buddy wasn't that good at high marks but athleticism and ball handling skills saved him. Imagine Tony Lockett he could jump hold and be attacked from all sides, and still mark. Josh Kennedy from the Eagles can do that , he just holds them , Roughy can too but not like he used to.

"No punching of the arms" is unfortunately very very new. But of course when some tricky stupid interpretation of one individual comes in as a rule , yep they got to pay it, I'm saying it shouldn't be a rule, like the excessive 50 metre penalties , and all the other stuff like incidental and accidental touching that gives umpires the ability to change or read a rule however he /she wants to.

It is bloody dangerous, and an opening for cheating, besides being unfair that these umpires have much too much influence in games.

Meritorious playing of football wins games, not an umpire causing doubtful frees that sometimes get teams goals, that happens, it just happens, if that's the game now , then I've started losing something I bloody worship as a sport.

And I DON'T blame the umpires I blame the bureaucrats inside the AFL administration, who have sold us all out.

The game still looks good when top teams are moving freely, against each other but some games are cruel to watch.

And the big issue for me is that the rule changes from before in the last ten years and the introduction of GWS and GC17 well its not about how well or how lousy they go, its about draining the pool from other traditional football state clubs suffer, loomk at Freo, look at Carlton , look at the Saints , even look at Melbourne world beaters , then they become brow beaters, with nothing going for them, and they've been raved about as the next big mover , yeah???

That's how hard the rules and the expansion has stuffed up footy for probably about ten clubs. Melbourne is a great example of promise then nothing!

An elite AFL senior forward or anybody for that matter should be good enough to take a grab and hold it. No matter who is punching his arms.

 

[JoondalupJ]

It has probably been noted numerous times but I'd assume that the sheer superhuman fitness of the modern player has meant that just about everyone on the ground is capable of running almost non-stop in some capacity across four quarters - the interchange rule obviously aiding it.

It means players can commit to contests and areas of the field that they otherwise don't need to be in, knowing that they can quickly get back to where they need to be. Forwards roaming up to their HB area for example, defenders drifting right up the ground knowing they can chase back if need be and at least 50-50 a contest.

I would prefer to see the interchange number dropped dramatically before a zoning rule came in, just to try and force players to be a bit more judicial with how often they commit to getting near the ball and the congested area. Knowing they can't just duck off for a quick blow after making a big run up the other end of the field simply to match the numbers at a stoppage would probably discourage a lot of guys from doing it.

As stupid as it sounds, I'd also love to see a coach of one of the sides with nothing to gain in the last few rounds, to try a tactic where they simply don't ask their side to try and get numbers around every stoppage - back the contested ball winners to win the ball and make use of the numerical advantage you automatically have outside the area.

I very very much doubt it would achieve anything but I'd love to see how often, if at all, it could work.

I like your comments and the game is geared today for everyman to be on the ball. Its getting like little league.

Also these super athletes , well they are so on the edge of perfection with fitness like a bloody thoroughbred race horse that the injury list gets bigger and bigger each year.
I would love to see it slow down and open up and have some real contested ball and contested skills, and we should see it in every match every week, but we don't.
The AFL sees only dollars, and if you reckon the last 10 or so years, haven't seen the footy manipulated for that purpose by administration and coaches , well you are not watching the same sport as me. Win no matter what , we have nearly lost what a game is.

Oh, once upon a time , players in position could move to other areas to help and if they were good enough and plenty did, but you know what, the coach always said when you leave your position make sure you can get back to it, at pace , as quick as you can. But you can help out if you feel capable in any given situation.
But now every ones' a rover!