Dealing with congestion

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mr Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 1, 2010
Posts
15,910
Likes
7,379
AFL Club
Richmond
There's been some pretty good footy between 93 and now.

Players before that used to dispose as quickly as possible or they got physically smashed. that doesnt happen now as the violence has been toned down. Now they hold by whatever means until a high rewrd option is available. THAT is the set of the issue. in the past the quick disposal led to a series of unpredicable panic situations. semi professional or sem amateur. I dont think watchers would like that vibe either.

But ffs deal with the issue at the source not try to change peripheral stuff

Its good that the AFL is at least doing trials rather than misinterpreting data


(In any case in the 'good old days' if a team got three goals up they then 'went the boundary line' and neutralised any contest whatsoever)
Thats interesting because the better footy was played before 93 IMO
 

cleomenes

Club Legend
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Posts
1,441
Likes
1,943
Location
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #253
I just read a comment from Pyke about unintended consequences of rule changes. How right he is. It would help matters greatly if the rules people acknowledged that the interchange and holding the ball interpretations are at the heart of the congestion problems.
The solutions are complex, since the genie has to be inserted into a bottle it really doesn't want to return to, but the answer lies in going back to the rules of the seventies, and adjusting them to cope with modern player safety realities. This means for instance that a return to 19th and 20th rules as they were then won't be acceptable because of player injury concerns. Work with this to find a way of getting injured players on and off safely without allowing coaches to abuse whatever system is arrived at for tactical purposes. There are a lot of possible ways to do this. Do a thorough analysis to find the best one.
Once, a player caught with the ball had to get rid of it legally straight away. He was better off if he did so just before a tackle because he had control of the disposal. Now, he is better off to fold up and hold the ball in, because there will more than likely be a ball up. This encourages bulls at the expense of the skilled.
It is not possible to turn the clock back; the game has become too professional, but with serious thought and the courage to defy the coaches, the game could be restored to some of its former glory.
 

shaqsuns

Club Legend
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Posts
1,137
Likes
857
Location
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Cavaliers
Iv given up with the AFL, I truly believe that they will completely blow this review and come up with an idea that wont eradicate the problem and in 12 months time we will still be talking about congestion, and how to get rid of it.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2000
Posts
63,922
Likes
23,882
Location
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
Iv given up with the AFL, I truly believe that they will completely blow this review and come up with an idea that wont eradicate the problem and in 12 months time we will still be talking about congestion, and how to get rid of it.
A bit of a re run of the interchange cap, wouldn’t you say?
 

sprockets

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Posts
2,938
Likes
3,524
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
The real answer is:

1. Get rid of prior opportunity, hence one less rule. Players should be aware of what's around them and not take hold of the ball if they know they'll be tackled immediately. They'll be forced to knock the ball on rather than knock the ball out after two players have fallen on it,
2. Award a free against ANY disposal of the ball other than a handball or kick, including it being stripped or knocked out as a result of the tackle. Stoppages, particularly ball-ups, lead to congestion, and kicks spread the players,
3. Make the minimum kick distance for a mark 20m.
 

footyfan78

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Posts
17,281
Likes
16,647
Location
spacetime
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
there are no other teams worthy
Interestingly in the trial in VFL game on weekend the wings were not starting centre bounces on the back of the square.
So unlike some other versions talked about of 6, 6, 6, you had to start your wings on side of the square. Also a pair of players had to start in the 18 metre rectangle out from the goals at both ends for each centre bounce start. One player for each team. On the smalls bits of play I saw the rectangle from the goal seemed to allow the defending team to be able to escape from out of the defence 50 a lot easier. A few interesting tactics seemed to arise that did not foresee before seeing it in action. Did not mind that part to be honest. But once players did get congested at either 50 metre arc for general stoppages, congestion the same. But my guess the two "game adjustments" ...lol... indirectly meant less of the stoppages. Not a lot less but still less of them all the same. The ground was pretty small though, so the 50 metre arcs are almost touching the centre square. Other grounds the starting positions for centre squares would make for even cleaner centre clearances as a real good burst mid could really run further than they can now towards the 50 metre arc. A Shuey roving to Nick Nat would be even more dangerous than it is now.

Curious what they trial next.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

footyfan78

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Posts
17,281
Likes
16,647
Location
spacetime
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
there are no other teams worthy
Do they change rules each week during these trials??
Sounding like this week will be the same as last week. Obviously trying to grab as much data as they can and see any interesting patterns that come out of them. I think every player wearing a GPS tracker for these trials. Fairly sure they interview all players and coaches for feedback on what they thought and noticed too.

What I want to know was there a trial in NEAFL last weekend too or is that coming this weekend ?
 

VogonProsthetnic

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Posts
3,457
Likes
3,685
Location
Beaufort
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
The real answer is:

1. Get rid of prior opportunity, hence one less rule. Players should be aware of what's around them and not take hold of the ball if they know they'll be tackled immediately. They'll be forced to knock the ball on rather than knock the ball out after two players have fallen on it,
2. Award a free against ANY disposal of the ball other than a handball or kick, including it being stripped or knocked out as a result of the tackle. Stoppages, particularly ball-ups, lead to congestion, and kicks spread the players,
3. Make the minimum kick distance for a mark 20m.

That makes too much sense for the AFL gurus.

But seriously at least 50% of all commenters correctly identify the advent of the prior opportunity rule as a problem. Yet this is one rule which is not being reviewed!

You highlight another effect as well. The extinction of the skilful but small bodied midfielder. How do think KB would have gone in todays game? Doubt he would be allowed anywhere near the centre bounce.

The fact that midfielders like Cripps and Bont resemble key position forwards shoes how player profiles are becoming homogenised.
 
Joined
Aug 8, 2018
Posts
4
Likes
3
AFL Club
Geelong
Don't need any new rules, just umpire the ones we have. Cutting out off the ball infringements would allow the ball to be cleared much more often. If that means you can't stop Dusty...Selwood....Cripps etc bad luck. They get the reward they deserve for being strong over the ball.
No dropping the ball when tackled, kick or handpass are only legal ways to dispose of it.
Don't mind prior, but if it can't be applied consistently, then scrap it. Rules with grey areas are hard for umpires.
Nothing wrong with paying a free kick. Instantly removes the pack because you have to scatter / man up to defend. Game opens up
 

yebiga

Hardcore Unconcious Racist
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Posts
9,916
Likes
10,245
Location
post modern zeitgeist
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
The real answer is:

1. Get rid of prior opportunity, hence one less rule. Players should be aware of what's around them and not take hold of the ball if they know they'll be tackled immediately. They'll be forced to knock the ball on rather than knock the ball out after two players have fallen on it,
2. Award a free against ANY disposal of the ball other than a handball or kick, including it being stripped or knocked out as a result of the tackle. Stoppages, particularly ball-ups, lead to congestion, and kicks spread the players,
3. Make the minimum kick distance for a mark 20m.
1 No Prior
Agree to remove prior opportunity - if you think this thru not only doesn't it make any sense - the arguments against it -"players will just sweat on the opponent and no one will go for the ball " are just nonsense. Players will be careful before they take possession - hoping they will be tackled without the ball but that is much easier to adjudicate a free. Right now players are grabbing the ball - when they know they will be immediately tackled - with the objective of forcing a ball-up.

2 Incorrect disposal / Caught with ball / dislodged in tackle
Agree - but If the ball is dislodged by the tackle and the player being tackled has hardly even taken possession - I am inclined to believe play on is the best option. If the player being tackled has however taken full possession - then yes.

3 minimum mark form 20 meter kick
20 meters - no brainer this one. The possession game is boring and it is too easy to chip a 15 meter kick.

4 Out of bounds deliberate from kick - extend point kick out rule
Would love to simplify the deliberate out of bounds rule. Where if its from a kick it is automatically a free. The umpires needing to adjudicate intent is simply unacceptable. Moreover, it would massively improve the game. Right now more forwards are deliberately kicking the ball deep out of bounds in the forward pocket because they are never pinned and their side can set up a deep forward press. It is infuriating and makes no sense when defenders under enormous pressure are pinged because of a pleading crowd roar.

5 Interchange
during stoppages after a goal not during play. If there is no goal for 10 minutes - which hardly ever happens - the umpire can stop play at next free of ball up. Otherwise anyone interchanged during the quarter is unable to return on the field until the following quarter. This would automatically reduce interchanges to injuries and genuine fatigue. At minute interchange is being used unfairly with fresh midfielders which has changed the game in ways we have not discussed or examined. On the one side the game may be quicker but on the other it probably causes congestion and definitely causes injuries when fatigued players must tackle and chase and bump fresh players.
 

shaqsuns

Club Legend
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Posts
1,137
Likes
857
Location
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Cavaliers
Has anybody been watching the VFL games with the rule changers?? If so how have you seen the game change? What rules were Hocking and co trailing?? Did it open the game up??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

The Dodger

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Posts
6,579
Likes
5,355
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
I think the out of bounds thing could be adjudicated easier in that punish poor skill errors that miss teammates and dribble over the line. If it comes off hands in a marking contest don't try to interpret if they meant it just throw it in. This means we don't need a video review to see who last touched it etc. as only kicks/handballs that miss targets and roll over the line (whether on full or not) create a free kick.
Take that interpretation of what the umpire thinks the player was doing as that is the area that is stupid and open to misadventure.
 

cleomenes

Club Legend
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Posts
1,441
Likes
1,943
Location
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #270
There is an interesting late note in the changes being contemplated for next year.
There is discussion of a change to ruckmen grabbing the ball from throw ins (and presumably ballups). There is no indication of what the change might be, but I guess (and hope) that it will relax the holding the ball judgement if there is a tackle after the ruck does this.
I like this idea as a remedy to the use of midfielders instead of ruckmen to disrupt sides with good ruckmen. Since it was first tried, I have thought that this tactic was an abuse of the rules that gained an unfair advantage by confusing everyone as to who the ruckman was. Trying to clean up the third man up problem was the source, but it has introduced this other abuse.
It also would be a return to the original game.
I hope there will still be a free kick if the ball is held in in this circumstance, under the "dragged it in" type of ruling if the ruckman grabs the ball, is tackled and doesn't get it out.
 
Top Bottom