Ending congestion

Remove this Banner Ad

Hawk_francais

Premiership Player
Sep 20, 2015
3,144
6,137
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Plenty of us are. Especially those of us that actually know what we are talking about with interchanges changing from how it was set up to be used when 2 were on the bench to the way it has ended up going in a direction it was never intended to be used, after it doubled in size to 4 on bench.
If you played in it and also observed the changes you would get it.
Good luck with the blinkers on.
I've read your comments. I don't know why you felt the need to get on your high horse when we don't actually disagree on any substantial points.
 

DAlembert

Club Legend
Mar 12, 2019
1,093
698
AFL Club
Geelong
Congestion is pretty easy to fix actually.

1. No nominating a ruck. In fact ball up whether there are rucks there or not.

2. As someone suggested reward free kicks for incorrect disposal and HTB. Stop allowing the throw.

3. Penalise players who hold the ball to players who are on the ground over the ball. They only do this for two reasons, one to get a free and two to get a ball up and keep the ball in the area. If they are holding the ball to another player they are technically in control of the ball and if tackled should be penalised for HTB

4. The coaches have for a long time treated the game like a game of Under 9's by using the flood and other congestion and highly negative tactics. Solution. Ban the flood. If any side has more than 12 players in the forward line a free is awarded to the opposition. If both teams have more than 12 players then the ball is returned to the centre square and bounced immediately. It does not matter if players are ready or not. If any side breaks the flooding rule 3 times in a row without the other side breaking it then free and 50 metres will be awarded to the opposition. Basically a goal line kick.

On U27 using BigFooty.com mobile app
Point 1. I agree 100%
Point 2. Get rid of the throw...a handball is a handball not a chuck over the shoulder etc....Won't happen but should
Point 3. Absolutely agree...player who holds the ball under should be penalised...If that is the player on top so be it. Happens all the time.
Point 4. Too complex for me. Keep it simple. Cross country basketball is here to stay.
 

Bunk Moreland

Hall of Famer
Sep 22, 2011
35,209
71,574
Your girlfriend's dreams
AFL Club
Essendon
The unfortunate reality of the congestion problem is that the coaches don't want it solved. Fast flowing open games are beyond their interference, and so they coach for congestion.
Precisely. All they want is stoppages because they can practice and control them. Place players exactly where they want them, etc. Train them all week.

Get rid of the stoppages, the ball is zinging around, the coaches can’t plan as minutely for it.

Stiff sh*t if a player gets a hot handball under pressure and gets immediately pinned, that's his team-mates fault for giving it to him under pressure.
One thing many people misunderstand when you propose this - they think these players getting put under pressure by a teammate have no options.

They do. You can actually justget rid of it, and that’s always happened plenty. It’s not that you can’t be tackled... it’s that if you are, you have to immediately get rid of the ball legally (boot or handball).

If an opponent lays a flawless tackle that doesn’t allow that, well good luck to them. That’s always been the goal of tackling.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Pessimistic

Make me an Admin!
Sep 13, 2000
78,925
36,034
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
Interchange peaked in 2010 ish which is generally regarded as good footy, at least better than now. So what has the interchange reduction achieved?

for mine the AFL have a perfect opportunity to trial things this year. But not with the senior premiership games. Fans suffered enough without wholesale changes

have some scratch games with ‘reserves’ as trials
 

Pessimistic

Make me an Admin!
Sep 13, 2000
78,925
36,034
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
Point 1. I agree 100%
Point 2. Get rid of the throw...a handball is a handball not a chuck over the shoulder etc....Won't happen but should
Point 3. Absolutely agree...player who holds the ball under should be penalised...If that is the player on top so be it. Happens all the time.
Point 4. Too complex for me. Keep it simple. Cross country basketball is here to stay.
or allow throws, but not above the shoulder or when on knees. Fairly easy to police
 

Maurice Mitchell

All Australian
Aug 25, 2018
1,325
2,742
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Liverpool
Allow fatigue to control congestion. Teams will have to pace themselves; if they want high intensity around the contest all game they will fall away late.

If the game isn’t shortened too much, that is.
Heard Hocking today, he is taking input from all stakeholders. Would rather coaches didn’t get a say but they will get more than anyone. Can anyone think of any coaches who have made the game better in the full professional era? I can’t.

Although, I guess I am biased but I reckon my team are attractive to watch but the whole game would be better with fatigue.

Would surely reduce collision injuries as well
 
Last edited:

theyellowsash

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 9, 2009
11,775
14,991
Footscray
AFL Club
Richmond
Pay the tiggy Touchwood free kicks around the ball and it will ease congestion. Hard for the best (or any) players to get the ball and dispose of it when they're being tackled before the ball even hits the ground.

Also, pay god damn dropping the ball. I don't buy this 'give them a chance to pick it up' crap. If you get 2 clean hands in the ball, you have to dispose of it correctly, and either not disposing or not disposing incorrectly is a free against. If players don't have the time to pick the ball up and dispose of it properly, then they can tap or kick it on. That will clear the ball of the pack as well.
 

theyellowsash

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 9, 2009
11,775
14,991
Footscray
AFL Club
Richmond
Here's a novel idea. What about penalizing the 3rd player that jumps on a guy already on the ground. What does that guy do other than hold the ball in? Especially when it's a player from the same team as the tackled player, that's just stupid. Once a player is brought to ground, no stacks on and let him get rid of it and if he doesn't, htb. Obviously if multiple players tackle while standing then both bring to ground it wouldn't apply.

Also, I don't know why in the back doesn't count in the stacks on that happens. Last I heard, the rule was primarily a safety thing, and diving on a guys back while he is pinned on the ground seems just as bad as an itb tackle.
 

hawkman

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 7, 2007
20,094
23,307
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur
Here's a novel idea. What about penalizing the 3rd player that jumps on a guy already on the ground. What does that guy do other than hold the ball in? Especially when it's a player from the same team as the tackled player, that's just stupid. Once a player is brought to ground, no stacks on and let him get rid of it and if he doesn't, htb. Obviously if multiple players tackle while standing then both bring to ground it wouldn't apply.

Also, I don't know why in the back doesn't count in the stacks on that happens. Last I heard, the rule was primarily a safety thing, and diving on a guys back while he is pinned on the ground seems just as bad as an itb tackle.
Don't even need to penalize the 3rd man in. Most of the time when there is a stacks on there is some sort of infringement either im the back or too high. Just need to pay those
 

Furn2

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 27, 2012
9,460
15,467
AFL Club
Hawthorn
It's simple maths, if each player on average moves 9km a game, with 4 interchange each position on the field can move 11kms. (Reduced rotations don't change this equation.)

That's almost 20% less ground covered if you go to straight subs.its not possible to get to as many contests without rotations.
 

footyfan1978

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 27, 2014
26,160
27,877
spacetime
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
there are no other teams worthy
Here's a novel idea. What about penalizing the 3rd player that jumps on a guy already on the ground. What does that guy do other than hold the ball in?
If he literally jumps on a guy, for sure. If he is trying to get to ball himself and doing nothing illegal he should not be penalised.

However, if third or more players are virtually stopping the flow of play (movement of ball for either team) and therefore only likely congest it more, there is a simple solution to this.... it is not novel and had already been in the game for eons.... the umpire says "it's mine", meaning this present situation is not advancing the ball moving so I am blowing the whilst and going to ball it up. This worked a treat, most times if done quickly as it taught players rolling mauls were not going to be allowed to take shape. We want a genuine contest where one side is going to win between a few players from each team, not a whole pack of players at ground level fighting for ball for ten seconds or more which happens too often now. Something changed in umpiring instruction and habits whereby now they allow the ugly ground packs to go on way too often. Blowing whistle quickly when it looks like more than two players contesting at ground level is going nowhere needs to. Nobody should be penalised if doing nothing wrong but also ugly packs should be taught are not going to eat up game time. blow the whistle, clear the congestion for rucks to quickly contest a ball up and allow one of teams to get ball moving again. Of course sometimes when it is really wet or muddy ground level contest are going to go on longer and with it being slippery the ball tends to spill free so less need for umpires to blow whistle and say it is mine but in general the umpires responsibility to keep the game freed up to have ball move more freely has to be put into more focus.

This along with genuine penalties for sloppy tackles or illegal tackles will remove the stranglehold the rolling mauls and tackle fests we have got to. Of course naturally if someone tackles completely legal and the ball with player drops ball or incorrect disposal that needs to be paid too.

I find it it all common sense that not been applied by umpiring fraternity for a long time now.
If these things were fixed and the interchange bench farce removed I think we get a much more attractive spectacle again as ugly congestion just won't dominate big chunks of games like it does now.
 

harrythetiger

Jack Graham That Is 🏆🏆🏆
Sep 13, 2015
15,573
42,309
Hillary Step
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76ers
Interchange peaked in 2010 ish which is generally regarded as good footy, at least better than now. So what has the interchange reduction achieved?

for mine the AFL have a perfect opportunity to trial things this year. But not with the senior premiership games. Fans suffered enough without wholesale changes

have some scratch games with ‘reserves’ as trials
Its a bit like the coaches box. People see the stat flicked up, or an image of the coaches box, they get annoyed. Don't show it, no one gives a sh*t.
 

sprockets

Premiership Player
Oct 15, 2004
4,778
8,017
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
If he literally jumps on a guy, for sure. If he is trying to get to ball himself and doing nothing illegal he should not be penalised.

However, if third or more players are virtually stopping the flow of play (movement of ball for either team) and therefore only likely congest it more, there is a simple solution to this.... it is not novel and had already been in the game for eons.... the umpire says "it's mine", meaning this present situation is not advancing the ball moving so I am blowing the whilst and going to ball it up. This worked a treat, most times if done quickly as it taught players rolling mauls were not going to be allowed to take shape. We want a genuine contest where one side is going to win between a few players from each team, not a whole pack of players at ground level fighting for ball for ten seconds or more which happens too often now. Something changed in umpiring instruction and habits whereby now they allow the ugly ground packs to go on way too often. Blowing whistle quickly when it looks like more than two players contesting at ground level is going nowhere needs to. Nobody should be penalised if doing nothing wrong but also ugly packs should be taught are not going to eat up game time. blow the whistle, clear the congestion for rucks to quickly contest a ball up and allow one of teams to get ball moving again. Of course sometimes when it is really wet or muddy ground level contest are going to go on longer and with it being slippery the ball tends to spill free so less need for umpires to blow whistle and say it is mine but in general the umpires responsibility to keep the game freed up to have ball move more freely has to be put into more focus.

This along with genuine penalties for sloppy tackles or illegal tackles will remove the stranglehold the rolling mauls and tackle fests we have got to. Of course naturally if someone tackles completely legal and the ball with player drops ball or incorrect disposal that needs to be paid too.

I find it it all common sense that not been applied by umpiring fraternity for a long time now.
If these things were fixed and the interchange bench farce removed I think we get a much more attractive spectacle again as ugly congestion just won't dominate big chunks of games like it does now.
I think that scenario came about when the AFL decided there were too many ball-ups and told umpires to wait longer before blowing the whistle. As usual, the AFL's solution made the game aesthetically worse.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

footyfan1978

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 27, 2014
26,160
27,877
spacetime
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
there are no other teams worthy
I think that scenario came about when the AFL decided there were too many ball-ups and told umpires to wait longer before blowing the whistle. As usual, the AFL's solution made the game aesthetically worse.
When exactly did this happen?
I do not remember a specific moment of it announced as a change. I assume around mid 90's some time.
 

Consolaçao

All Australian
May 22, 2007
714
459
Melbourne Town
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Phnom Penh Utd (curling)
Can somebody explain to me why 16 or even 15 a side isn’t an option? Three quarter time and it’s a close game, but I’ve turned the TV off.. pretty much unwatchable. There are some incredible players running around out there tonight, but nobody’s got the space to do anything with the ball besides rushed handballs and scrubby kicks.
 

Pessimistic

Make me an Admin!
Sep 13, 2000
78,925
36,034
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
Can somebody explain to me why 16 or even 15 a side isn’t an option? Three quarter time and it’s a close game, but I’ve turned the TV off.. pretty much unwatchable. There are some incredible players running around out there tonight, but nobody’s got the space to do anything with the ball besides rushed handballs and scrubby kicks.
‘worth a good trial if you ask me. Maybe they can try it in reserves scratch games
 

nick1408

Club Legend
Dec 12, 2010
1,599
1,566
Why?
AFL Club
Richmond
Can somebody explain to me why 16 or even 15 a side isn’t an option? Three quarter time and it’s a close game, but I’ve turned the TV off.. pretty much unwatchable. There are some incredible players running around out there tonight, but nobody’s got the space to do anything with the ball besides rushed handballs and scrubby kicks.
Pretty sure it's in the charter of the game document. The AFL will always be reluctant to go against that.

I'm not sure taking players off the field would help either. The two players to go won't be the wings, it'll be whoever is the least fit and can get to the least amount of contests.

And if it does work how long for? Until a coach comes up with a gameplan that can get as many guys to contests as possible to outnumber opponents.

I don't know what the answer is but a sticker interpretation of the rules would be a good way to start. Maybe even allow 3rd man up again as that 3rd man was clearing the ball from congestion. I don't know.
 

big_e

Premium Platinum
Apr 28, 2008
7,059
20,215
The Championship
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wycombe Wanderers
Can somebody explain to me why 16 or even 15 a side isn’t an option? Three quarter time and it’s a close game, but I’ve turned the TV off.. pretty much unwatchable. There are some incredible players running around out there tonight, but nobody’s got the space to do anything with the ball besides rushed handballs and scrubby kicks.
It's been 18 on the field since 1899. Some things are so fundamental to the game they shouldn't be changed, IMO.
 

sprockets

Premiership Player
Oct 15, 2004
4,778
8,017
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
When exactly did this happen?
I do not remember a specific moment of it announced as a change. I assume around mid 90's some time.
I can't remember specifically when it happened but I do remember reading articles like the following...


"As they were last season, the umpires have been instructed to tightly police the holding-the-ball rule in order to reduce the number of ball-ups and increase the tempo of the game. "

Interesting comment that one considering the premise in the OP.

But I think it's something that's encouraged by the PTB every few years...

 

shaqsuns

Club Legend
Jun 13, 2011
1,251
1,083
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Cavaliers
You know I have this crazy idea, look I know it’s really left field, but just hear me out.....
We have 5 major state league competitions that copy the AFL’s rules and coaches tactics.

Why don’t we come up with 5 different major rule changes, trial one major rule change in each state league for one year and see if it reduce’s the congestion.

Eg;
VFL - Unlimited amount of interchanges
SANFL - No interchanges
WAFL - Zones
TFL - Umpiring interpretation rules
NEAFL - 16 a side


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Johnny Bananas

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 10, 2010
7,133
9,277
A sugar refinery
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
It's been 18 on the field since 1899. Some things are so fundamental to the game they shouldn't be changed, IMO.
I disagree because the quality of those 18 has changed a massive amount. They're much fitter and a lot better at defensive pressure and structure now. How is the number of players on the field any more fundamental than the rules on handballs which changed frequently until the 60s?
 

Johnny Bananas

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 10, 2010
7,133
9,277
A sugar refinery
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Can somebody explain to me why 16 or even 15 a side isn’t an option? Three quarter time and it’s a close game, but I’ve turned the TV off.. pretty much unwatchable. There are some incredible players running around out there tonight, but nobody’s got the space to do anything with the ball besides rushed handballs and scrubby kicks.
I reckon 15 would be the optimum number, there'd be a lot more space and ability for counter-attacking.
 

shaqsuns

Club Legend
Jun 13, 2011
1,251
1,083
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Cavaliers
The suns only had 32 interchanges and let’s be honest they looked the most impressive so far and the game looked pretty open to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

footyfan1978

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 27, 2014
26,160
27,877
spacetime
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
there are no other teams worthy
The suns only had 32 interchanges and let’s be honest they looked the most impressive so far and the game looked pretty open to me.
Should be one interchange allowed every player beyond forced concussion ones. If you benched a second time from field for any other reason, the second time you cannot come back on. Make it closer to old school. It would basically mean less than 30 anyway except for can make as many changes as you like during quarter breaks and half time naturally.
 

Hawk_francais

Premiership Player
Sep 20, 2015
3,144
6,137
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Clarko has called it post North Melbourne match. 69 tackles for the Hawks without a single holding the ball decision (Simpkin was penalised once, but that was for a throw). He has called on the umpires to improve the state of the game and just pay holding the ball whenever a player is caught in possession.
 

Remove this Banner Ad