The Burger King
Cancelled
- Jun 21, 2019
- 368
- 999
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
This guy vandalises the game year after year. When will it stop? The stand rule is a joke and is equally as bad as zones in destroying the game.
Hocking’s Mess
- Thread starter The Burger King
- Start date
- Tagged users None
captain blood 17
El Jefe
- Dec 9, 2006
- 50,288
- 111,885
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa Traralgon Football Club
SHocking won't be satisfied until the game resembles auskick. Guy is a moron who needs to go.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,490
- 40,670
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
He earns millions a year. You think he is doing all he does without the all clear from Gil?
His job is literally to implement the dumb thought bubbles Gil has.
Im sure we could make a list of bad ideas from the last 20 years, but can anyone list the good ones from the last 20 years?
Strapping Young Lad
Moderator
- Apr 19, 2006
- 97,298
- 235,245
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Storm, Spurs, Socceroos
- Moderator
- #4
The rules committee share part of the blame.
Who are the relics on there making the calls?
Lip Gallagher
Club Legend
- Nov 11, 2020
- 1,498
- 1,680
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Banned
- #5
What's wrong with making the man on the mark stand on one foot and flapping his arms like a bird?
captain blood 17
El Jefe
- Dec 9, 2006
- 50,288
- 111,885
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa Traralgon Football Club
I think you'll find it's Hocking who generates the ideas (after reviews by the board). He analyses the data/surveys etc and then presents to Gil and co what he thinks can assist in addressing the issues. So in the case of scoring decreasing, SHockings solutions have been 6-6-6 and now this man on the mark rule. Gil tickles it off, but, these are generated by Hocking and his group. Guy is a ******* idiot. And for the record i am on the coaches side in the belief of leave the game alone, it will sort itself out over time.
Millions a year you reckon??
- Feb 21, 2006
- 20,731
- 19,579
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Turtles, NYJets, Celtics, Tottenham
Billions!!
They simply havent required the "commitees for change" to prove their worth (and the worth of their implementations). They havent managed changes well and clearly continue not to do so
man on mark walks back 15 m and hunches like a sprinter on starting block. Kicker does the same but 5m back. ball is placed end up on the mark.
umpire blows whistle and its a race to kick or smother. Crowd does the cricket uuuuuuuaaaaarah! noise
The games pretty cruddy though, he has to try something.
I'd go with 16 a side and seriously clamp down on holding the man. That would promote free running to space and kicking the ball out in front of team mates to take the game on.
It would also spread the talent across the clubs as 2 less players would get games each week. The lack of skilled players is a huge issue. There's several teams who just don't have the talent to play up tempo footy even if they wanted to.
Anyway, back on topic, he's trying something. There's no way anyone could have his job and not try things. Even if you took out all the obvious financial benefit to the admin that would come with more goals and everyone in these jobs were volunteers, you'd still have to try something!
I'd go with 16 a side and seriously clamp down on holding the man. That would promote free running to space and kicking the ball out in front of team mates to take the game on.
It would also spread the talent across the clubs as 2 less players would get games each week. The lack of skilled players is a huge issue. There's several teams who just don't have the talent to play up tempo footy even if they wanted to.
Anyway, back on topic, he's trying something. There's no way anyone could have his job and not try things. Even if you took out all the obvious financial benefit to the admin that would come with more goals and everyone in these jobs were volunteers, you'd still have to try something!
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,490
- 40,670
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Yes. It surprises you that the senior execs get paid massive amounts of money?
I think last year they took a pay cut but you can be sure they will be back to raking in the cash as soon as they can.
captain blood 17
El Jefe
- Dec 9, 2006
- 50,288
- 111,885
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa Traralgon Football Club
Here's the thing, you don't have to try "anything". He introduced the 6-6-6 and scoring went back to the 60's (the datas out there, that's a factual remark). We played shorter quarters last year in a shorter season, of course scoring will be down. This is a stupid rule.
Rules he should review are nominating ruckman. You want to speed the game up, remove that rule. Just throw the ball up and only 2 compete.
Look at the holding the ball rule, that rule is now confusing as hell.
As for the rest of it, leave the f......ing game alone.
Last edited:
I would personally go even further and go 15 a side. Sure it would be a huge change, but better one big change that actually works than 50 little changes that have no real effect at all. If anything the AFL has been afraid to make a proper change fearing the backlash, so instead they keep making little changes that usually don't work.
The problem to me is there will be a reluctance to deal with the consequences. Simply change something else.
Not a chance he is earning multiple million haha.
‘How much are you going to waste on cheap phones before you buy a smartphone?
How many Mickey Mouse rules do you apply before actually reducing infield numbers?
Pay the price (of course the change should be implemented with proper testing and post implementation review)
How many Mickey Mouse rules do you apply before actually reducing infield numbers?
Pay the price (of course the change should be implemented with proper testing and post implementation review)
The thing is 15 a side would fix the game instantly and would almost future-proof the game as no matter how good the coach they would struggle to apply a proper zone if they have 3 fewer players on the field. There would be a lot more gaps in a teams zone, making being defensive a lot harder.
People would complain for a year or two, but after that everyone would accept it as the new normal and reluctantly admit that the game is far more free flowing with 6 fewer players on the ground. The AFL just needs to be brave enough to weather the initial criticism (which they are not).
I think the man on the mark rule actually has merit, the mark is set where the ball is marked/free paid why should the player get to move 5m either side? it just blocks off angles for the kicker resulting in more long bombs down the line.
ffs the season is six weeks away so of course the “media” will try to make a story out of nothing, as if the standing on the mark and not moving will change the fabric of the game. It’s a “story” to get the nuffies melting and well done a lot of you have taken the bait. Lmfao
Hocking won't stop until he gets Geelong their premiership.
I'm not a fan of the standing rule.
The way I would counter it though is unless if the mark is within defensive 50, to have a player 5m back from the mark and leave the mark free.
Better to concede 5m and have the player have free movement rather than have him stand there unable to move.
I'm not a fan of the standing rule.
The way I would counter it though is unless if the mark is within defensive 50, to have a player 5m back from the mark and leave the mark free.
Better to concede 5m and have the player have free movement rather than have him stand there unable to move.
captain blood 17
El Jefe
- Dec 9, 2006
- 50,288
- 111,885
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa Traralgon Football Club
Clearly you have played SFA footy in your life then if that's your take.
