Hocking's "data"

[Aramis]

"In terms of rule interpretations, Hocking said the controversial ruck nomination process is likely to stay "unless you have something you can throw at me that blows us away"."

Is this guy for real?

Heres an idea you cretin... 2 blokes (1 from each team) can go up in the ruck. If a 2nd goes up for either team, free kick. Onus on each team to organise.

 

[popsikle99]

Channel 7 should blame the rubbish Friday night fixturing rather than blame it game styles for the dwindling viewership..

The irony in all of this is that most of the afl, commentators and fans of the game can’t get enough of high pressure, high tackling, intense September ‘finals footy’. Yet these changes, coupled with a joke of a product in AFLX, is all about circle work, goals and more ads...

way to sell out AFL.

 

[Bush_Chook]

It would have made a big difference as it would have been 3 games involving AFL teams, and those games would be more valuable than 10 games of VFL teams.

The 10 games is slightly better but still useless to be drawing statistical inferences from. You need large samples to draw inferences about the wider population, otherwise you cant say the differences aren't simply due to random chance and other factors. The sample also fails independence assumptions as you've sampled the bottom teams in the league, where's the random sampling Gill?

The whole thing is a rubbish attempt at using pseudostatistics to justify rule changes. C'mon Gill, hire someone who knows how to run an experiment.

 

[Firestarter]

Shocking from Hocking.

: self deprecating laughter :

 

[Thrawn]

Have a look at the current state of of the below the knees rule. This should be enough to slow down on any further rule changes. The game needs fewer rules, not more.

Get rid of the deliberate rule.

 

[wowlace]

Get rid of the deliberate rule.

Yeah, one of at least 5 I would remove.

 

[Dez!]

Mostly Victorian clubs shut games down so mostly Victorian supporters are going to complain.

You Adelaide supporters are the dumbest supporters there are, your infatuation with Victoria is astounding.

 

[catscratchfever]

Hocking is an embarrassment to himself and the league with all these s**t ideas he's forcing through

I'm bumped into Shocking in a gym back in the day when he was still playing. He seemed a genuinely nice guy but on this contrived issue (i.e. the "problems" with the modern game) he has no ******* idea.

Egos rule at AFL House.

If it ain't broke, don't ******* fix it!

And as far as I'm concerned: IT AIN'T BROKE!!!

 

[TripleJay]

Haha this the bolded bit is my favourite quote of the article. Sounds like the Afl has a classic case of confirmation bias.

"Ask any statistician what they can infer with any significance from three data points and the answer will invariably be "nothing". Trends can't be identified. Factors such as weather, accuracy and team style can't be controlled for. Causation can't be proved.

Yet none of that has stopped the AFL from trying it on."

 

[Thegibbsgamble]

You Adelaide supporters are the dumbest supporters there are, your infatuation with Victoria is astounding.

You welfare bludgers arrogance is outstanding.

 

[HTT]

I've maintained we should be fixing the rules we have already before pulling more out of our arses. The idiots in charge can't even work out how to 'save the ruckmen', now they think they can 'save the game'

 

[HTT]

Something needs to be done. I mean scoring has plummeted in the last 15 years and this finals series has been a slog fest in terms of goal scoring.

Maybe for Sydney it has, but the rest of us have found it reasonable.

 

[RUNVS]

Maybe for Sydney it has, but the rest of us have found it reasonable.

So far

95
64
75
46
30
79
86
70
71
104

That is a total of 720, meaning 144 points per match, or 72 points per team which is barely 11 goals when you take into account behinds.

 

[HTT]

So far

95
64
75
46
30
79
86
70
71
104

That is a total of 720, meaning 144 points per match, or 72 points per team which is barely 11 goals when you take into account behinds.

There are two key statistical outliers, in the scores of 30 and 46. Take those out and its 644 total, 80.5pts per team. As I said, maybe Sydney have found it difficult, the good teams - not so much.

 

[RUNVS]

There are two key statistical outliers, in the scores of 30 and 46. Take those out and its 644 total, 80.5pts per team. As I said, maybe Sydney have found it difficult, the good teams - not so much.

The 104 is a statistical outlier as well, as could be argued is the 95.

Either way scoring in 2018 is way way way down on what it was 20 years ago, even 10 years ago, and that is over the course of an entire season.

 

[HTT]

The 104 is a statistical outlier as well, as could be argued is the 95.

Either way scoring in 2018 is way way way down on what it was 20 years ago, even 10 years ago, and that is over the course of an entire season.

I see you are one of the 'wE nEeD mOrE gOaLs' people. It's ok. The NBA starts soon.

 

[Dazzler9]

I'm not ideologically opposed to the 18m goalsquare. But I am opposed to its introduction without a decent trial period in lower leagues.

 

[catscratchfever]

The 104 is a statistical outlier as well, as could be argued is the 95.

Either way scoring in 2018 is way way way down on what it was 20 years ago, even 10 years ago, and that is over the course of an entire season.

So what?

 

[Ghossein]

who cares, this was never about the data or we would've been given concrete evidence that the drop in viewership was related to the "state of the game"

this whole thing is a farce

 

[catscratchfever]

The 104 is a statistical outlier as well, as could be argued is the 95.

Either way scoring in 2018 is way way way down on what it was 20 years ago, even 10 years ago, and that is over the course of an entire season.

I bet you weren't complaining about the state of the game when Sydney and West Coast played those 2 classic Grand Final slogfests back in 2005/6! And neither was I - they were great games despite the low scoring: intense, thrilling and unforgettable (and despite the fact that a clueless whinging majority complained about them at the time).

 

[Ghossein]

The 104 is a statistical outlier as well, as could be argued is the 95.

Either way scoring in 2018 is way way way down on what it was 20 years ago, even 10 years ago, and that is over the course of an entire season.

Go and watch footy from 20 years ago. Midfielder kicks it to their full-forward, who takes a minute to line up for a set shot, kicks the goal. Opposition midfield kicks it to their full-forward, who takes a minute to line up for a set shot, kicks the goal. There's a reason games were so high scoring, and why full forwards used to regularly kick 80+ goals. It's boring as s**t.

 

[Borussia Teeth]

 

[Ron The Bear]

this finals series has been a slog fest in terms of goal scoring.

Most of the games have been rain-affected. Can't do much about it unless finals are played at Etihad.

 

[The_torpedo]

I have a feeling this rule may end up like the elimination qualifying in F1 a couple of years back

 

[Back One Out]

If Dees had lost last night by a goal or two they would have been entitled to make a formal complaint, FWIW. Two blatant bad calls, one resulting in a Hawks goal

Melbourne also scored goals from dubious umpiring decisions and the Hawks were denied a shot at goal when the umpire incorrectly disallowed a mark to Luke Breust. Swings and roundabouts which you may not have noticed if you were barracking for one side. But all of this is irrelevant to Dangerwood shitting the bed last weekend and the Geelong skipper's undisciplined, petulant, selfish display.

Rule changes? Yeah, why not. The game is pretty much f**ked as it is. The umpiring is already woeful due to impossible ever-changing interpretations of the rules. Let's have some more unwieldy, pointless rules for them muck up on a weekly basis and make "our great game" a further laughing stock.