Strategy How can AFL rule-makers prevent forward-50 congestion?

[CrowBloke]

I'm not a fan of Patrick Smith or this article which attempts to explain 2017's upset results and Competition evenness, where he states that AFL footy has become so fast that it's little more than a comedy of errors (my emphasis in bold italics):
"We mentioned this after the Queen’s Birthday round when Melbourne and Collingwood played a brand of football where it appeared that reward would come to the team that made the most mistakes in the shortest amount of time. After that match we wrote: “The first quarter was a cauldron of feverish running but so deficient were the skills the game looked like a rejected script from a Charlie Chaplin film. Melbourne would run furiously towards their goal supplying the ball to teammates who were running in formation beside them. They would then give the ball to Collingwood via a poorly executed kick. Collingwood would then flock towards their goal only to return the ball to Melbourne.”
(http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...s/news-story/7f4e9cd453eb557ae2feef90ba955bb8)"

"Adelaide are on top of the ladder. Of 12 games played they have lost three. That should not be seen as a badge of brilliance but only that it is recognition of the Crows being the best of a collection of incompetence. "
Personally, I love the speed of the modern game and I reckon in 2017 the Crows have played the best, fastest run/spread/overlap footy of any team. However, in several other games, 20+ players around the ball make for stoppage after stoppage, low scoring and ugly footy.
Here's the question: how could the rule-makers open the game up even further to prevent forward-50 congestion where a concentration of players now move end-to-end leaving 50-60% of the ground vacant, or leave it as is?

 

[BunjiMac]

Evolution will sort this one out.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

AFL have created this monster with the deliberate out of bounds rule.

Now it's too easy to defend your forward 50 and lock th game in.

Previously you'd hit up the line, force a stoppage then reset.

 

[Geoffa32]

The only way is to have set positions in the rules and make the 50m arc mean something in regards to player positioning.

X number of players must remain in the 50m arc at all times. I would suggest three per team, ie FF/FB and two Forward/Back Pocket players each . Make it so that these guys never leave the 50m arcs.

Could also do the same thing for the Centre square, ie have two player per team must remain in the Centre Square at all times. Have these two positions as designated Centremen.

Without such rules you could never truly stop congestion. However such rules also go against the "fabric" of the game and are another thing umpires can get wrong.




Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[CrowBloke]

Evolution will sort this one out.

LOL, like "organic growth"? ^_^

 

[BunjiMac]

LOL, like "organic growth"? ^_^

How are they even similar?

 

[CrowBloke]

X number of players must remain in the 50m arc at all times. I would suggest three per team, ie FF/FB and two Forward/Back Pocket players each . Make it so that these guys never leave the 50m arcs.
Could also do the same thing for the Centre square, ie have two player per team must remain in the Centre Square at all times. Have these two positions as designated Centremen.

Yeah, I was thinking about this, like zones on a netball court, but naaaah wouldn't work. The centre-bounce rules have worked well, but zones would slow the game down and make run/spread/overlap footy (our strength) impossible --- no more bursts from the centre with a few bounces for a speccy on-the-run goal. Too hard to isolate a few blokes to a particular region. As you pointed out, it'd be something else for Umpires to stuff up.
Also, players would need to put on the brakes, quick-smart, to avoid crossing *dun-dun-DUUUNNNN* The Forbidden Zones.

 

[CrowBloke]

How are they even similar?

Not gonna answer that in case I'm sledged for being pedantic.
Besides, I was kidding.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Deeper pockets at all grounds

 

[GreyCrow]

Deeper pockets at all grounds

I assume this is in reference to the price of beer and food?

 

[Bicks]

A novel approach...

The AFL to forthwith stop F*(&^%g with the rules and leave the game alone!

 

[GreyCrow]

This has been mentioned earlier in regards to zones. I think St Kilda had an AFL sanctioned trial to see the issues.

I don't see any other solution but evolution or legislation. I would hate to see legislation used to limit players movement.

 

[DD#23]

AFL have created this monster with the deliberate out of bounds rule.

Now it's too easy to defend your forward 50 and lock th game in.

Previously you'd hit up the line, force a stoppage then reset.

bingo

the AFL can't see one move ahead with their rule changes let alone two or three. Absolutely useless.

 

[CrowBloke]

Evolution ...

I don't see any other solution but evolution or legislation.

Serious question to you both.
By "evolution" do you mean the various strategies that coaches have come up with over the years, either to change the face of the game or counteract some trend? eg "Pagan's Paddock" (which he said he set up so that Carey would be out in space, one-on-one, because he backed Carey to win the ball), Eade's "flooding" (which causes most modern forward congestion --- the TV broadcaster often pans back to show all the players in one half of the ground) and Craig's zoning?
Clarkson's method has been an emphasis on toughness in getting the ball then on premium hand and foot skills to retain uncontested possessions via run/spread/overlap the latter of which the Crows have used under Pyke to score so highly (I just wish the Crows would mongrel up, play really unsociable footy like the Hawks have for years).

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

bingo

the AFL can't see one move ahead with their rule changes let alone two or three. Absolutely useless.

Happens all the time. Change one rule to solve one problem, create two more problems.

 

[Scorpus]

A novel approach...

The AFL to forthwith stop F*(&^%g with the rules and leave the game alone!

Changing the rules every year has a huge impact on skills. Players need to retool their knowledge for minor changes all the time.

 

[GreyCrow]

Serious question to you both.
By "evolution" do you mean the various strategies that coaches have come up with over the years,

Yes. At some stage coaches wont accept scores against turnovers and realise having a player or 2 back may slow/stop this

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

Yes. At some stage coaches wont accept scores against turnovers and realise having a player or 2 back may slow/stop this

Yep. Will go back to being a sort of flood. We have flooding now, but it's forward flooding. Once it's breached, you're stuffed.

I'd even consider having 2 or 3 speedy guys in the defensive wall so when a break happens, there's some pressure applied.

I'd also implement professional fouls. Hold on to players without the ball during a break away. Concede the free. Who cares.

 

[Apsaalooke]

The only way is to have set positions in the rules and make the 50m arc mean something in regards to player positioning.

X number of players must remain in the 50m arc at all times. I would suggest three per team, ie FF/FB and two Forward/Back Pocket players each . Make it so that these guys never leave the 50m arcs.

Could also do the same thing for the Centre square, ie have two player per team must remain in the Centre Square at all times. Have these two positions as designated Centremen.

Without such rules you could never truly stop congestion. However such rules also go against the "fabric" of the game and are another thing umpires can get wrong.




Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Too hard to police. What if you're stuck in the 50 on a flank with the ball 2 metres away that you can't contest until a team mate enters the 50 on the other flank to take your place. Would look stupid

 

[BunjiMac]

Serious question to you both.
By "evolution" do you mean the various strategies that coaches have come up with over the years, either to change the face of the game or counteract some trend? eg "Pagan's Paddock" (which he said he set up so that Carey would be out in space, one-on-one, because he backed Carey to win the ball), Eade's "flooding" (which causes most modern forward congestion --- the TV broadcaster often pans back to show all the players in one half of the ground) and Craig's zoning?
Clarkson's method has been an emphasis on toughness in getting the ball then on premium hand and foot skills to retain uncontested possessions via run/spread/overlap the latter of which the Crows have used under Pyke to score so highly (I just wish the Crows would mongrel up, play really unsociable footy like the Hawks have for years).

Evolution is just the natural change that occurs in football as sides look for the innovation that will seperate it from the competition.

When strategies and tactics go from being different to be the norm, subtle changes always emerge that then start new trends.

I don't see anything that requires further intervention in the game itself. The game will innovate on its own and those sides that do, should be rewarded.

 

[flashcrow]

Get rid of the 50 metre arc and make all grounds rectangular.

 

[CrowBloke]

Changing the rules every year has a huge impact on skills. Players need to retool their knowledge for minor changes all the time.

For better or for worse, do you think?
eg the speed of the game has demanded greater fitness levels which has got to be an improvement. Also, the Hawks' successes based on high uncontested possessions (as one element) means that their players had to improve their foot-passing skills, especially.

 

[Scorpus]

For better or for worse, do you think?
eg the speed of the game has demanded greater fitness levels which has got to be an improvement. Also, the Hawks' successes based on high uncontested possessions (as one element) means that their players had to improve their foot-passing skills, especially.

For worse. Players who learned to do something for years and through juniors suddenly have to adjust, which costs them in terms of accurate decision making, which leads to more errors and a sloppier game

 

[CrowBloke]

I don't see anything that requires further intervention in the game itself. The game will innovate on its own and those sides that do, should be rewarded.

Really good point .
I'm old enough to remember how Sturt became a power in the 60's and broke PA's domination because of the way Jack Oatey emphasised quicker ball movement & play-on via handball. It's the done thing now, totally taken for granted, but at the time it was revolutionary. Until then, handball was basically a get-out-of-trouble defensive manouevre.

 

[Simmo28]

Deeper pockets at all grounds

So far we have zones (netball) and deeper ground (soccer field), just add some off side rules and we have completely ****ed up the game....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk