-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Analysis How the state of the game has evolved, is the increased rate of injuries a result of of the evolution
- Thread starter Macpotata
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Jul 10, 2012
- 7,503
- 9,220
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Manchester City, Lakers
I've played my entire life. If you think when you are absolutely ****ed you want to go run down the wing, instead of just locking it in and killing the ball, then you obviously haven't.
Another part of the game is the lack of restriction on where you can run (there is specifically no offside rule), and where you can move the ball. The only restriction on ball movement is that you can't throw it.
If we got rid of this by introducing zones, it would be a great tragedy for our game.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- May 5, 2006
- 65,628
- 74,793
- AFL Club
- West Coast
People complain about congestion around stoppages but that stems from 'clusters' and 'webs'. As anyone who has played U/8s knows, players are naturally attracted to the ball. The more players you have close to the ball, the more players you will have being drawn to the ball when it hits the ground. Josh Kennedy rarely impacts stoppages unless they are in our forward 50. Jamie Cripps or LeCras who play as half forwards, well they could be involved in a stoppage in the defensive 50.
Back when we were awesome in the 90s we had a back line, half back line, centre line, half forward line and forward line. In soccer terms a 3-3-6-3-3 formation. There was no defensive press where some or all of the forwards pushed up the ground. These days if we turn the ball over we have some kind of hovering formation with lines of 3, 4, 5, 6 players going on where the deepest player starts at CHF. It's inevitable that these players are going to gravitate to the ball when it's within 20-30m of them, which it is a lot of the time.
Back when we were awesome in the 90s we had a back line, half back line, centre line, half forward line and forward line. In soccer terms a 3-3-6-3-3 formation. There was no defensive press where some or all of the forwards pushed up the ground. These days if we turn the ball over we have some kind of hovering formation with lines of 3, 4, 5, 6 players going on where the deepest player starts at CHF. It's inevitable that these players are going to gravitate to the ball when it's within 20-30m of them, which it is a lot of the time.
JohnnyFontane90
Norm Smith Medallist
- Feb 14, 2014
- 6,481
- 10,001
- AFL Club
- Carlton
See i don't see congestion itself as a problem. the problem is the scrappy skills many sides have when trying to navigate through it which has been really noticeable since we started restricting interchanges.
in 2013 (highest scoring season in last decade) when interchanges were at their maximum the game was still congested but i don't remember everyone complaining that the game was unwatchable. the players were rested enough to run,spread from contests and execute effectively.
I think most of the complaining about congestion comes from the 'back in my day' mentality. the modern game looks different to how it did in the 90s but when it's played well is fine as a spectacle. I think the quality of the product will improve if we stop making players tired on purpose
in 2013 (highest scoring season in last decade) when interchanges were at their maximum the game was still congested but i don't remember everyone complaining that the game was unwatchable. the players were rested enough to run,spread from contests and execute effectively.
I think most of the complaining about congestion comes from the 'back in my day' mentality. the modern game looks different to how it did in the 90s but when it's played well is fine as a spectacle. I think the quality of the product will improve if we stop making players tired on purpose
- Apr 13, 2015
- 2,012
- 2,768
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I think the biggest problem is once a team wins a centre clearance and gets it in their forward half its way too hard to get it out and transition to the other end.
If we increased the length of the goal square to say 15 or 20m and made the man on the mark stand at 30 it’d be much easier to get the ball out of defence and they’d be more likely to go attacking down the middle of the ground as opposed to wide around the boundary.
If we increased the length of the goal square to say 15 or 20m and made the man on the mark stand at 30 it’d be much easier to get the ball out of defence and they’d be more likely to go attacking down the middle of the ground as opposed to wide around the boundary.
The point is fatigued players, or players trying to conserve energy, wont cover the entire ground, so contests around the ground involve less players. This will result in less congestion, more ball movement and freer more attractive play.
Get rid of coaches, there the problem.
- Apr 13, 2015
- 2,012
- 2,768
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
One of the stupidest rules is why players have to bounce the ball when they are running.
It’s a rule designed to disadvantage those who can run fast and bring them back to the pack of the plodders.
There’s no rule to disadvantage tall players and bring them back to the pack with the short arses. They even introduced a rule to stop smaller players chopping arms or going 3rd man up at the ruck contest.
There’s also no rule to disadvantage strong players against weaker opponents for example not allowing pushing in the side in a marking contest, that’s regarded as a show of strength.
I get that running and bouncing is now iconic because it’s been a stupid historic rule so we probably have to keep it. But increase the distance to 25m and tell the umpires to rule on the side of caution and only pay the really obvious ones. Like in the NBA they don’t pay travels harshly because it increases the spectacle.
It’s a rule designed to disadvantage those who can run fast and bring them back to the pack of the plodders.
There’s no rule to disadvantage tall players and bring them back to the pack with the short arses. They even introduced a rule to stop smaller players chopping arms or going 3rd man up at the ruck contest.
There’s also no rule to disadvantage strong players against weaker opponents for example not allowing pushing in the side in a marking contest, that’s regarded as a show of strength.
I get that running and bouncing is now iconic because it’s been a stupid historic rule so we probably have to keep it. But increase the distance to 25m and tell the umpires to rule on the side of caution and only pay the really obvious ones. Like in the NBA they don’t pay travels harshly because it increases the spectacle.
Well said, but yeah, zones for mine not needed. Four on bench used for rotations is where we need to fix the mistake.
Taylor
Community Leader
- Moderator
- #388
You are allowed to do that, when the ball is within 5m.
The player that read the ball better and found the best position to stand to contest the mark shouldn't be punished by a brute who got there late playing the man, the brute can work him aside when the ball is within 5m but he also needs to be good enough to make it look like he is going for the mark after - which is the tricky part.
Yes sir, you are 100% correct, but that's what the coaches want these days. Nathan Buckley's answer is "scrap prior opportunity" so the tackler has more chance. The reason he advocates for this is, he bloody well knows he's in charge of a team of athletes not footballers and they have no idea about a game with highmarking ,precision kicking ,attacking handball ,good defence and goals being kicked. (That's what we want to see, not what Buckley wants to see) Not while he's coaching he doesn't. Buckley doesn't want anything that will see an increase in turnovers, so getting to the ball first is a big no no! It's all tackle, tackle and more tackle and with the entire team around the ball he figures he will get a clearance somehow! Gone are the days of seeing Geoff Raines storming out of the centre and hitting Michael Roach on the chest, gone are the days of Polly Farmer taking it out of the ruck and shooting off a 20 metre precision placed handball to a running player who hits Doug wade on the chest, gone are the days of the high marking ruckman/forward (hello Simon Madden)
One thing is for certain, we don't want the coaches having a say on the state of the game, they only care about winning, they don't care about how they win or what it looks like to the spectator. This will sound harsh, but to coaches we're a bit of a hindrance!
I don't want more tackling, i don't like rugby, i like Aussie rules, i want to see more long kicking to position, i want to see two blokes in a contest going for the ball and see who wins that contest, i want more high marking up forward. I don't want to see 36 players crowded around a stoppage on the half back line....
No doubt we will see a number of opinions on how to fix the game as a spectacle, just keep the coaches well away from it!
I've heard everything from 16 a side to 18 min QTRs, to zones, bring back the 3rd man up, to 6 interchange etc etc
IMO use the ARC and have two players permanently in there, if not, get rid of the ARC! Reduce the interchange rotations to 12 or 15 per QTR...that might stop the insanity of seeing blokes running off the ground every time they score a goal. I grew up in an era of positional football, i witnessed the golden age of the game, i'm buggered if i know what i'm witnessing now and my eyesight isn't that bad...
- Apr 18, 2005
- 34,711
- 31,444
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Disagree. What you’ll see is a clear discrepancy between the super aerobic athletes breaking away from the contests. This will make the less fitter footballers stay up forward rather than getting sucked up the ground then breaking off in a big zone.
We will return to good old fashioned one on one footy. Traditional positions will be far visible and blokes will have ‘think’ about their positioning rather than interchanging after 2 minutes because they’re cooked.
At 90 rotations a game you’ve basically got a rotation every 1.5 minutes.
But neutral fans care about the spectacle quality. If my team wins 1.2 to 0.1 I might be happy (unlikely), but other than essendon fans who would watch a game with unprecedented mistakes, stoppages, flooding, and congestion?
Luv_our_club
Norm Smith Medallist
- Feb 14, 2017
- 6,883
- 12,960
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
we are at page 6.... after a few hours.
Is it not a media beat up, or are we all suckers?
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
smasha
It's Time!
Media beat up.
Richmond on top of the ladder,defense mechanisms in place.
Richmond on top of the ladder,defense mechanisms in place.
Except that it won't work. If it starts to do that, clubs will start recruiting athletes over footballers and congestion will remain the same, but with players that are genuinely poorly skilled. Won't that just be a joy to watch
- Apr 30, 2015
- 15,782
- 28,294
- AFL Club
- West Coast
What's with all the Richmond supporters getting defensive about this topic?
- Apr 18, 2005
- 34,711
- 31,444
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
What’s with every Richmond supporter getting defensive about every topic....
Toump Ass
The Big Deal
- Jun 14, 2015
- 21,783
- 49,468
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Port Adelaide Power
Here's ten for a start:
1. Cheerleaders. Some hot af women in jack shit clothing bouncing around never hurt anyone, but don't forget some ripped dudes in g-bangers too. No need to discriminate in 2018. I went to Shitihad on the weekend and they had no half-time entertainment at all. What the ****?
2. Speaking of Shitihad, open the ****ing roof if it's 22 degrees and sunny outside you stupid campaigners.
3. Ban Australian flags at the football, I saw a bunch at ANZAC day and it made me want to throw up on myself. Save your nationalistic bullshit for the V8's you neanderthal ****ing mouth-breathers.
4. You want people to watch AFL? Then stop scheduling Carlton on Friday nights until they can win a ****ing game.
5. Fix the score review or **** it off
6. Penalise ducking
7. Pay women a proper wage to play football. AFLw is great and it creates interest in football amongst the fairer sex and if you think women coming to football is offensive you should probably stay at home.
8. Bring back curtain-raisers so we can enjoy a full day at the footy- reserves, AFLw, whatever.
9. Fixture equality please.
10. Leave the ****ing rules alone and let the game evolve naturally.
1. Cheerleaders. Some hot af women in jack shit clothing bouncing around never hurt anyone, but don't forget some ripped dudes in g-bangers too. No need to discriminate in 2018. I went to Shitihad on the weekend and they had no half-time entertainment at all. What the ****?
2. Speaking of Shitihad, open the ****ing roof if it's 22 degrees and sunny outside you stupid campaigners.
3. Ban Australian flags at the football, I saw a bunch at ANZAC day and it made me want to throw up on myself. Save your nationalistic bullshit for the V8's you neanderthal ****ing mouth-breathers.
4. You want people to watch AFL? Then stop scheduling Carlton on Friday nights until they can win a ****ing game.
5. Fix the score review or **** it off
6. Penalise ducking
7. Pay women a proper wage to play football. AFLw is great and it creates interest in football amongst the fairer sex and if you think women coming to football is offensive you should probably stay at home.
8. Bring back curtain-raisers so we can enjoy a full day at the footy- reserves, AFLw, whatever.
9. Fixture equality please.
10. Leave the ****ing rules alone and let the game evolve naturally.
