I'm in the zone - zone experiment

Pessimistic

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts HBF's Milk Crate - 70k Posts TheBrownDog
Sep 13, 2000
86,852
42,951
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
So lets get this right, the AFL and the saints did an experiment with zones, but didn't bother experimenting with less onfield numbers.

Ladies and gentlemen, The AFL, proudly seeking out failed rules and replacing them with even crazier rules they have to change later

examples:
The interchange and sub
The quick kick out after a behind

so what is the 'penalty' if someone breaks the new zone rule?
 
Jul 13, 2015
36,294
40,453
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I have no issue with reducing interchange numbers. Other that that there are a lot of stupid ideas floating around.

But really the first change should be interchange only after goals. Would stop the collisions when fresh players appear from nowhere. And would itself reduce the number of changes possible.
 

Pessimistic

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts HBF's Milk Crate - 70k Posts TheBrownDog
Sep 13, 2000
86,852
42,951
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
The most unique feature of Australian football is the freedom to run wherever you want. Would hate to see zones.

Yes it seems to be low on the "Essence of the game" requirements. apart from centre square, everything else is 'in play' rules.

Id bet if the mandated 2 players from each team to be in each 'endzone' at stoppages, at least one would be a good gut runner who could repeatedly run to the ends and back to where the team wants them.
 

Pessimistic

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts HBF's Milk Crate - 70k Posts TheBrownDog
Sep 13, 2000
86,852
42,951
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
Theres now reports there have been trials with 16 a side - you wonder if the other two will be moved to interchange to keep 22. Anti interchange commentators will go into overdrive
 

D-N-R

Club Legend
Apr 4, 2005
2,999
3,443
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
WCE
Yes it seems to be low on the "Essence of the game" requirements. apart from centre square, everything else is 'in play' rules.

Id bet if the mandated 2 players from each team to be in each 'endzone' at stoppages, at least one would be a good gut runner who could repeatedly run to the ends and back to where the team wants them.
If they want to experiment, they need to play more than a single game. They really need to run it for a season in the VFA, WAFL or SANFL (or all 3). You need to see how the changes will affect tactics over time.

That said, I think zoning is a bad idea. Reducing the number of on-field players is the way to go as this will have no effect on the rules and won't require any extra monitoring of players other than what is currently done at the interchange. Zoning means a lot of stuff may happen away from the play which is confusing for spectators. Having players entering and leaving a zone on opposite sides of the field could be difficult for umpires to adjudicate as well.
 
Back