News Interchange Caps 2014

[Skippy231]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-03-05/no-backing-down-on-cap-demetriou

Sounds like the AFL have made their decision. Any thoughts? i think this could have a significant effect on us as we generally have a pretty high rotation rate

 

[MRB37]

Bah, can't they just leave the game along for once? Always constantly fiddling and messing about with the rules.

 

[Team DJ]

**** off Andy D you w***er.

Leave the game alone.

No one wants this rule in. If i was the players association i would strike. What a joke.

What is the point, who really cares how many times someone comes to the bench. Media ad AFL beat up.

In spite of rising interchanges, Tex still kicks 5, Danger still collects 30, thats what the fans want to see.

Player wont be able to play past the ae of 25 the way things are going. The sub rule and now this.

$10 says this will cause more injuries due to tired over worked bodies.

#LeaveTheGameAlone

 

[Smoooothy]

but, andy d isn't arrogant and listens to the public??

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

**** off Andy D you Moo.

Leave the game alone.

No one wants this rule in. If i was the players association i would strike. What a joke.

What is the point, who really cares how many times someone comes to the bench. Media ad AFL beat up.

In spite of rising interchanges, Tex still kicks 5, Danger still collects 30, thats what the fans want to see.

Player wont be able to play past the ae of 25 the way things are going. The sub rule and now this.

$10 says this will cause more injuries due to tired over worked bodies.

#LeaveTheGameAlone

I concur 100%.

Andy D is completely arrogant & doesn't give a shyte what anyone else thinks.

This only goes to confirm that it is time for Fat Controller to retire.

Will be interesting to see how Micky M & rest of the coaches respond, as they won't be silenced!

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

PS. This will impact on the Crows, as we have the highest use of interchange changes.

 

[Deaneus!]

If i was the players association i would strike.

If they have any balls they will. It will be sports scientists at ten paces, and I'm pretty sure the players won't like it.

Plus, they've just added another level of administration to the game. Pity they're no good at administration.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

If they have any balls they will. It will be sports scientists at ten paces, and I'm pretty sure the players won't like it.

Plus, they've just added another level of administration to the game. Pity they're no good at administration.

I thought the coaches are going to count the changes

Perhaps they could get Adrian Anderson back with his yellow post-it notes, but this time they are pre-numbered 1 to 20.

 

[Team DJ]

I concur 100%.

Andy D is completely arrogant & doesn't give a shyte what anyone else thinks.

This only goes to confirm that it is time for Fat Controller to retire.

Will be interesting to see how Micky M & rest of the coaches respond, as they won't be silenced!

Is Mick normally on Double A on Tuesdays?

Could be a fun show tonight

 

[Dirty Bird]

$10 says this will cause more injuries due to tired over worked bodies.

#LeaveTheGameAlone

And I put $10 on the game becoming ultra defensive to maintain energy to avoid high levels of fatigue.

In turn, turning the game into what the AFL wants to avoid.

Therefore after 1 season, it'll be dropped.

 

[Team DJ]

And I put $10 on the game becoming ultra defensive to maintain energy to avoid high levels of fatigue.

In turn, turning the game into what the AFL wants to avoid.

Therefore after 1 season, it'll be dropped.

Correct. 16 Blokes behind the Footy again

 

[Cap]

I don't think it will turn ultra defensive, what I do hope is there a move back to more specalised players.

i.e you need a forward who can convert more often than not, so you recruit guys who can kick goals rather than a guy who hope to turn into a goal kicker.

 

[Team DJ]

The one they should look into is 16 per side.

Less players means less congestion, less stoppages, therfore less big hits and dangerous tackles.

More open space, free flowing and higher scoring.

Think 16 per, 4 bench, 2 subs.

 

[Team DJ]

I don't think it will turn ultra defensive, what I do hope is there a move back to more specalised players.

i.e you need a forward who can convert more often than not, so you recruit guys who can kick goals rather than a guy who hope to turn into a goal kicker.

Maybe, but the specialist small forwards and back will die.
Stephen Milne wouldnt get a game because he couldnt go through the midfield as well.
It'll end up being 2 key forwards and Backs. 1 Ruck, and a utility type.
Then 16 midfielders that just rotate through the other roles.

 

[Dirty Bird]

12 on field
each player gets a bib saying "F", "B" or "C"
Can only play in your zone, if you leave it, free against.

 

[WAG]

12 on field
each player gets a bib saying "F", "B" or "C"
Can only play in your zone, if you leave it, free against.

Players will have to line up before each game to get the length of their nails checked!

 

[Smoooothy]

Players will have to line up before each game to get the length of their nails checked!

they will look lovely in their lycra skirts too

 

[WAG]

they will look lovely in their lycra skirts too

Tex changes mullet for ponytail!

 

[BornPort]

And I put $10 on the game becoming ultra defensive to maintain energy to avoid high levels of fatigue.

In turn, turning the game into what the AFL wants to avoid.

Therefore after 1 season, it'll be dropped.

It won't be dropped. The AFL will come up with another ridiculous rule to supplement this one.

 

[Dirty Bird]

It won't be dropped. The AFL will come up with another ridiculous rule to supplement this one.

Sounds like the ruck situation

AFL wants to see ruckman jumping into each other rather than blocking the other one out.
They put pine across to say you must come from either side.
Injuries come from it.
THerefore they put in the circle to reduce runup

If they didn't put in the 1st rule, the 2nd isn't needed

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

And I put $10 on the game becoming ultra defensive to maintain energy to avoid high levels of fatigue.

In turn, turning the game into what the AFL wants to avoid.

Therefore after 1 season, it'll be dropped.

Coaches will look to a strategy to slow the game down - there will be more time-wasting & stupid backward kicking to recoup.

 

[fabs33]

Is it me or has Demetriou developed an over-inflated sense of ownership over our game?

 

[OrdinaryJoel]

Someone put a bullet through AD's head... (inb4carded).

The guy has over the past decade, introduced so many rules which contradict each other and mess up the game we love. First they complained about the speed and marketability of the game, which then leads to a surplus of rules or even words into the ears of umpires to officiate differently and vice versa (see weird influxes in frees given and stupid tinkering of current rules et al.)

There are so many rules that have been introduced that have boiled my blood at one point, that to list them would give me a heart failure or someshit.

This being one of them of course...

 

[AFC979810]

Ever since Petrenko played 23 games and firmly entrenched himself in the top 22 - Vader has been plotting a rule change to ensure he won't become a successful footballer.

Well played Vader - well played.

 

[Vader]

Someone put a bullet through AD's head... (inb4carded).

The guy has over the past decade, introduced so many rules which contradict each other and mess up the game we love. First they complained about the speed and marketability of the game, which then leads to a surplus of rules or even words into the ears of umpires to officiate differently and vice versa (see weird influxes in frees given and stupid tinkering of current rules et al.)

There are so many rules that have been introduced that have boiled my blood at one point, that to list them would give me a heart failure or someshit.

This being one of them of course...

Name one example where the rules have contradicted each other. Just one.

I'm betting what you come up with will be show your misunderstanding of the AFL's intent, rather than an actual contradiction. That's not having a go at you - it's more the fault of the AFL for failing to communicate their intentions properly.

For example.. The AFL have never tried to increase the speed of the game. Rules like throwing the ball up around the ground, rather than bouncing it, are designed to maximise the amount of time that the ball is in play (minimising stoppages).

The sub rule is the most misunderstood of all time. It's actually two unrelated rule changes, introduced simultaneously. First, they introduced a sub - the purpose of this was to minimise the disadvantage suffered by teams losing a player to injury. It worked. Secondly, they reduced the bench size from 4 to 3. The purpose of this was twofold - it forced the better players to spend more time on the field and it countered the ugly flooding & zoning defensive tactics by fatiguing the players so that games opened up more in the second half. It worked.

Limiting the interchange rule is an extension of the 3-man interchange rule, with much the same design & intent.

For the record, it was only about 4 or 5 years about 4 or 5 years ago that the first team exceeded 80 interchanges in a single game. It was only 3-4 years ago that 80+ interchanges became the norm. If coaches & teams didn't deem 80+ interchanges to be necessary 5 years ago, then I'm sure they'll manage to cope just fine in 2014 when 80 interchanges becomes a hard limit.