International Rules 2011

[DivideandMultiply]

I disagree actually.

The concept is dead and the Australians are to blame. They killed it the year they used it primarily as an excuse to king hit and beat-up Irishmen half their size. Chris Johnson was the primary offender, he embarrassed himself, the league, the code and the country.

It was an ugly, ugly spectacle that a lot of people switched off, and haven’t and won’t switch back on.

Despite any stereotype to the contrary, Australians don’t enjoy cowardly, needless violence, nor an uneven fight.

I unwittingly found myself cheering for the Irish that night, and have spoken to plenty of Aussies who were the same.

Maybe if the physical match-up was even, the spectacle of violence would be appealing.

It’s was already a rubbish concept and that display killed what little durability it had. May there be less than 20k people at Etihad, and it soon be consigned to the sewerage pipes of history. Absolute shite in its purest form.

You are dead wrong.

What killed the concept is Ireland losing and last year.

The Irish media are parochial in the extreme and the reaction to any touch ups or losses is completely going cold on the idea.

In 2010 Australia played exactly the way the Irish media had been demanding and wiped the floor with the Irish team.

A more flaccid reaction I have not seen.

I even remember non Australian calls to bring back "the biff".

Which makes me a little suspicious about the nominated Australian squad, which resembles a bad joke more than even a C-Grade squad.

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

What a shame ROK isn't playing, he's the best at roughing them up and being a prick but not being a thug at the same time.

Will still watch, and judge me all you like but I love the aggression in the game.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

What a shame ROK isn't playing, he's the best at roughing them up and being a prick but not being a thug at the same time.

Will still watch, and judge me all you like but I love the aggression in the game.

The Irish media demonised the Australian players and the series was nearly canned.

Cue promises of playing nice and resurrection.

More Gaelic inspired rule adjustments and moaning about Haussie tuggery and the need for a more skillfull spectacle in line with the good old Gaelic tradition and we finally field a team that is chosen too and moderately plays that way. Irish get pantsed, Irish media and the putz on Hogsmeade etc baw, whining how the series is dead and so on.

The Australian players, fans and media seem to have finally stopped buying the AFL's bullshit and just dun give a ****, for the players and staff it was all about the overseas trip anyway.

And that brings us to now. Clubs and players have more pressing issues and my suspicious nature makes me think that the AFL are happy to exploit this fact, even push it along and field a shitfully inadequate team in the hope the ever predictable Irish media and fans will jump back on the bandwaggon if they score the win and maybe a loss will drum up some Aussie patriotic sentiment.

Personally, I hope despite the rediculous side we are fielding that we crush them, they cry and it ends. Sadly this won't be the case.

 

[laminex]

The Irish media demonised the Australian players and the series was nearly canned.

Cue promises of playing nice and resurrection.

More Gaelic inspired rule adjustments and moaning about Haussie tuggery and the need for a more skillfull spectacle in line with the good old Gaelic tradition and we finally field a team that is chosen too and moderately plays that way. Irish get pantsed, Irish media and the putz on Hogsmeade etc baw, whining how the series is dead and so on.

The Australian players, fans and media seem to have finally stopped buying the AFL's bullshit and just dun give a ****, for the players and staff it was all about the overseas trip anyway.

And that brings us to now. Clubs and players have more pressing issues and my suspicious nature makes me think that the AFL are happy to exploit this fact, even push it along and field a shitfully inadequate team in the hope the ever predictable Irish media and fans will jump back on the bandwaggon if they score the win and maybe a loss will drum up some Aussie patriotic sentiment.

Personally, I hope despite the rediculous side we are fielding that we crush them, they cry and it ends. Sadly this won't be the case.

happy much ?

 

[cos789]

What a shame ROK isn't playing, he's the best at roughing them up and being a prick but not being a thug at the same time.

Will still watch, and judge me all you like but I love the aggression in the game.

I love the game too.Simple fact is that it's better than not having a game.
IMO I think we should pick an AA team and not a team designed to win.
That seems to be a criticism of a lot of people.

Until they come up with a replacement like SOO or summer football I'll be watching.

 

[dread and might]

No Adam Good-s???
Owned the Irish last time IIRC

 

[cos789]

West Australian has the game listed as being on Ten.
Is this confirmation or them being slack ?

 

[footballfreak]

Scrap the game, nothing international about this game at all if it's only being played by 2 nations. It's just another novelty game, no one cares about it.

 

[cos789]

Scrap the game.

Why ?

nothing international about this game.

It's called "International Rules" !

it's only being played by 2 nations.

Played by plenty of countries.

no one care about it.

Then why does everybody show up to watch it when they don't show up to watch other sports ? You don't have to watch it. You can catch up on your grammar.

 

[footballfreak]

Why ?



It's called "International Rules" !



Played by plenty of countries.



Then why does everybody show up to watch it when they don't show up to watch other sports ? You don't have to watch it. You can catch up on your grammar.

If you can't include any other countries in the competition then it has no right to be called "international rules" The AFL is not gonna go out of it's way to win the competition. It is a petty sport which has little to zero prestige.

 

[zachary]

If you can't include any other countries in the competition then it has no right to be called "international rules" The AFL is not gonna go out of it's way to win the competition. It is a petty sport which has little to zero prestige.

But there's two! (Homer Simpson)

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Does that mean we need a new name for ODI's?

 

[cos789]

If you can't include any other countries in the competition then it has no right to be called "international rules"

So rl has no right to be called international ?

The AFL is not gonna go out of it's way to win the competition.

It's the opposite problem . Australia has switched to picking a winning team not an AA team.

It is a petty sport which has little to zero prestige.

You mean like the rl wc ?

 

[Dazb86]

Hahaha shit the team we've selected is awful.

 

[Naphula]

If you can't include any other countries in the competition then it has no right to be called "international rules" The AFL is not gonna go out of it's way to win the competition. It is a petty sport which has little to zero prestige.

in·ter·na·tion·al

Adjective: Existing, occurring, or carried on between two or more nations.

 

[brucetiki]

The games are being televised on Channel 10 - first test is on at 8:30pm Friday night.

I wonder if 10 have any AFL commentators still contracted to the station - otherwise we may end up with Steve Carfino

 

[sighclone]

So rl has no right to be called international ?

If there are at least two nations which have professional club sides, I would say yes. In fact, four nations have professional clubs. Plus, unlike rugby league, aussie rules was never officially banned in institutions like the British university system and the armed forces. If the rugby schism had never happened, chances are Aussie Rules would be confined to Victoria, SA and Tasmania. WA would have probably turned towards rugby.
That is not a scenario I would wish for.

 

[sighclone]

If you can't include any other countries in the competition then it has no right to be called "international rules" The AFL is not gonna go out of it's way to win the competition. It is a petty sport which has little to zero prestige.

AFL has quite a grand product, it's just limited and most AFL fans feel protective, it seems like part of their nation. This is plain wrong. If you search deep enough, it's obvious that Australia's game is British and or Irish in origin.

 

[sighclone]

in·ter·na·tion·al

Adjective: Existing, occurring, or carried on between two or more nations.

Even at at an amateur level? Or is the term 'Compromised Rules' more appropriate.

 

[blacksockred]

OK question about the laws of the game...

Seems simple but... Just how far can a player run with the ball?


Article 15.2.2 (b) of the laws of the game 2010 says: "Where a Player is moving whilst in possession of the football, he must bounce or touch the football on the ground at least once every 10 metres or 6 steps (whatever the greater), irrespective of whether such Player is running in a straight line or otherwise. A Player may bounce the ball or touch it off the ground on a maximum of 2 occasions before disposal but may toe tap (play the ball from hand to foot to hand) as many times as he wishes. (A Player may bounce the football basketball style when he is attempting to take control of it)."

So, I gather that a player must not run more than 6 paces or 10 metres without bouncing or touching the ball to the ground. But a player can't bounce or touch to the ground more than twice. A player can toe tap as many times as he wishes... but so what! The laws do not say that a player must bounce, touch to the ground, or toe tap every 6 paces/10 metres. I.e. the laws don't specifically say that a toe tap every 6 paces/10 metres is an alternative to bouncing/touching to the ground every 6 paces/10 metres.

For example... a player takes possession, runs 9 metres, bounces, runs 9 metres, bounces, runs 9 metres, toe taps, runs 9 metres, toe taps, runs 9 metres, toe taps, runs 9 metres, toe taps, and so on.... is this legal?

I would think so but the pedantic semantic in me says WTF.

 

[MattyEdgeworth]

OK question about the laws of the game...

Seems simple but... Just how far can a player run with the ball?


Article 15.2.2 (b) of the laws of the game 2010 says: "Where a Player is moving whilst in possession of the football, he must bounce or touch the football on the ground at least once every 10 metres or 6 steps (whatever the greater), irrespective of whether such Player is running in a straight line or otherwise. A Player may bounce the ball or touch it off the ground on a maximum of 2 occasions before disposal but may toe tap (play the ball from hand to foot to hand) as many times as he wishes. (A Player may bounce the football basketball style when he is attempting to take control of it)."

So, I gather that a player must not run more than 6 paces or 10 metres without bouncing or touching the ball to the ground. But a player can't bounce or touch to the ground more than twice. A player can toe tap as many times as he wishes... but so what! The laws do not say that a player must bounce, touch to the ground, or toe tap every 6 paces/10 metres. I.e. the laws don't specifically say that a toe tap every 6 paces/10 metres is an alternative to bouncing/touching to the ground every 6 paces/10 metres.

For example... a player takes possession, runs 9 metres, bounces, runs 9 metres, bounces, runs 9 metres, toe taps, runs 9 metres, toe taps, runs 9 metres, toe taps, runs 9 metres, toe taps, and so on.... is this legal?

I would think so but the pedantic semantic in me says WTF.

What are the rules on running with the ball in AFL?

 

[blacksockred]

What are the rules on running with the ball in AFL?

Run, Forrest, so long as you bounce or touch the ball to the ground at least once every 15 metres.

 

[blacksockred]

What's the rule when a player with the ball get's tackled and wrapped up, with the ball held to him, unable to dispose of the ball, and had no prior or reasonable opportunity to dispose of the ball? In Aussie rules the ump would do a ball up...

Seems the IR 2010 rules only say this much:

15.2.3 Holding the Football – Prior Opportunity/No Prior Opportunity
Where the Referee is satisfied that a Player in possession of the football:
(a) has had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the Referee shall award a Free Kick against that Player if the Player does not kick or strike the ball away with the hand immediately when he is Correctly Tackled; or
(b) has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the Referee shall award a Free Kick against that Player if, upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not dispose of the football or attempt to do so after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.

​

 

[Aucklander]

Even at at an amateur level? Or is the term 'Compromised Rules' more appropriate.

International Rules is fine. It's only a name and it gives Aussie Rules players a chance to represent their country even if it is at an altered version of the game they play. That can't be a bad thing.

 

[roostersgal4eva]

International Rules is fine. It's only a name and it gives Aussie Rules players a chance to represent their country even if it is at an altered version of the game they play. That can't be a bad thing.

Bingo!

When the crowds are heathy & every player that's played say it's the best thing they've done (even premiership players) it will stay. this year it's going to suffer cause of the very late finish to the season for us and their season still going. Next year business as usual

No one has to like the series - I'd just like to think that those who don't have better things to do the ruin the discussion of this who do