Mega Thread Port Forum 'General AFL Talk' Thread Part 17

[powermacs]

Hawks have been messing with the man on the mark in the entire Clarko era.
This rule will hurt them more then anyone.

No it won’t. Man on the mark not moving makes it easier for him to play keepers off again. AFL want teams to run and move forward, Clarko and co will just chip it sideways.

 

[Eddie Dingle]

My question is, why is a 120 v 115 game better than an 80 v 75 game? Many of the best games have been low scoring affairs - why the obsession with trying to generate higher scores?

Strategy means nothing apparently.

Goals and speccies are the only things that will keep people watching.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

No it won’t. Man on the mark not moving makes it easier for him to play keepers off again. AFL want teams to run and move forward, Clarko and co will just chip it sideways.

Not to mention the fact that "1 metre" for a Hawthorn defender is a much further distance than "1 metre" for a defender from most other sides.

 

[malcheski]

Just fu** off now!

Seems a very, 'look over there' tactic. There is no hope their admin will be based there. Potentially an outcrop office like we have/had at Tennis SA but there is zero room for them at Adelaide Oval to build what is necessary let alone what they are after as a home base.

 

[philreich]

Strategy means nothing apparently.

Goals and speccies are the only things that will keep people watching.

Well T20 cricket is apparently the way of the future - sounds like the AFL wants "T20 football" as well.

 

[Interstater]

My question is, why is a 120 v 115 game better than an 80 v 75 game? Many of the best games have been low scoring affairs - why the obsession with trying to generate higher scores?

More opportunities for advertisements.

 

[Steve Dore]

Well T20 cricket is apparently the way of the future - sounds like the AFL wants "T20 football" as well.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

So much this.

What issue has been plaguing the game that requires this significant rule change to rectify?

More goals = more ads for broadcasters = more TV revenue = more bonus $ for Gill.

 

[Steve Dore]

More goals = more ads for broadcasters = more TV revenue = more bonus $ for Gill.

I agree that the broadcasters are behind this agenda and it has nothing to do with improving the game.

 

[Grave Danger]

With quarters back to the 20 minutes plus time on, reduced interchanges and players zig-zagging across the ground (even more), they'll be too buggered to kick more goals!

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

My question is, why is a 120 v 115 game better than an 80 v 75 game? Many of the best games have been low scoring affairs - why the obsession with trying to generate higher scores?

Depends on the style of play. If we are comparing games where Port isn't playing and there is no rain, I'm more likely to enjoy a 19.6 v 17.13 game as opposed to a 10.20 v 10.15 game with lots of poor kicking for goal and rushed behinds.

 

[Steve Dore]

If more goals = better game then the 2007 GF, 30 goals (24-6), was a better game than the 2004 GF, 27 goals (17-10).

 

[philreich]

Depends on the style of play. If we are comparing games where Port isn't playing and there is no rain, I'm more likely to enjoy a 19.6 v 17.13 game as opposed to a 10.20 v 10.15 game with lots of poor kicking for goal and rushed behinds.

I was thinking of a game like that Geelong v St. Kilda game in 2009 - not high scoring, but arguably one of the best home and away games ever.

 

[VineValerian]

Seems a very, 'look over there' tactic. There is no hope their admin will be based there. Potentially an outcrop office like we have/had at Tennis SA but there is zero room for them at Adelaide Oval to build what is necessary let alone what they are after as a home base.

AO is the absolute LAST place I want them to be.
The further away from AO the better.
M Gambier sounds about right.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I was thinking of a game like that Geelong v St. Kilda game in 2009 - not high scoring, but arguably one of the best home and away games ever.

The 2 best Port Adelaide home and away games I have attended, are the 2 consecutive games against Brisbane, in Rd 22 2002 at Footy Park, and then Rd 17 2003 at the Gabba and those 2 games were 13 goals v 13 goals and 15 goals v 15 goals.

It helps that we won those 2 games, but they lived up to their heavyweight billing hype of 1st v 2nd games late in the season, and more importantly, the quality of the football was elite and you saw both elite attacking and elite defensive footy.

That sort of score line is what I want to see, where a combined 6 or 7 goals a quarter on average are scored. The 2002 game both sides only kicked a goal each in the first quarter, but it then opened up.

If you have elite sides with elite skills, then in reasonable weather conditions they should be good enough to average 3 or 4 goals a quarter. This soccer parking the bus in defence and trying to win 1-0 is what has made the game boring. Sure every team wants to stop momentum and ok they need to park the bus for a short period to stop the bleeding, but there isn't anything more boring when one side isn't really trying to score for most of the game.

The spirit of Aussie Rules is scoring - otherwise you wouldn't get a score for missing the goals, and there would be a crossbar which meant you wouldn't get a score if the ball went over or under the crossbar like in other football codes and other ball sports.

And that Geelong v St Kilda game in 2009 at a roof closed Docklands where both teams entered the game with a win loss record at 13-0, was St Kilda 14.7 91 to Geelong 13.7 85 - very similar score to the 2002 Port v Briz game.

 

[Alberton Proud]

With quarters back to the 20 minutes plus time on, reduced interchanges and players zig-zagging across the ground (even more), they'll be too buggered to kick more goals!

Not if the oppo are all forced to stand still

 

[Alberton Proud]

If more goals = better game then the 2007 GF, 30 goals (24-6), was a better game than the 2004 GF, 27 goals (17-10).

Please just don't

 

[El_Scorcho]

My question is, why is a 120 v 115 game better than an 80 v 75 game? Many of the best games have been low scoring affairs - why the obsession with trying to generate higher scores?

I have a couple of opinions here.

Firstly, a defensive game is great, but what's happening now is that every game is defensive. There were 15 scores of 100+ last season. I know it was a shortened season full of shortened games, but 14 times in the regular season, less than once a round, and 1 solitary time in the finals.

For comparison, teams scored less than 40 points 47 times. It's not just a lot of 80 v 75 type scores.

Secondly, sports is star driven and it's ultimately a more fun league when forwards are kicking bags. I can absolutely still enjoy the grind of a defensive game between 2 defensively brilliant teams, but forwards kicking bags is fun. Fun brings people to the footy. I grew up in the 90s with a guernsey with number 11 on the back.

 

[powermacs]

Seems a very, 'look over there' tactic. There is no hope their admin will be based there. Potentially an outcrop office like we have/had at Tennis SA but there is zero room for them at Adelaide Oval to build what is necessary let alone what they are after as a home base.

So looking at this campaigners Twitter he’s the new sports writer. I’m sure cricket would be happy to move training games ect so the crows can train. He must be on work experience, there is no way anyone would get payed as an actual journalist to write something so stupid.
FYI he also wrote an article last week that port were looking for a handout for our upgrade. *whit.

 

[Grave Danger]

So looking at this campaigners Twitter he’s the new sports writer. I’m sure cricket would be happy to move training games ect so the crows can train. He must be on work experience, there is no way anyone would get payed as an actual journalist to write something so stupid.
FYI he also wrote an article last week that port were looking for a handout for our upgrade. fu**whit.

I wonder if he pronounces his name Simeon as "Simian" (which means ape or monkey), or just the regular "Simon", which would be just as pretentious as that advertising industry twat from the 80s/90s Siimon someboy or other.

 

[RossFC]

 

[Alberton Proud]

Gamer's thumb ?

 

[RossFC]

Gamer's thumb ?

Pulled a calf in Fortnite.

 

[Alberton Proud]

Pulled a calf in Fortnite.

Moooooo !

 

[backtozero]

I don't wanna see anyone get injured...... but suck a bag, Hawthorn.