Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy Rd 22 Blues go down but lots to like

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Toddski said:
My old man is adamant we should remove the interchange bench. Just a 19th and 20th man like it used to be. I don't think the players could last very long without having a rest. Would love to see it trialled.
Click to expand...
Nope......absolutely not. Go and watch some full games (not highlights) out of the 70s & 80s before interchange came in. Come the 10 minute mark of the 3rd quarter players just fell down over the ball with no attempt to take possession, clear the ball or tackle an opponent. They would just lie there and beg the ump for a free. There was just ball-up after ball-up after ball-up until the ump eventually paid a free, more out of impatience than for any meaningful infringement, just to clear the ball out of the area. The game was so slow as a result that you really only needed one field umpire. It was shithouse in every respect and one the main reasons interchange was brought in. Clubs will go back to recruiting athletes rather than footballers and if you think the game will look better with 22 Rhys Stanleys V 22 Daniel Gorringes then God help us.

There is not one rule change made in the last 5 years that has benefitted the game. Not a single one:
  • 10m Exclusion Area - Too big an area to police consistently. The player that used to sit 5m off the mark to prevent the player with ball playing on now goes downfield to clog up space. A classic case of a poorly thought out rule change where those with rose-coloured glasses purely just looked at it from their own perspective and vision rather than how coaches might counter it.
  • Nominating Rucks - Takes too long to find out who's doing what and allows players from far and wide to get to the contest. Only encourages congestion. We were sold this rule change because it would supposedly ensure the future of the lumbering ruck.......enter Shaun Grigg. Get rid of it FFS.
  • No 3rd Man Up - To supposedly protect the biggest, strongest, meanest buggers on the field, because Sandilands became the first ruckman in over 100 years of footy to be injured by the 3rd man up. One more man in the air means one less on the ground, which may assist easing congestion on the deck. Here is the classic reason as to why coaches shouldn't be involved in rule changes. It's called self interest.
  • 30 Second Shot Clock - Get rid of it. That you can have multiple durations 30 seconds inside 50 when everyone else has 10 seconds is ridiculous. KPFs have always been the games biggest sooks and remain so.
  • Scoring Reviews - Get rid of them full stop. Unless you're going to have the same camera options at all grounds, including Cairns, Gold Coast, Hobart, Launceston, Alice Springs, Canberra, Darwin & China then the exercise is pointless. Then you have the issue of the video ump trying to make decisions when games are broadcast in different definitions (standard def 576p, high def 720p and full high def 1080p). When you add that the video ump is often trying to over rule a decision with a blurry 2D video at the behest of the field ump when the goal ump has watched it in 3D astounds me. Even when the video does highlight a discrepancy, the decisions made by the video ump are often confounding to say the least. Just leave it to the goal umps.
How about we get rid of this lot and see what the game looks like rather introducing more bloody rules to fix the unintended consequences brought about by previous poorly thought out rule changes. Some things I would consider though are:
  • Make The Throw Legal - The throw is now the unofficial 3rd method of legal disposal. I see a lot of scoops, slaps, handoffs, chucks and out-and-out rugby passes, but they sure as hell aren't handballs. I'd go so far as to say 1 in every 4 disposals that passes for a handball is actually a throw and if I can see it 50m away in the stands then you can't tell me 3 umpires 10m away can't. Either outlaw it or legalise it, because right now it's a bloody joke. If you pay a free for throwing the ball it will aid in clearing congestion.
  • Reward The Tackler - If a player loses the ball when tackled by any method other than a kick or a handball then penalise him irrespective of prior opportunity. That will assist clearing congestion.
It is now 2018 not 1964. Players now run and now tackle, while back in 1964 no once gave a ****. The handball used to be an "in case of emergency break glass" method of disposal, now it is an offensive weapon. There are far too many people living in the past and really need to have a good hard sniff of what they're shovelling. Be very careful what you wish for and why Toddski.
 
Blue and Blue said:
I find it laughable to be honest this argument between Byrne and Williamson.
Its called depth. The very thing we have lacked for a couple of decades.
Two young men fighting for the same thing.

Byrne was terrific yesterday.
We can see just why they have stuck with him through injuries.
Click to expand...

I see Docherty Williamson & Byrne in the same side. Lamb is the wildcard and Simpson drops back as the 7th defender
 
Byrne did some good stuff yesterday. Obviously Doc is first-picked back there. Simmo is picked until he's done, but that's clearly not toooooo far away. Everyone on this board is convinced Williamson is a star, so that's exciting. Hopefully he is!

Lamb should be ecstatic he's still in the AFL, and will need to fight tooth and nail to stay relevant at the level when all of the above are available. But that's a healthy thing. He might come in for specific roles, or as a depth option.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

The Smoking Gun said:
Nope......absolutely not. Go and watch some full games (not highlights) out of the 70s & 80s before interchange came in. Come the 10 minute mark of the 3rd quarter players just fell down over the ball with no attempt to take possession, clear the ball or tackle an opponent. They would just lie there and beg the ump for a free. There was just ball-up after ball-up after ball-up until the ump eventually paid a free, more out of impatience than for any meaningful infringement, just to clear the ball out of the area. The game was so slow as a result that you really only needed one field umpire. It was shithouse in every respect and one the main reasons interchange was brought in. Clubs will go back to recruiting athletes rather than footballers and if you think the game will look better with 22 Rhys Stanleys V 22 Daniel Gorringes then God help us.

There is not one rule change made in the last 5 years that has benefitted the game. Not a single one:
  • 10m Exclusion Area - Too big an area to police consistently. The player that used to sit 5m off the mark to prevent the player with ball playing on now goes downfield to clog up space. A classic case of a poorly thought out rule change where those with rose-coloured glasses purely just looked at it from their own perspective and vision rather than how coaches might counter it.
  • Nominating Rucks - Takes too long to find out who's doing what and allows players from far and wide to get to the contest. Only encourages congestion. We were sold this rule change because it would supposedly ensure the future of the lumbering ruck.......enter Shaun Grigg. Get rid of it FFS.
  • No 3rd Man Up - To supposedly protect the biggest, strongest, meanest buggers on the field, because Sandilands became the first ruckman in over 100 years of footy to be injured by the 3rd man up. One more man in the air means one less on the ground, which may assist easing congestion on the deck. Here is the classic reason as to why coaches shouldn't be involved in rule changes. It's called self interest.
  • 30 Second Shot Clock - Get rid of it. That you can have multiple durations 30 seconds inside 50 when everyone else has 10 seconds is ridiculous. KPFs have always been the games biggest sooks and remain so.
  • Scoring Reviews - Get rid of them full stop. Unless you're going to have the same camera options at all grounds, including Cairns, Gold Coast, Hobart, Launceston, Alice Springs, Canberra, Darwin & China then the exercise is pointless. Then you have the issue of the video ump trying to make decisions when games are broadcast in different definitions (standard def 576p, high def 720p and full high def 1080p). When you add that the video ump is often trying to over rule a decision with a blurry 2D video at the behest of the field ump when the goal ump has watched it in 3D astounds me. Even when the video does highlight a discrepancy, the decisions made by the video ump are often confounding to say the least. Just leave it to the goal umps.
How about we get rid of this lot and see what the game looks like rather introducing more bloody rules to fix the unintended consequences brought about by previous poorly thought out rule changes. Some things I would consider though are:
  • Make The Throw Legal - The throw is now the unofficial 3rd method of legal disposal. I see a lot of scoops, slaps, handoffs, chucks and out-and-out rugby passes, but they sure as hell aren't handballs. I'd go so far as to say 1 in every 4 disposals that passes for a handball is actually a throw and if I can see it 50m away in the stands then you can't tell me 3 umpires 10m away can't. Either outlaw it or legalise it, because right now it's a bloody joke. If you pay a free for throwing the ball it will aid in clearing congestion.
  • Reward The Tackler - If a player loses the ball when tackled by any method other than a kick or a handball then penalise him irrespective of prior opportunity. That will assist clearing congestion.
It is now 2018 not 1964. Players now run and now tackle, while back in 1964 no once gave a ****. The handball used to be an "in case of emergency break glass" method of disposal, now it is an offensive weapon. There are far too many people living in the past and really need to have a good hard sniff of what they're shovelling. Be very careful what you wish for and why Toddski.
Click to expand...

Post of the year
 
Couldn't watch the game yesterday so listened to it whilst driving around country Victoria. Flipped b/w SEN and 774. Both thought the decision against Lamb was rough and The Bont going down like he was shot was over the top.

But my question to those who watched/or went; where did Murphy play in the last qtr? I didn't hear his name get called ONCE. Kept hearing Hunter, Mcrae, Bont, Cripps etc but not one mention of our captain. Can someone enlighten me? If he wasn't in the midfield when clearly the game was getting away from us, did he actually try to assist? Did he do anything apart from a couple of nice passes in the F50 supposedly?

FFS - i'm tired of him.
 
OldCarltonian said:
Couldn't watch the game yesterday so listened to it whilst driving around country Victoria. Flipped b/w SEN and 774. Both thought the decision against Lamb was rough and The Bont going down like he was shot was over the top.

But my question to those who watched/or went; where did Murphy play in the last qtr? I didn't hear his name get called ONCE. Kept hearing Hunter, Mcrae, Bont, Cripps etc but not one mention of our captain. Can someone enlighten me? If he wasn't in the midfield when clearly the game was getting away from us, did he actually try to assist? Did he do anything apart from a couple of nice passes in the F50 supposedly?

FFS - i'm tired of him.
Click to expand...

he gave cripps a real hospital pass in the last, got cleaned up by a knees to the guts in the contest.
 
I would like to thank Brendon Bolton, finally for the first time this season Carlton played 1 on 1 football, which made everybody accountable. Now while the Dogs Midfield took us apart as did JJ as we had nobody that had the speed to run with him we looked better.

However, playing this type of football means when you have the ball you need to create space by moving, too often the blues would take a mark or get a free kick on the half back line and we were stagnent waiting for the next kick. Also, I know Marchbank too a lot of marks but too often he was 10m behind his man allowing the dogs to get cheap inside 50's. When playing 1 on 1 you must maintain pressure by stick with your man when they have the ball and running away when you have the ball. Unfortunately the dogs out ran and out scrambled the blues.

Whatever happens between now and next season, the blues need to work on run and spread, disposal efficiency (Charlie, Harry, Murphy etc) and goal kicking. Let's hope SOS can work some magic.
 
[QUOTE=".
How about we get rid of this lot and see what the game looks like rather introducing more bloody rules to fix the unintended consequences brought about by previous poorly thought out rule changes. Some things I would consider though are:
  • Make The Throw Legal - The throw is now the unofficial 3rd method of legal disposal. I see a lot of scoops, slaps, handoffs, chucks and out-and-out rugby passes, but they sure as hell aren't handballs. I'd go so far as to say 1 in every 4 disposals that passes for a handball is actually a throw and if I can see it 50m away in the stands then you can't tell me 3 umpires 10m away can't. Either outlaw it or legalise it, because right now it's a bloody joke. If you pay a free for throwing the ball it will aid in clearing congestion.
  • Reward The Tackler - If a player loses the ball when tackled by any method other than a kick or a handball then penalise him irrespective of prior opportunity. That will assist clearing congestion.
It is now 2018 not 1964. Players now run and now tackle, while back in 1964 no once gave a ****. The handball used to be an "in case of emergency break glass" method of disposal, now it is an offensive weapon. There are far too many people living in the past and really need to have a good hard sniff of what they're shovelling. Be very careful what you wish for and why Toddski.[/QUOTE]

Or we could just start calling it rugby... Additionally rewarding the tackler is the reason we are in this mess in the first place.. They got tougher on prior opportunity meaning players now no longer take possession and try and make a play when its congested, instead they pat it along waiting for either a clear possession or for their opponent to take possession so they can then tackle and win a free kick. The spirit of the rules used to be to reward the player making the play, this no longer happens which is why we end up with scrums that can last 30+ seconds before the ball is knocked out where previously a player would take possession try and make a play, would either get the ball out and to a teammate or get tackled and would be a ball up called immediately. IMO this is the biggest issue with football today.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

PROs
- LOB has the best game of his career
- Weiters back saw Marchy have a MUCH better game. These combos are so important to our future spine, as Bolts said in that video regarding this man...
- The King will be a player. Wasn't sure what to expect as have not seen him play at any level, but De Koning was excellent. Presented, competed and got on the end of a few - got a cult hero feeling about this kid.
- Charlie and Harry are coming together nicely. Level up our midfield in 2019 and those two will be a force akin to Buddy and Roughy in no time.
- The game wasn't a blowout and we competed for longer than expected.

CONs
- 4th quarter was unacceptable but not helped by shit umpiring. Improve our own fortunes though, and our luck will change.
- Midfield midfield midfield. Shiel is being heavily courted, as should Walsh be in the draft.
- Coaching (not Bolts necessarily) has a lot of work to do. Need more cohesion and talent in position-specific areas *cough Sam Mitchell mids coach cough* and some changes to move forward.

All in all, can't wait til the off-season but the shit this year has given us has unearthed some positives that we would've never seen otherwise.
 
The Smoking Gun said:
Nope......absolutely not. Go and watch some full games (not highlights) out of the 70s & 80s before interchange came in. Come the 10 minute mark of the 3rd quarter players just fell down over the ball with no attempt to take possession, clear the ball or tackle an opponent. They would just lie there and beg the ump for a free. There was just ball-up after ball-up after ball-up until the ump eventually paid a free, more out of impatience than for any meaningful infringement, just to clear the ball out of the area. The game was so slow as a result that you really only needed one field umpire. It was shithouse in every respect and one the main reasons interchange was brought in. Clubs will go back to recruiting athletes rather than footballers and if you think the game will look better with 22 Rhys Stanleys V 22 Daniel Gorringes then God help us.

There is not one rule change made in the last 5 years that has benefitted the game. Not a single one:
  • 10m Exclusion Area - Too big an area to police consistently. The player that used to sit 5m off the mark to prevent the player with ball playing on now goes downfield to clog up space. A classic case of a poorly thought out rule change where those with rose-coloured glasses purely just looked at it from their own perspective and vision rather than how coaches might counter it.
  • Nominating Rucks - Takes too long to find out who's doing what and allows players from far and wide to get to the contest. Only encourages congestion. We were sold this rule change because it would supposedly ensure the future of the lumbering ruck.......enter Shaun Grigg. Get rid of it FFS.
  • No 3rd Man Up - To supposedly protect the biggest, strongest, meanest buggers on the field, because Sandilands became the first ruckman in over 100 years of footy to be injured by the 3rd man up. One more man in the air means one less on the ground, which may assist easing congestion on the deck. Here is the classic reason as to why coaches shouldn't be involved in rule changes. It's called self interest.
  • 30 Second Shot Clock - Get rid of it. That you can have multiple durations 30 seconds inside 50 when everyone else has 10 seconds is ridiculous. KPFs have always been the games biggest sooks and remain so.
  • Scoring Reviews - Get rid of them full stop. Unless you're going to have the same camera options at all grounds, including Cairns, Gold Coast, Hobart, Launceston, Alice Springs, Canberra, Darwin & China then the exercise is pointless. Then you have the issue of the video ump trying to make decisions when games are broadcast in different definitions (standard def 576p, high def 720p and full high def 1080p). When you add that the video ump is often trying to over rule a decision with a blurry 2D video at the behest of the field ump when the goal ump has watched it in 3D astounds me. Even when the video does highlight a discrepancy, the decisions made by the video ump are often confounding to say the least. Just leave it to the goal umps.
How about we get rid of this lot and see what the game looks like rather introducing more bloody rules to fix the unintended consequences brought about by previous poorly thought out rule changes. Some things I would consider though are:
  • Make The Throw Legal - The throw is now the unofficial 3rd method of legal disposal. I see a lot of scoops, slaps, handoffs, chucks and out-and-out rugby passes, but they sure as hell aren't handballs. I'd go so far as to say 1 in every 4 disposals that passes for a handball is actually a throw and if I can see it 50m away in the stands then you can't tell me 3 umpires 10m away can't. Either outlaw it or legalise it, because right now it's a bloody joke. If you pay a free for throwing the ball it will aid in clearing congestion.
  • Reward The Tackler - If a player loses the ball when tackled by any method other than a kick or a handball then penalise him irrespective of prior opportunity. That will assist clearing congestion.
It is now 2018 not 1964. Players now run and now tackle, while back in 1964 no once gave a ****. The handball used to be an "in case of emergency break glass" method of disposal, now it is an offensive weapon. There are far too many people living in the past and really need to have a good hard sniff of what they're shovelling. Be very careful what you wish for and why Toddski.
Click to expand...
Most I agree with, but a couple of points.
"No 3rd Man Up": Witnessed a ruckman get knocked out by a 3rd man up on the weekend. Not sure it is bad rule tbh, as the ruckmen are sitting ducks for someone coming in at the ball.

"Reward The Tackler": I just cant come around to the concept that we reward someone to not go at the ball.

I must admit I am rather concerned at some of the concepts being pushed forward to supposably get rid of the congestion, with out much thought for how it will impact the game.
 
ItsAllAboutMe said:
Or we could just start calling it rugby... Additionally rewarding the tackler is the reason we are in this mess in the first place.. They got tougher on prior opportunity meaning players now no longer take possession and try and make a play when its congested, instead they pat it along waiting for either a clear possession or for their opponent to take possession so they can then tackle and win a free kick. The spirit of the rules used to be to reward the player making the play, this no longer happens which is why we end up with scrums that can last 30+ seconds before the ball is knocked out where previously a player would take possession try and make a play, would either get the ball out and to a teammate or get tackled and would be a ball up called immediately. IMO this is the biggest issue with football today.
Click to expand...
Not so sure we are stricter on Prior opportunity. Once upon a time there was the unwritten 360 rule, now it is just about the 720 rule. In the past you also were not allowed to just drop it to a teammates advantage.
 
Wh
The Smoking Gun said:
Nope......absolutely not. Go and watch some full games (not highlights) out of the 70s & 80s before interchange came in. Come the 10 minute mark of the 3rd quarter players just fell down over the ball with no attempt to take possession, clear the ball or tackle an opponent. They would just lie there and beg the ump for a free. There was just ball-up after ball-up after ball-up until the ump eventually paid a free, more out of impatience than for any meaningful infringement, just to clear the ball out of the area. The game was so slow as a result that you really only needed one field umpire. It was shithouse in every respect and one the main reasons interchange was brought in. Clubs will go back to recruiting athletes rather than footballers and if you think the game will look better with 22 Rhys Stanleys V 22 Daniel Gorringes then God help us.

There is not one rule change made in the last 5 years that has benefitted the game. Not a single one:
  • 10m Exclusion Area - Too big an area to police consistently. The player that used to sit 5m off the mark to prevent the player with ball playing on now goes downfield to clog up space. A classic case of a poorly thought out rule change where those with rose-coloured glasses purely just looked at it from their own perspective and vision rather than how coaches might counter it.
  • Nominating Rucks - Takes too long to find out who's doing what and allows players from far and wide to get to the contest. Only encourages congestion. We were sold this rule change because it would supposedly ensure the future of the lumbering ruck.......enter Shaun Grigg. Get rid of it FFS.
  • No 3rd Man Up - To supposedly protect the biggest, strongest, meanest buggers on the field, because Sandilands became the first ruckman in over 100 years of footy to be injured by the 3rd man up. One more man in the air means one less on the ground, which may assist easing congestion on the deck. Here is the classic reason as to why coaches shouldn't be involved in rule changes. It's called self interest.
  • 30 Second Shot Clock - Get rid of it. That you can have multiple durations 30 seconds inside 50 when everyone else has 10 seconds is ridiculous. KPFs have always been the games biggest sooks and remain so.
  • Scoring Reviews - Get rid of them full stop. Unless you're going to have the same camera options at all grounds, including Cairns, Gold Coast, Hobart, Launceston, Alice Springs, Canberra, Darwin & China then the exercise is pointless. Then you have the issue of the video ump trying to make decisions when games are broadcast in different definitions (standard def 576p, high def 720p and full high def 1080p). When you add that the video ump is often trying to over rule a decision with a blurry 2D video at the behest of the field ump when the goal ump has watched it in 3D astounds me. Even when the video does highlight a discrepancy, the decisions made by the video ump are often confounding to say the least. Just leave it to the goal umps.
How about we get rid of this lot and see what the game looks like rather introducing more bloody rules to fix the unintended consequences brought about by previous poorly thought out rule changes. Some things I would consider though are:
  • Make The Throw Legal - The throw is now the unofficial 3rd method of legal disposal. I see a lot of scoops, slaps, handoffs, chucks and out-and-out rugby passes, but they sure as hell aren't handballs. I'd go so far as to say 1 in every 4 disposals that passes for a handball is actually a throw and if I can see it 50m away in the stands then you can't tell me 3 umpires 10m away can't. Either outlaw it or legalise it, because right now it's a bloody joke. If you pay a free for throwing the ball it will aid in clearing congestion.
  • Reward The Tackler - If a player loses the ball when tackled by any method other than a kick or a handball then penalise him irrespective of prior opportunity. That will assist clearing congestion.
It is now 2018 not 1964. Players now run and now tackle, while back in 1964 no once gave a ****. The handball used to be an "in case of emergency break glass" method of disposal, now it is an offensive weapon. There are far too many people living in the past and really need to have a good hard sniff of what they're shovelling. Be very careful what you wish for and why Toddski.
Click to expand...

While I agree with most of this, I disagree with rewarding the tackler and legalising the throw. We should be very strict with the definition of a handball and penalise the throw. We should reward the player who gets the ball, not the player who sits off waiting for the opponent to take possession. And for pity sake, please get rid of the 'you dragged it in' HTB rule. We are taught as footballers from infancy to get to the ball first, be desperate, take possession. What happens now is player A busts a gut to get there first only to have some clever dick player B pin the ball in under him to get a htb decision. It is against the spirit of the game and has to go.
 
Congestion isnt the result of a change in interpretation by the umpires - its partly because teams are more defensively minded these day, but mostly coaches want as many players at a contest as possible.

Rules changes are a bit like cane toads. how can anyone sitting at a meeting table forsee the ultimate repercussions of a rule that will be subjected to months or years of scrutiny and match practice by expert coaches? Its delusional to think you can.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The Smoking Gun said:
Nope......absolutely not. Go and watch some full games (not highlights) out of the 70s & 80s before interchange came in. Come the 10 minute mark of the 3rd quarter players just fell down over the ball with no attempt to take possession, clear the ball or tackle an opponent. They would just lie there and beg the ump for a free. There was just ball-up after ball-up after ball-up until the ump eventually paid a free, more out of impatience than for any meaningful infringement, just to clear the ball out of the area. The game was so slow as a result that you really only needed one field umpire. It was shithouse in every respect and one the main reasons interchange was brought in. Clubs will go back to recruiting athletes rather than footballers and if you think the game will look better with 22 Rhys Stanleys V 22 Daniel Gorringes then God help us.

There is not one rule change made in the last 5 years that has benefitted the game. Not a single one:
  • 10m Exclusion Area - Too big an area to police consistently. The player that used to sit 5m off the mark to prevent the player with ball playing on now goes downfield to clog up space. A classic case of a poorly thought out rule change where those with rose-coloured glasses purely just looked at it from their own perspective and vision rather than how coaches might counter it.
  • Nominating Rucks - Takes too long to find out who's doing what and allows players from far and wide to get to the contest. Only encourages congestion. We were sold this rule change because it would supposedly ensure the future of the lumbering ruck.......enter Shaun Grigg. Get rid of it FFS.
  • No 3rd Man Up - To supposedly protect the biggest, strongest, meanest buggers on the field, because Sandilands became the first ruckman in over 100 years of footy to be injured by the 3rd man up. One more man in the air means one less on the ground, which may assist easing congestion on the deck. Here is the classic reason as to why coaches shouldn't be involved in rule changes. It's called self interest.
  • 30 Second Shot Clock - Get rid of it. That you can have multiple durations 30 seconds inside 50 when everyone else has 10 seconds is ridiculous. KPFs have always been the games biggest sooks and remain so.
  • Scoring Reviews - Get rid of them full stop. Unless you're going to have the same camera options at all grounds, including Cairns, Gold Coast, Hobart, Launceston, Alice Springs, Canberra, Darwin & China then the exercise is pointless. Then you have the issue of the video ump trying to make decisions when games are broadcast in different definitions (standard def 576p, high def 720p and full high def 1080p). When you add that the video ump is often trying to over rule a decision with a blurry 2D video at the behest of the field ump when the goal ump has watched it in 3D astounds me. Even when the video does highlight a discrepancy, the decisions made by the video ump are often confounding to say the least. Just leave it to the goal umps.
How about we get rid of this lot and see what the game looks like rather introducing more bloody rules to fix the unintended consequences brought about by previous poorly thought out rule changes. Some things I would consider though are:
  • Make The Throw Legal - The throw is now the unofficial 3rd method of legal disposal. I see a lot of scoops, slaps, handoffs, chucks and out-and-out rugby passes, but they sure as hell aren't handballs. I'd go so far as to say 1 in every 4 disposals that passes for a handball is actually a throw and if I can see it 50m away in the stands then you can't tell me 3 umpires 10m away can't. Either outlaw it or legalise it, because right now it's a bloody joke. If you pay a free for throwing the ball it will aid in clearing congestion.
  • Reward The Tackler - If a player loses the ball when tackled by any method other than a kick or a handball then penalise him irrespective of prior opportunity. That will assist clearing congestion.
It is now 2018 not 1964. Players now run and now tackle, while back in 1964 no once gave a ****. The handball used to be an "in case of emergency break glass" method of disposal, now it is an offensive weapon. There are far too many people living in the past and really need to have a good hard sniff of what they're shovelling. Be very careful what you wish for and why Toddski.
Click to expand...

All of your suggestions won't work either.

If you're happy watching Auskick then good for you, but I certainly am not.

There was not as much emphasis on keeping the play moving back in 60s and 70s. So your argument about players lying on the ball because they're tired is moot. Our rules preclude that from happening now anyway.

Definitely need to see a trial of a minimal to zero interchange. Then we can reassess.

You are in the cohort of people that mistakenly believe AFL rule changes have caused the state of the game. It's actually the coaches manipulating it to find a strategic advantage. You can't blame them but something needs to be done. I'm not a huge fan of all of the recent rule changes either but they haven't caused this.
 
Blue and Blue said:
I find it laughable to be honest this argument between Byrne and Williamson.
Its called depth. The very thing we have lacked for a couple of decades.
Two young men fighting for the same thing.

Byrne was terrific yesterday.
We can see just why they have stuck with him through injuries.
Click to expand...
IMO our starting back 6 now should be:
byrne plowman marchbank
docherty weitering simpson

i see williamson as eventually replacing simpson or even potentially moving up to the wing. Certainly long term there's definitely room for both, it's absolutely not a case of one or the other.
 
Toddski said:
All of your suggestions won't work either.

If you're happy watching Auskick then good for you, but I certainly am not.

There was not as much emphasis on keeping the play moving back in 60s and 70s. So your argument about players lying on the ball because they're tired is moot. Our rules preclude that from happening now anyway.

Definitely need to see a trial of a minimal to zero interchange. Then we can reassess.

You are in the cohort of people that mistakenly believe AFL rule changes have caused the state of the game. It's actually the coaches manipulating it to find a strategic advantage. You can't blame them but something needs to be done. I'm not a huge fan of all of the recent rule changes either but they haven't caused this.
Click to expand...
this isn't really the place for it so i don't want to get too in depth but the thing that's changed the game completely is team defense. for 100 years it was a game of 18 x 1v1s and then in early 2000s when the internet came and gave us more access to other sports around the world coaches realized it's more effective to defend as a group so all the changes in the way the game is played stem from that. the problem is now we're trying to change rules to make the game look like it used to but the coaches are never gonna unlearn the tactics.
 
JohnnyFontane90 said:
this isn't really the place for it so i don't want to get too in depth but the thing that's changed the game completely is team defense. for 100 years it was a game of 18 x 1v1s and then in early 2000s when the internet came and gave us more access to other sports around the world coaches realized it's more effective to defend as a group so all the changes in the way the game is played stem from that. the problem is now we're trying to change rules to make the game look like it used to but the coaches are never gonna unlearn the tactics.
Click to expand...

Yeah not the forum for it but I agree. Not claiming to know exactly how to fix it either. Worth trialling some things though. Bee hive football and locking the ball inside 50 with repeat entries is not something I really enjoy watching.
 
BlueBayou said:
Wh


While I agree with most of this, I disagree with rewarding the tackler and legalising the throw. We should be very strict with the definition of a handball and penalise the throw. We should reward the player who gets the ball, not the player who sits off waiting for the opponent to take possession. And for pity sake, please get rid of the 'you dragged it in' HTB rule. We are taught as footballers from infancy to get to the ball first, be desperate, take possession. What happens now is player A busts a gut to get there first only to have some clever dick player B pin the ball in under him to get a htb decision. It is against the spirit of the game and has to go.
Click to expand...
Dont need to get rid of the dragged it in rule just need to pay ín the back frees to the guy with the ball on the ground if players pile on top of him. If a player is lying on your back it is a free. Once upon a time you used to hold up a players jumper if they were lying on the ball hatching it not jump allover them.
 
Accidental genius said:
Byrne needs more time/continuity ...My observation atm is that he doesn’t appear to see play unfold in front of him...he runs out of defence nicely but looks unsure what to do with it..
Click to expand...
I see the same thing and to me it's an issue of us not having the running power to break in to space when we're transitioning the ball from defense. players off the ball need to run hard into space to almost make the decision easy for the ball carrier. when richmond win the ball in defense and run it forward they have guys like lambert, ellis, grigg etc that can run all day and when players are finding space like that it can make average players look very accomplished
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy Rd 22 Blues go down but lots to like

Similar threads

Aphrodite
Senior Welcome to Carlton Tayla McMillan
Replies
16
Views
731
Aphrodite
Aphrodite
Aphrodite
Senior Welcome to Carlton Lily Baxter
Replies
8
Views
808
GalaxyBlue
GalaxyBlue

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top