Rule changes 2019: someone say 'attacking football'?

Topkent

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2010
37,719
47,261
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
Scoring has got nothing to do with the rule changes.
The skill level of the draftees and the stars of the comp are at an all time low.
More money on junior development or it will keep getting worse.
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 20, 2009
15,638
20,843
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
Low scoring is nothing to do with rules - even though they are stupid rules. Richmond won the flag by destroying teams on the turnover. WCEs won the flag by playing a really tight zone, forcing teams to go down the line marking the down the line kicks. Teams are just too scared to move the ball forward in case they give the ball back to the opposition.
 

Topkent

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2010
37,719
47,261
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
Low scoring is nothing to do with rules - even though they are stupid rules. Richmond won the flag by destroying teams on the turnover. WCEs won the flag by playing a really tight zone, forcing teams to go down the line marking the down the line kicks. Teams are just too scared to move the ball forward in case they give the ball back to the opposition.
Only way i can see a tangible change is if they go back to 16 each on field.

4 less players means it's harder to defend and easier to attack
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

rjslcM

Club Legend
Apr 18, 2008
1,403
1,588
Glen Waverly
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Australia, Roger Federer.
Scoring has got nothing to do with the rule changes.
The skill level of the draftees and the stars of the comp are at an all time low.
More money on junior development or it will keep getting worse.
Did you watch GWS on the weekend
Thought their kicking was A class
 

shaqsuns

Club Legend
Jun 13, 2011
1,224
1,022
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Cavaliers
Scoring has got nothing to do with the rule changes.
The skill level of the draftees and the stars of the comp are at an all time low.
More money on junior development or it will keep getting worse.
Skills are better then they ever were in the past, just the players don’t have any space to put them on display and this will continue until the AFL have the balls to get rid of the interchange.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Dez!

Hall of Famer
Jul 14, 2007
32,391
23,362
Melbourne, Victoria
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Skills are better then they ever were in the past, just the players don’t have any space to put them on display and this will continue until the AFL have the balls to get rid of the interchange.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Getting rid of the interchange is the most idiotic thing the league could do.
 

shaqsuns

Club Legend
Jun 13, 2011
1,224
1,022
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Cavaliers
Getting rid of the interchange is the most idiotic thing the league could do.
We played the game for 150 years with no or limited interchanges and the game was a one on one end to end spectacle with plenty of open spaces (no one complained). As soon the interchange went crazy the game became congested and now we are having conferences on the state of the game.

Now I understand correlation doesn’t equal causation however I would like to try the complete reduction of the interchange, before we make up redundant rules that makes our game unrecognisable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Topkent

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2010
37,719
47,261
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
Skills are better then they ever were in the past, just the players don’t have any space to put them on display and this will continue until the AFL have the balls to get rid of the interchange.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Completely disagree

Best mids 95-05
Voss, Buckley, Ricciuto, Goodes, Hird, Kouta, Harvey, Voss, Black, Aker etc

Beautiful kicks of the footy and dual sided by foot and hand

Now
Treloar Kelly Danger Fyfe Oliver Cripps Crouch Sloane Brayshaw Neale Mitchell Merrett Bont etc

Alot of one sided average kicks in that list.

Forwards aren't a patch on the forwards of the 90s and early 00s
 

shaqsuns

Club Legend
Jun 13, 2011
1,224
1,022
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Cavaliers
Completely disagree

Best mids 95-05
Voss, Buckley, Ricciuto, Goodes, Hird, Kouta, Harvey, Voss, Black, Aker etc

Beautiful kicks of the footy and dual sided by foot and hand

Now
Treloar Kelly Danger Fyfe Oliver Cripps Crouch Sloane Brayshaw Neale Mitchell Merrett Bont etc

Alot of one sided average kicks in that list.

Forwards aren't a patch on the forwards of the 90s and early 00s
Ask yourself are the forwards getting the same space they were getting 20 years ago????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Topkent

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2010
37,719
47,261
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
Ask yourself are the forwards getting the same space they were getting 20 years ago????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Plenty of times. On quick breaks they often have half the field but their leading, their hands in front their eyes and their set shot kicking is all worse.
 

harrythetiger

Jack Graham That Is 🏆
Sep 13, 2015
13,247
35,916
Hillary Step
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76ers
We played the game for 150 years with no or limited interchanges and the game was a one on one end to end spectacle with plenty of open spaces (no one complained). As soon the interchange went crazy the game became congested and now we are having conferences on the state of the game.

Now I understand correlation doesn’t equal causation however I would like to try the complete reduction of the interchange, before we make up redundant rules that makes our game unrecognisable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For the best part of 150 years the game was nowhere near as tactically advanced as it is now.
In order to cover the field the way they do now, players don’t actually have to hold a very high speed - no more than 10km/h average. That’s easily carried out even by ‘tired’ players. You know what becomes exponentially more difficult when players become fatigued? Skills. Any attempt to fatigue players will lead to the last quarter being a slog with a kicking efficiency of 20%.
 

Priddis Is Done

Premiership Player
May 28, 2017
3,637
4,199
AFL Club
West Coast
Only way i can see a tangible change is if they go back to 16 each on field.

4 less players means it's harder to defend and easier to attack
I hear you but the coaches will want even better athletes to cover the same ground. Said athletes will have worse disposal than currently = more stoppages.

And around and around we go.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Priddis Is Done

Premiership Player
May 28, 2017
3,637
4,199
AFL Club
West Coast
For the best part of 150 years the game was nowhere near as tactically advanced as it is now.
In order to cover the field the way they do now, players don’t actually have to hold a very high speed - no more than 10km/h average. That’s easily carried out even by ‘tired’ players. You know what becomes exponentially more difficult when players become fatigued? Skills. Any attempt to fatigue players will lead to the last quarter being a slog with a kicking efficiency of 20%.
Agree. Passes missing, more stoppages, packs, ball bouncing from one 50m to the next. Worse passing into forward line, worse conversion on goal.

Do you get to the stage where your whole team is camped in defensive 50, playing 25 + chip kicks, regaining a small amount of energy back.... all out 100% attack for 30 seconds, then camp out defensively for another breather.
 

_M_16_

Premiership Player
Nov 26, 2009
3,248
3,988
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Liv FC, LA Rams, Pitt Pen, Michigan
Only an idiot would think 6-6-6 is to blame for the low scoring as many say. Firstly, you cannot judge the effectiveness of that rule on 4 games, yet alone one season by itself. Secondly, common sense would say, that if teams are struggling to score points with the 6-6-6, imagine them trying to kick scores when every team dropped back an loose intercept defender/spare man when the 6-6-6 rules were not in place. Teams would likely be struggling to kick 20 points with the 6-6-6.

There are two things that have contributed. The overall drop in genuine footballing skills. It's pretty worrying when you have a million kids playing AFL, yet when it comes to drafting 60-80 of those each year, be lucky to find 4-5 of them with elite kicking skills. When coaching is more about who can run 10 laps the fastest over skills and technique development, you wonder why the league is full of athletes who can't play for s**t. Elite level completion yet hardly any players with all round elite skills

The modern game will no doubt lower skills in general even for highly skilled players, with the run and gun, blindly kicking it approach, and the intense pressure levels as well.

Coaching and general tactics, many teams are now more concerned with keeping possession, slow build ups, heavy defensive tactics and flooding the forward half with every single man on the field. Imagine the older days where teams legit left forwards at home in the pocket and the game was open and free flowing.

Its skills, coaching and tactics, not rule changes that stuff the game up
 

rippersnipper

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 22, 2014
9,900
7,525
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Also because coaches want to reduce scoring. The lower the score of the opposition, the more likely you are to win. Therefore, they flood the stoppages to stop the ball getting out quickly. There's really no easy solution to this, it's just the tactical evolution of the sport.
 

Jack5

Team Captain
Sep 15, 2017
322
1,197
AFL Club
Richmond
I think we are seeing a battle between two opposing strategies. One built on pressure / turnover that takes territory at every opportunity and a gameplan designed to thwart that plan by maintaining posession through short kicking and then carefully moving forward until a position is reached where a turnover is much less damaging.

The games where both teams employ a possession strategy are boring AF. Bulldogs v Pies being an example.

Personally I think the new rules favour each of these strategies in different ways.

666 promotes fast ball movement and taking territory - we see all teams do this.

The impact of playing on from a behind is more complicated. My current thinking is that a behind is a turnover which you get rewarded for by 1 point. ie the only difference between an out on the full next the goals and a behind is the point you get. Except now the opposition gets posession AND a little more territory before facing some pressure. Its a small difference but the relative value of a behind compared to a goal is now less than it was because of this extra territory. It may be that teams want a pursue a higher probability goal opportunity than previously as result of this. Hence slower play when defensive structures are already in place. Or it may not make much difference.

The breaks between goals seem longer and quarters seem to be going longer. Longer breaks between goals would counter some of the skills falling away because tired arguments but there has been fewer goals. Not sure how it pans out.

More teams, talent pool thinner, weve known this for a while.
 

scottyt2

Senior List
Aug 21, 2006
167
85
melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
Only an idiot would think 6-6-6 is to blame for the low scoring as many say. Firstly, you cannot judge the effectiveness of that rule on 4 games, yet alone one season by itself. Secondly, common sense would say, that if teams are struggling to score points with the 6-6-6, imagine them trying to kick scores when every team dropped back an loose intercept defender/spare man when the 6-6-6 rules were not in place. Teams would likely be struggling to kick 20 points with the 6-6-6.
Every team deployed a spare in defence up until this year...it allowed them to gain possession, transition the ball quickly up the field and maybe have a shot at the other end. That's why coaches hate their players just bombing the ball forward.. they know how many dangerous attacks start from the back line. The 6-6-6 rule has taken this away to an extent.
 

PowerForGood

Deleting account. No interest in AFL anymore Enjoy
Sep 1, 2006
15,308
13,205
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool FC
Update: This is now the lowest scoring season since 1967.

Some cracking contests but scoring continues to drop.
 

Do the Dew

All Australian
Feb 14, 2019
819
1,682
Stuart Dew's Gut
AFL Club
Richmond
I find it funny when people have a dig at players skills. Do any of you actually go to the games and sit on the fence so you're close to the action? If so, you'll realize how ridiculously tough this game is. Players have barely any time to dispose of the ball, particularly when there's congestion. Players are fitter, faster, stronger than ever before, compared to the unprofessional game of yesteryear. I guarantee that if players were afforded the same space and time as they would have got in the 70s/80s, you'd see some amazing skills on display. If you watch them at training, players barely miss a target because they're afforded this time and space.

As for people saying we can't make a rash decision and equate rule changes to lower scoring after 6 rounds etc. Well the AFL brought in said changes from like 2 VFL matches?? If that's their sample size then we can surely have a crack at these shite changes because the AFL did not do their due diligence.
 

saints_333

Senior List
Feb 16, 2018
240
200
AFL Club
St Kilda
Only an idiot would think 6-6-6 is to blame for the low scoring as many say. Firstly, you cannot judge the effectiveness of that rule on 4 games, yet alone one season by itself. Secondly, common sense would say, that if teams are struggling to score points with the 6-6-6, imagine them trying to kick scores when every team dropped back an loose intercept defender/spare man when the 6-6-6 rules were not in place. Teams would likely be struggling to kick 20 points with the 6-6-6.

There are two things that have contributed. The overall drop in genuine footballing skills. It's pretty worrying when you have a million kids playing AFL, yet when it comes to drafting 60-80 of those each year, be lucky to find 4-5 of them with elite kicking skills. When coaching is more about who can run 10 laps the fastest over skills and technique development, you wonder why the league is full of athletes who can't play for s**t. Elite level completion yet hardly any players with all round elite skills

The modern game will no doubt lower skills in general even for highly skilled players, with the run and gun, blindly kicking it approach, and the intense pressure levels as well.

Coaching and general tactics, many teams are now more concerned with keeping possession, slow build ups, heavy defensive tactics and flooding the forward half with every single man on the field. Imagine the older days where teams legit left forwards at home in the pocket and the game was open and free flowing.

Its skills, coaching and tactics, not rule changes that stuff the game up
it's not because of the 6-6-6 rule but it's doing absolutely nothing to make it better even though the AFL and media would like you to believe otherwise. I notice that they have gone very quiet about it lately.
 

Kappa

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 7, 2014
18,278
21,851
AFL Club
Collingwood
Only way i can see a tangible change is if they go back to 16 each on field.

4 less players means it's harder to defend and easier to attack
What if the 2 players that get removed from the team are both forwards...? Which will certainly be the case...

Suddenly both teams play 6v4 in the backline and scoring is even worse?
 

Topkent

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2010
37,719
47,261
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
What if the 2 players that get removed from the team are both forwards...? Which will certainly be the case...

Suddenly both teams play 6v4 in the backline and scoring is even worse?
Coaches will try anything. Point is it's harder to defend the field with less people
 

Kappa

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 7, 2014
18,278
21,851
AFL Club
Collingwood
Coaches will try anything. Point is it's harder to defend the field with less people
Yea and it's gonna be a lot harder to score when coaches are forced to remove 2 forwards to drop down to 16 players. You remove 1 ruckmen and the 2nd tall forward and play 6 6 4
 

Top Bottom