Rule changes 2019: someone say 'attacking football'?

Topkent

Premium Platinum
Aug 29, 2010
34,066
41,363
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
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
Nah that's a guess. Less people will mean more scores.
No matter what nothing will really matter though. Coaches would rather lose 60-70 than 100-130
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kappa

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 7, 2014
15,039
17,509
AFL Club
Collingwood
It's impossible to cover the same defence with less people that's a fact not guessing
You know there are other ways to defend if a particular zone defence doesn't work anymore, right?

And those defenders are going to have a 6v4 or 5v3 advantage now instead of 6v6 / 7v6
 

Crusty Demon

Premiership Player
Sep 20, 2009
3,142
2,591
Ferntree Gully
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Leeds United
Which raises an interesting question. What's more important, high scoring matches or entertaining matches? I would choose entertaining.
100% my team is sh*t again this season. So I've turned to other games for entertainment. Fair to say i haven't been entertained. Maybe 2 watchable games I've seen. Outside of watching your own team, theirs not much point watching other games as it's borderline unwatchable this year. Skill level is the worst I've seen it, and the new rules have made it less watchable.
 

rogiebear93

Premiership Player
May 17, 2017
4,258
7,779
AFL Club
Hawthorn
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
Can you please go watch a few of the games from the 90's and 2000's?

Once you've done that, compare the speed of play and congestion to the AFL now. You can't just ignore the impact that defensive zones have had on the player and their ability to use the ball, and of the ability of forwards to get out and mark.

Players in the modern game have a fraction of the time to dispose of the ball both in play and after a mark, the difficulty of the kick has gone up dramatically as zones mean that there are almost always players standing in a position to cut a kick off.

In addition to play being set up like that, players are also asked to do a LOT more athletically than they ever have been. Take tackling for example, the only player in the top 20 for tackles per season pre-2010 is Brett Kirk in 2009, and that was the bulk of his role. Compare that to Clayton Oliver in 2018 who had 2 less tackles on the season, but also averaged 30 disposals.

Current day midfielders aren't unskillful, they're just buggered.

Also regarding forwards - again, different periods in the AFL. If you took Buddy Franklin out of the modern era and chucked him in the 90s, he would absolutely bend over and exploit every full back in every way imaginable. Why? Zones, player ability and fitness. Can you imagine SOS trying to keep up with Franklin on the lead, or on a tear away back towards goals? Look at what Buddy did in 2008 when Hawthorn ran with a game plan that worked around isolating Franklin like he would have been in the 90s.

Flip side, imagine removing Dunstall from the 90s and chucking him in the modern era. Stocky, 186cm tall - he wouldn't kick a goal on any of the better modern full backs. Mainly because they're athletically better, but also because he wouldn't be getting hit up on the lead all the time as the zone would cut it off.

This all just boils down to the fact that you can't compare eras. The game has changed a ridiculous amount and it has become so much more professional than it was back then. Just like Wilt Chamberlain averaging 50ppg in the NBA while the league was in its infancy, forwards and midfielders were made to look better by their surroundings. Outliers could outlie more in a less professional league with less structures in place to stop them.
 

Do the Dew

Team Captain
Feb 14, 2019
320
360
US and A
AFL Club
Richmond
Can you please go watch a few of the games from the 90's and 2000's?

Once you've done that, compare the speed of play and congestion to the AFL now. You can't just ignore the impact that defensive zones have had on the player and their ability to use the ball, and of the ability of forwards to get out and mark.

Players in the modern game have a fraction of the time to dispose of the ball both in play and after a mark, the difficulty of the kick has gone up dramatically as zones mean that there are almost always players standing in a position to cut a kick off.

In addition to play being set up like that, players are also asked to do a LOT more athletically than they ever have been. Take tackling for example, the only player in the top 20 for tackles per season pre-2010 is Brett Kirk in 2009, and that was the bulk of his role. Compare that to Clayton Oliver in 2018 who had 2 less tackles on the season, but also averaged 30 disposals.

Current day midfielders aren't unskillful, they're just buggered.

Also regarding forwards - again, different periods in the AFL. If you took Buddy Franklin out of the modern era and chucked him in the 90s, he would absolutely bend over and exploit every full back in every way imaginable. Why? Zones, player ability and fitness. Can you imagine SOS trying to keep up with Franklin on the lead, or on a tear away back towards goals? Look at what Buddy did in 2008 when Hawthorn ran with a game plan that worked around isolating Franklin like he would have been in the 90s.

Flip side, imagine removing Dunstall from the 90s and chucking him in the modern era. Stocky, 186cm tall - he wouldn't kick a goal on any of the better modern full backs. Mainly because they're athletically better, but also because he wouldn't be getting hit up on the lead all the time as the zone would cut it off.

This all just boils down to the fact that you can't compare eras. The game has changed a ridiculous amount and it has become so much more professional than it was back then. Just like Wilt Chamberlain averaging 50ppg in the NBA while the league was in its infancy, forwards and midfielders were made to look better by their surroundings. Outliers could outlie more in a less professional league with less structures in place to stop them.
Unfortunately it doesn't stop nuffies, ex-dinosaur-players (Blight), and rules committees from stating that "it was better in my day", and then screwing with the rules to try and manufacture a situation that they have no understanding of in terms of causation.

I'd argue that the standard of the average game has increased considerably compared to the past, which is the only way you can compare between eras. This is a result of equalization (draft, $$) and general professionalism across each club.

Personally I enjoy watching games now more than I ever have, with the only exception being the horrible umpiring. This is not their fault though, and is entirely due to constant rule changes with not much thought behind them as well as the dreaded 'interpretations'.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Topkent

Premium Platinum
Aug 29, 2010
34,066
41,363
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
Unfortunately it doesn't stop nuffies, ex-dinosaur-players (Blight), and rules committees from stating that "it was better in my day", and then screwing with the rules to try and manufacture a situation that they have no understanding of in terms of causation.

I'd argue that the standard of the average game has increased considerably compared to the past, which is the only way you can compare between eras. This is a result of equalization (draft, $$) and general professionalism across each club.

Personally I enjoy watching games now more than I ever have, with the only exception being the horrible umpiring. This is not their fault though, and is entirely due to constant rule changes with not much thought behind them as well as the dreaded 'interpretations'.
Yeah well personally I've never been so bored watching this sport before and it's not improving
 

Topkent

Premium Platinum
Aug 29, 2010
34,066
41,363
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
To be fair though you are quite a negative poster...
It's also tough to improve the sport organically when rules committees make a bunch of changes each season, stifling organic growth
I hardly every post on the main board so if you are talking Melbourne board stuff well no s**t.
 

mick500

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 17, 2012
6,213
4,906
AFL Club
Adelaide
100% my team is sh*t again this season. So I've turned to other games for entertainment. Fair to say i haven't been entertained. Maybe 2 watchable games I've seen. Outside of watching your own team, theirs not much point watching other games as it's borderline unwatchable this year. Skill level is the worst I've seen it, and the new rules have made it less watchable.

I don't think it's the rule changes. I'm finding it more unenjoyable because of the commentary, the hysteria over booing, the politics the afl has involved itself with, being told how to run the league by the likes of slobbo robbo and whateley, herald sun, media Murdoch empire. Gil is spineless. Also the beat up by the media about 2 great Victorian clubs playing each other and how great it is leading into say a ordinary match of say Carlton vs essendon. Both struggling sides. Hardly a blockbuster, but they pretend it is any time 2 vicco clubs play each other, and God forbid when it's an interstate side all you hear is cheerleading from the commentators for the vicco side. It's gotten ridiculous. Half of them are ex footy players that don't know the first think about commentating, huddo is the shining example of a professional caller. Outside of that we don't have much.

Then the umpires ruining matches. Either easily influenced by crowd noise and again spineless or corrupt. It's one of the 2. Neither good options or the level you want the umpiring to be at in a "professional" sport.

I will admit I have watched less footy this year than ever before . I will watch the crows every week. But last week for the first time if the saints had the ball I would pause and fast forward until we had regained possession because I refused to sit there and watch us lose to the saints. I would have turned it off. I have settled in for other matches as well and lost interest within 5 minutes, matches like the Geelong vs Melbourne match that was hyped up as 2 powerhouses when Geelong are the clearly better side. And have a proven track record, and switched to watch a movie instead, rather than listening to the commentators barrack all day for a contest from Melbourne.

But I don't blame the rule changes.
 

FRUMPY

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 18, 2006
9,434
8,715
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
I don't think it's the rule changes. I'm finding it more unenjoyable because of the commentary, the hysteria over booing, the politics the afl has involved itself with, being told how to run the league by the likes of slobbo robbo and whateley, herald sun, media Murdoch empire. Gil is spineless. Also the beat up by the media about 2 great Victorian clubs playing each other and how great it is leading into say a ordinary match of say Carlton vs essendon. Both struggling sides. Hardly a blockbuster, but they pretend it is any time 2 vicco clubs play each other, and God forbid when it's an interstate side all you hear is cheerleading from the commentators for the vicco side. It's gotten ridiculous. Half of them are ex footy players that don't know the first think about commentating, huddo is the shining example of a professional caller. Outside of that we don't have much.

Then the umpires ruining matches. Either easily influenced by crowd noise and again spineless or corrupt. It's one of the 2. Neither good options or the level you want the umpiring to be at in a "professional" sport.

I will admit I have watched less footy this year than ever before . I will watch the crows every week. But last week for the first time if the saints had the ball I would pause and fast forward until we had regained possession because I refused to sit there and watch us lose to the saints. I would have turned it off. I have settled in for other matches as well and lost interest within 5 minutes, matches like the Geelong vs Melbourne match that was hyped up as 2 powerhouses when Geelong are the clearly better side. And have a proven track record, and switched to watch a movie instead, rather than listening to the commentators barrack all day for a contest from Melbourne.

But I don't blame the rule changes.
Its the oversaturation - footy is everywhere and like anything that's everywhere, you get bored of it.
 

PowerForGood

Self-imposed Suspension to 2019.
Sep 1, 2006
15,306
13,136
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool FC
Which raises an interesting question. What's more important, high scoring matches or entertaining matches? I would choose entertaining.
As a spectator, Entertaining wins of course, as long as "close" isn't a substitute for entertaining.

AFL want goals, which leads to $$$$$.

Dwayne Russell's commentary on the low scoring is to remark about his great it is that there fewer blow outs. That's not my idea of entertaining, because if your team is not involved then a close game is interesting. but its the skill level under pressure and desperation and moments of magic that I look for. And I don't see it, pessimist that I am.
 

juss

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 23, 2009
16,485
20,181
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
New York Jets
I'm wondering when the "experts" will learn that the game constantly changes through evolution and new strategies, and that you can't manipulate it into a desirable product with rule changes. Coaches will always be able to influence the game how they like, and it's much easier to restrict scoring than to go the other way.

The AFL treat the public like fools when any half sensible footy punter can see otherwise.
 

juss

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 23, 2009
16,485
20,181
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
New York Jets
As a spectator, Entertaining wins of course, as long as "close" isn't a substitute for entertaining.

AFL want goals, which leads to $$$$$.

Dwayne Russell's commentary on the low scoring is to remark about his great it is that there fewer blow outs. That's not my idea of entertaining, because if your team is not involved then a close game is interesting. but its the skill level under pressure and desperation and moments of magic that I look for. And I don't see it, pessimist that I am.
Agree, great post. I am sick of recent commentary about what an amazing game I'm seeing if the scores are 59-61. Sure, close games keep you interested to watch the final quarter, and particularly the last 5 minutes, but the quality of football can still be absolute trash. I have seen some awful close games that were terrible to watch.
On the other hand I have seen games that weren't as close, maybe 10-20 point difference by the end, but the quality of football was great and you knew that both teams were playing good hard high level football.
 

PowerForGood

Self-imposed Suspension to 2019.
Sep 1, 2006
15,306
13,136
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool FC
I'm wondering when the "experts" will learn that the game constantly changes through evolution and new strategies, and that you can't manipulate it into a desirable product with rule changes. Coaches will always be able to influence the game how they like, and it's much easier to restrict scoring than to go the other way.

The AFL treat the public like fools when any half sensible footy punter can see otherwise.
Without my being a senior footy coach...

I'd go a step further and say that successful coaches think "defence first, attack second"

So when you change the rules, these coaches think about how to defend the new rule, and only once that is worked out and bedded in, then consider how to better attack without compromising the defensive aspects.

Vice versa, leave the rules alone and you'll start to see more attacking football. Change the rules and in the affected aspect of the game you start again on defence.

Just my 2c worth.
 

shaqsuns

Club Legend
Jun 13, 2011
1,188
904
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Cavaliers
I’ve never subscribed to that fact that “Not all high scoring games are good games”. They are still better to watch, then a low scoring turn over slog even when they are close.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

harrythetiger

Summited Everest 30/9/17
Sep 13, 2015
10,997
27,967
Hillary Step
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76ers
I’ve never subscribed to that fact that “Not all high scoring games are good games”. They are still better to watch, then a low scoring turn over slog even when they are close.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I present AFLX. Goals kicked every 10 seconds. Zero entertainment.
 

Monument Hills

All Australian
Dec 12, 2017
878
2,238
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Wildcats Cockburn Watersliders
Fopaux on the 360 show the other night - the one with Carey and Watson. The channel 7 reporter rep mentioned when they were discussing it that "the boss of this channel wanted more goals scored" (paraphrase but close to it). Thought that was interesting and guessing he probably wasn't meant to say it. Fair bit of pressure on Gil I imagine from his media overlords to change the game to improve the entertainment value. Hasn't worked though. Less goals and pi55ed off fans as the holding the ball rule has become a chook raffle.
 

HTPunter

Premiership Player
Sep 27, 2014
4,722
5,304
AFL Club
North Melbourne
The AFL got us to where we got last year, via lots of rule changes (albeit for a variety of reasons, such as injury-prevention).

Now, who is actually surprised that a few rules dreamt up in an office didn't actually change the way coaches coach...

The AFL is, although their media arm is going hammer and tongs trying to tell us it's a massive success. Wayne Carey mentions the extreme awesome benefits of 6-6-6 and the new kick-in rule every game that has a margin within 5 goals with 15 minutes to go.
 

HTPunter

Premiership Player
Sep 27, 2014
4,722
5,304
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Fopaux on the 360 show the other night - the one with Carey and Watson. The channel 7 reporter rep mentioned when they were discussing it that "the boss of this channel wanted more goals scored" (paraphrase but close to it). Thought that was interesting and guessing he probably wasn't meant to say it. Fair bit of pressure on Gil I imagine from his media overlords to change the game to improve the entertainment value. Hasn't worked though. Less goals and pi55ed off fans as the holding the ball rule has become a chook raffle.
They never thought to focus on improving their own portion of the product - almost as if fans don't want 6 commentators a game and have nearly all those commentators be ex-players. Except for a half time cross over to Sam McClure :drunk:
 
Top Bottom