Rule Changes - Dogs' involvement

[DexterTan]

I know there are people on here who are rabid in their opposition to any rule changes, so this post is probably not for you.

In a season where I have had little to no interest in the AFL (unless the Dogs are involved) would you be for or against the Dogs being guinea pigs to see how the rule changes affect the game?

The game against Carlton at Etihad seems to be one of the games the AFL would be targeting.

 

[BEaston]

I just don't see what the point is in trialling 6/6/6 for only a couple of games. The sample size is so small it tells you nothing.

They'd be better off going back and reviewing every single game and how the teams were setup for each centre bounce to try to analyse the difference in outcomes from each bounce vs team setup. That would at least get them a set of data that could be used to base the rule change on. You would hope they have already done this, but it is the AFL.....

On first thought I don't think 6/6/6 will change much at all. Teams wanting to flood will just put their wingers on the defensive side of the centre square which makes it 8 v 6. in the general area. There's not that much difference between the 50 line and centre square line. It's not even that common of a scenario anyway, usually teams are lining up with 6/6/6 now. It will only make a difference in very specific scenarios and even then it's minimal difference IMO.

Does nothing to change the rolling congestion in game.

So to answer your question, I don't really care if they trial it in one of our games.

 

[Pugz89]

I know there are people on here who are rabid in their opposition to any rule changes, so this post is probably not for you.

In a season where I have had little to no interest in the AFL (unless the Dogs are involved) would you be for or against the Dogs being guinea pigs to see how the rule changes affect the game?

The game against Carlton at Etihad seems to be one of the games the AFL would be targeting.

I think it would be benificial to us as a club, with other clubs using the new rules during training, I think Bevo would get a bit out of utilising it in game scenarios to come up with plans etc ahead of preseason 2019.

I think it goes directly against the integrity of the competition though, to trial new rules for some games in final few rounds, which could have an impact on results therefore draft picks etc.

 

[dogwatch]

And how much does a trial prove?

The real test of new rules comes when they've been in for about a season and coaches start to exploit weaknesses in whatever those new rules are.
Then no doubt the AFL will come out and say we need to make some more changes ...

I'm not saying no rule changes ever, but the AFL rules committee/Hocking can't stop tinkering with the fundamentals. They behave like it's their own private property.

It's not. It's part of Australian culture and our sporting traditions. They are just custodians for a few years. They should move very conservatively before making such radical rule changes.

 

[Mofra]

Adding a small amount of interest to an otherwise nothing game?

I'm very wary of rule changes but I'd be ok with this.

 

[Snarls Barkley]

Thought Jimmy Bartel summed it up really well when BT was fawning over our lord and saviour Steve Hocking. The guys we’re trusting to fix the game are the guys that have implemented and/or can’t fix protected zones, the below the knees rule, prior opportunity/holding the ball, etc.

They just try to fix everything with new rules without doing testing or thinking of the consequences. Why not trial these rules in the state leagues for a few seasons and see what effects they have and whether coaches their are able to exploit it. Not sure what a half dozen games between the shit teams is going to show us. If anything they’ll still be dour, unskilled games anyway and there will be push back.

I don’t think their is that much wrong with the game at the moment. Watching the good teams is still enjoyable (I like the Richmond brand of football) and they’re have been a heap of great games over the past few weeks. The main problem is that their is 6 teams that are beyond awful and not enjoyable to watch in the slightest.

Is it really that different to 5 years ago when Gold Coast and GWS we’re getting smashed every week, Melbourne and Port Adelaide we’re rabbles, us and Saints were bad after our eras of contention ended. The main difference was most of those games weren’t during prime time. This year how many games have Carlton and us play that have been uncompetitive bores on Thursday and Friday nights?

Think all of this will blow over if we just let things play out. Teams will learn how to deal with Richmond’s press like teams learnt how to deal with Collingwoods press after 2011, no teams dominate forever.

EDIT: Also, thought I should clarify. I’m not against rule changes. I think some things need to be fixed, I’d definitely change the ruck nominations rule, I think prior opportunity needs to be tweaked and more free kicks against for incorrect disposal and holding the ball (think this is the main problem with congestion) and I’d probably cut down interchanges again. Just not for drastic rule changes without proper trialling and procedure.

 

[Braybrook Son]

Can I just say something? They want to trial starting 6 players forward, 6 in defence and 6 in the middle/wings for every centre bounce after a goal. Ok, but what about every other stoppage during the game? Most sides start with that set up give or take a man or two somewhere else, so how is this gonna stop congestion during the game? Players will just set up how they are now when it’s not a centre bounce. Pointless if you ask me. Surely they could’ve come up with a better idea than this?

 

[Tommycash]

I think the proposed changes seem dumb but I'm happy for them to be trialled at the end of the year, though I fear that it will turn the game from a dead rubber to something even worse, but so be it.

 

[Struggle]

Against. It's the 2018 season and every game should be played under the same rules. It's a disgrace that the league are even considering this. Only positive would be if both teams actively sabotage it so the rules fail

 

[ossie_21]

I think a major issue is Gil with his powertrips. More money involved in the game than ever before, but he just keeps ruining it. Demetriou had his critics too, but he did a much better job as the main man.

I’m in the no more new rules camp, but they need to fix what they have already brought in which doesn’t work. Our reward for winning the flag was changing a rule altogether that increases congestion, all because one or two ruckmen were jumped into from behind with raised knees.

Remove ruck nomination rule & throw the ball up straight away, pay a free against any player jumping in that isn’t going for the ball or is an unrealistic attempt similar to marking.

Remove below the knees rule, pay frees for dangerous play if players go too hard when someone is already there.

Fix the ****ing HTB/prior rules, in a very congested game there has been record tackle numbers but most times players are allowed to drop the ball & someone else gets it to repeat the process. There was one game this season both teams had over 100 tackles, so 200+ and only a handful of HTB decisions. Come onnnnnn

 

[Northernsoul74]

Against. It's the 2018 season and every game should be played under the same rules. It's a disgrace that the league are even considering this. Only positive would be if both teams actively sabotage it so the rules fail

Completely agree, I read the proposal to trial in some regular season games and thought it was a joke. No other sport in the world would clubs and fans allow their competition to be completely disrespected like this. It’s a disgrace. How can you have a fair competition and draft if some games have been played for points under completely different rules?

 

[Cam1967]

I've seen where 3rd man up can clear congestion and lead to better outcomes.

 

[Testekill]

I think a major issue is Gil with his powertrips. More money involved in the game than ever before, but he just keeps ruining it. Demetriou had his critics too, but he did a much better job as the main man.

I’m in the no more new rules camp, but they need to fix what they have already brought in which doesn’t work. Our reward for winning the flag was changing a rule altogether that increases congestion, all because one or two ruckmen were jumped into from behind with raised knees.

Remove ruck nomination rule & throw the ball up straight away, pay a free against any player jumping in that isn’t going for the ball or is an unrealistic attempt similar to marking.

Remove below the knees rule, pay frees for dangerous play if players go too hard when someone is already there.

Fix the ******* HTB/prior rules, in a very congested game there has been record tackle numbers but most times players are allowed to drop the ball & someone else gets it to repeat the process. There was one game this season both teams had over 100 tackles, so 200+ and only a handful of HTB decisions. Come onnnnnn

With 3rd man up, the AFL was concerned that non-athletic talls would be forced out by smaller mobile talls. So ban third man up since a smaller player could occupy a ruckman an a third could come over the top.
Of course this makes the games rolling scrums but baby steps.

 

[Substance]

I know nobody cares but I'm considering just giving up on the AFL. It just seems that each year they want to make the game more complicated by adding more rules and conditions, instead of making it easier on umpires by rolling back useless rule changes and making the game simple again. I feel like we're going to end up with the cones of dunshire.

 

[DogDays]

I know nobody cares but I'm considering just giving up on the AFL. It just seems that each year they want to make the game more complicated by adding more rules and conditions, instead of making it easier on umpires by rolling back useless rule changes and making the game simple again. I feel like we're going to end up with the cones of dunshire.

Couldn’t have said it better myself. Anyone who knows me would be shocked that I’d feel like that but I’m just getting more and more annoyed when watching the game at the highest level.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Struggle]

I know nobody cares but I'm considering just giving up on the AFL. It just seems that each year they want to make the game more complicated by adding more rules and conditions, instead of making it easier on umpires by rolling back useless rule changes and making the game simple again. I feel like we're going to end up with the cones of dunshire.

Yep, I'm stuck between my love of the club and hatred for the league and the way the game is going.

 

[Spiritof82]

I hope we treat these proposed games like we treated the AFLX games

 

[VogonProsthetnic]

I think a major issue is Gil with his powertrips. More money involved in the game than ever before, but he just keeps ruining it. Demetriou had his critics too, but he did a much better job as the main man.

I’m in the no more new rules camp, but they need to fix what they have already brought in which doesn’t work. Our reward for winning the flag was changing a rule altogether that increases congestion, all because one or two ruckmen were jumped into from behind with raised knees.

Remove ruck nomination rule & throw the ball up straight away, pay a free against any player jumping in that isn’t going for the ball or is an unrealistic attempt similar to marking.

Remove below the knees rule, pay frees for dangerous play if players go too hard when someone is already there.

Fix the ******* HTB/prior rules, in a very congested game there has been record tackle numbers but most times players are allowed to drop the ball & someone else gets it to repeat the process. There was one game this season both teams had over 100 tackles, so 200+ and only a handful of HTB decisions. Come onnnnnn

The last paragraph sums up all that is wrong with the game ATM.

They should never have stopped penalising incorrect disposal. Anything other than a kick or handball is NOT legal. What is so hard to understand about that?

In the 80s and 90s no body would dare pick up the ball when about the be tackled. Now you pick it up get spun around, shrug your shoulder in hope of getting a free, then hand it to your mate who does the same thing.

Fix the f$$$$$ current rules before making up other ones.

 

[Yojimbo]

I remember in round one when about six fifties were paid for entering the protected area in the first game
only to see about six in total for the rest of the round. I think we play under different interpretations all
the time because there is a human factor in interpretation pure and simple. I think certain coaches
including ours are scared how opening up the game will hurt their game plans, especially the ones who
have unskilled workers and rely in essence on congestion. I for one am sick of seeing no players forward
of the ball and the blame game that follows players who either hand off the responsibility or are caught
cold. I would go further than the proposed changes, zones for me and no more eighteen man kick in
zone, lengthen the ground, sixty rotations make the coaches coach. FreeBevo

 

[Mantis Toboggan]

I can’t believe a top class sport is considering having teams in the same league playing under different rules.

Dead rubber or not, it’s just something you don’t do. Why not have them play tiddly-winks instead?

The powers that be constantly reference ‘the look of the game’. Can you get a worse ‘look’ than having games in the same league being played under different rules?

I’d call them a laughing stock...but that would imply people around the world give a shit about the AFL. They don’t. 90% of the fans are here in Victoria...and we’re certainly not laughing. We’re the ones invested. And we’re the ones having OUR game butchered.

 

[Northernsoul74]

I will certainly boycott these “games” if we’re involved. I reckon there’d be grounds for compensation on my membership from losing yet another game to attend as well. The afl would be pretty much admitting they are nothing games.

 

[Yojimbo]

We’re the ones invested. And we’re the ones having OUR game butchered.

As an older man who played early eighties I can remember the one on one contest and having an opponent not guarding
a blade of grass as part of some web. Players used to kick a hundred goals in a season back then and playing high had
a slightly different meaning. Like it or not the game has been butchered for years and is a hybrid of many sports.

 

[SonOfScray]

I will only attend to hurl abuse and voice my disapproval.

 

[BRWB]

Can I just say something? They want to trial starting 6 players forward, 6 in defence and 6 in the middle/wings for every centre bounce after a goal. Ok, but what about every other stoppage during the game? Most sides start with that set up give or take a man or two somewhere else, so how is this gonna stop congestion during the game? Players will just set up how they are now when it’s not a centre bounce. Pointless if you ask me. Surely they could’ve come up with a better idea than this?

Ever heard of boiling a frog slowly?

The 666 for goals is just a precursor to every stoppage (netball), as they will say the 666 needs to be implemented 'properly'.

Massive egos tearing at the game's fabric.

And hypocritical to implement any changes in regular season for shit games because these games 'don't matter'. Poor old Dean Bailey would be somersaulting in his grave.

 

[dergert]

Bring back the third man up rule and we will win the flag again