SANFL footy

[smoovy]

Is ugly

For a neutral supporter the last quarter of the preliminary final was horrid. There was interest because it was tight, but that was all. The game just degenerated into a stoppagefest.

When is the SANFL going to get their head out of the sand and stop thinking they are better than everyone else by persisting with this slack interpretation of holding ball the rule when it is dragged under a pack.

I know there will be people complain that the ball player doesn't get protected in the AFL by putting his head over the ball. But this is what happens when you don't apply a stricter interpretation of the rule, stoppage after stoppage.

To make matters worse the SANFL chooses not to apply time on when the umpire calls for the bounce. So there absolutely no incentive to move the ball on.

Teams averaged 77.7 points this year, to put this in perspective the lowest scoring team in the AFL (Richmond) averaged higher than this.

I went to 8 SANFL games this year and they were all the same. I used to think this was just a North thing, but after watching some of the finals it is league wide.

SANFL has received a lot of pats on the back the last few years for there almost perceived defiance of some of the AFL interpretations, but it is time they moved with the times. It seems ludicrous to have the same game where there is such a difference in interpretation of the laws of the game. Even more ludicrous is that we have players who have to play both AFL one week and SANFL the next and have to make the adjustment.

End rant

 

[Cap]

I guess everyone has an issue regardless.

For the last qtr was awesome real tough footy.

I'll use the old adage - a high scoring game is not always a good game.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Spot on smoovy

Didn't see today's game but I agree 100% with what you are saying. I hate the way SANFL footy is umpired, especially with regards to holding the ball. They never pay anything which means packs, congestion and shit football.

They also went through a phase of hardly paying any free kicks - and of course, everyone raved about how great it was that in the SANFL they let it go and didn't pay any soft frees... What everyone didn't realise was that by not paying free kicks it meant that the shit teams and shit footballers could scrag their way into the contest and drag the skillful players down.

Umpire properly please. The rules are in the book. Pay them. Umpire the shit players out of the game so that the skillful players can shine and we might see a team score more than 100 points one day, who knows.

 

[Cap]

so you would rather have the complete lottery that is AFL HTB than the more easily understood SANFL one?

your also asking for more umpire involvement when AFL fans are screaming for the reverse.

sorry you've lost me there.

 

[Powerade 08]

Quality post Smoov.

Don't watch a lot of SANFL, and usually turn it off once it becomes a stoppage fest.

For the last qtr was awesome real tough footy.

Theres a fine line between awesome tough footy and men playing pile on for 5 minutes with the ball not going anywhere. We saw both in that last qtr.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Teams averaged 77.7 points this year, to put this in perspective the lowest scoring team in the AFL (Richmond) averaged higher than this.

selective stats. Great

you brought up earlier in your rant that the SANFL doesnt have automatic time on for ball ups
that would be a contributing factor to this

SANFL quarters go shorter then AFL quarters due to that fact, probably around the 27 minute mark, if that is the case then a point is scored on average every 83.4 seconds

while AFL quarters would go around the 31 minute mark, the average score is 90, if that is the case then a point is scores on average every 82.7 seconds

so what 1 extra point every 7 tenths of a second?
wow, such a huge defferance to base an arguement on

also, leagues are based on cycles, teams try to stratergise to beat the premiers, the SANFL is currently going through a defensive stage, North flood, South flood, West flood, Norwood zone
next year North will change for the positive, and if Norwood get more players when they can recruit again, they may very well attack more, the SANFL will go up in the next few years

while the AFL is in a turnover point atm, some teams are trying to copy Geelong success with their attacking gameplans, while others are strategising to beat that gameplan, Collingwood and St Kildas more defensive gameplan has done that, the trend in the AFL will go the other way now, it will become more defensive with teams trying to copy St Kilda and Collingwoods gameplan.

I'll give it 2 years and the averages in score will be the same, but the SANFL will be more entertaining due to the fact that it is being done in shorter game time

 

[smoovy]

so you would rather have the complete lottery that is AFL HTB than the more easily understood SANFL one?

your also asking for more umpire involvement when AFL fans are screaming for the reverse.

sorry you've lost me there.

I don't find the AFL HTB a lottery. There are grey areas and there are always going to be dodgy decisions.

If you give me a choice between a few dodgy HTB and watching the ball in the umpires hands more often than lot, then I will take the former all day.

This is not to say you couldn't improve the AFL interpretation.

 

[smoovy]

selective stats. Great

you brought up earlier in your rant that the SANFL doesnt have automatic time on for ball ups
that would be a contributing factor to this

SANFL quarters go shorter then AFL quarters due to that fact, probably around the 27 minute mark, if that is the case then a point is scored on average every 83.4 seconds

while AFL quarters would go around the 31 minute mark, the average score is 90, if that is the case then a point is scores on average every 82.7 seconds

so what 1 extra point every 7 tenths of a second?
wow, such a huge defferance to base an arguement on

also, leagues are based on cycles, teams try to stratergise to beat the premiers, the SANFL is currently going through a defensive stage, North flood, South flood, West flood, Norwood zone
next year North will change for the positive, and if Norwood get more players when they can recruit again, they may very well attack more, the SANFL will go up in the next few years

while the AFL is in a turnover point atm, some teams are trying to copy Geelong success with their attacking gameplans, while others are strategising to beat that gameplan, Collingwood and St Kildas more defensive gameplan has done that, the trend in the AFL will go the other way now, it will become more defensive with teams trying to copy St Kilda and Collingwoods gameplan.

I'll give it 2 years and the averages in score will be the same, but the SANFL will be more entertaining due to the fact that it is being done in shorter game time

If you are going to acuse me of selective stats, then you can't go ahead and use these arbitrary numbers to make a point.

It doesn't matter how long quarters go for, it is the actual playing time that matters.

We know the AFL is 20 minutes of playing time, SANFL is 20 minutes less the amount of time the ball is in the umpires hands bouncing the ball at a stoppage. So then the SANFL has less opportunity to score, ok fair enough, but isn't that then part of the problem? The ball is spending too much time in the umpires hands. And I don't find it particularly entertaining (some may call it tough or brave) for a player to drag a ball in under the bottom of the pack and just sit on it.

In event the actual numbers are irrelevent, it is how entertaining you find the match and if you find it enjoyable then keep supporting the SANFL.

Back on the other point, and that is about consistency between the competitions. What actual onus is there on the SANFL to adopt AFL rule changes? That is, is the AFL not just running the leage competition, but is it responsible for the overall control and running of the game like a FIFA or FIBA?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

so you would rather have the complete lottery that is AFL HTB than the more easily understood SANFL one?

Granted, the SANFL one is consistent and more easily understood.

It's always a bounce. Always. Every time. Except for the really obvious holding the ball ones... in those cases the umpires think for a split second longer, then decide to bounce it.

your also asking for more umpire involvement when AFL fans are screaming for the reverse.

sorry you've lost me there.

As I said above, the fans don't know what they want.

They express their love for the 'let it go' SANFL style of umpiring without drawing the link with the dreadful standard of football.

They herald the 'exciting and breathtaking' football that Geelong have brought to the AFL the last few years without drawing the link with a 'more umpire involvement' style of umpiring.

 

[feenix67]

Too many people want football "their way". How about just going to the football to support your team, instead of expecting to be "entertained"? The current dour playstyles of some SANFL teams is far less frustrating to watch than much of the inexplicable overumpiring in the AFL.

Ive seen some fantastic free flowing games in the SANFL this year. Ive also turned off many AFL games due to a completely boring lack of a physical contest. Football is what it is, some games are a great spectacle, some less so. One thing's consistent though - the less the Umpires try to involve themselves in the game, the better it usually is.

 

[Cap]

Granted, the SANFL one is consistent and more easily understood.

It's always a bounce. Always. Every time. Except for the really obvious holding the ball ones... in those cases the umpires think for a split second longer, then decide to bounce it.

I'll argue to the cows come home that the SANFL interpretation so far is the correct one and is what the rule was designed for, not a quasi stopagge buster your proposing.

You could do the AFL thing, change the interpretation and have the HTB rule become a farce or perhaps amend rules that simply relate to stopages but the last thing I want is the only guy going for the ball to get done HTB 9/10 simply because someone sweated off him.

As I said above, the fans don't know what they want.

They express their love for the 'let it go' SANFL style of umpiring without drawing the link with the dreadful standard of football.

They herald the 'exciting and breathtaking' football that Geelong have brought to the AFL the last few years without drawing the link with a 'more umpire involvement' style of umpiring.

I think you also need to remember we are comparing pros to semi-pro/ametuers so what you call a dreadful standard (which has seen our comp win a majority of interstate games over the last 5 or so years) is most likely just the standard you get at that level.

 

[smoovy]

Too many people want football "their way". How about just going to the football to support your team, instead of expecting to be "entertained"? The current dour playstyles of some SANFL teams is far less frustrating to watch than much of the inexplicable overumpiring in the AFL.

Ive seen some fantastic free flowing games in the SANFL this year. Ive also turned off many AFL games due to a completely boring lack of a physical contest. Football is what it is, some games are a great spectacle, some less so. One thing's consistent though - the less the Umpires try to involve themselves in the game, the better it usually is.

Well I went to 8 North games this season and I am a full paid up member. I don't go there in the first instance expecting to be entertained, I go there to support my local team. However, I don't see why I can't comment on the standard.

I would think the first thing, before anything you would want to see is actual football being played. Not the umpire blowing his whistle and bouncing the ball.

What we may have then is two extremes in the interpretation of the rule, depending on your perspective. Maybe they should find some middle ground? I've argued possible solutions before here

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=18082623&postcount=74

 

[Macca19]

If you are going to acuse me of selective stats, then you can't go ahead and use these arbitrary numbers to make a point.

It doesn't matter how long quarters go for, it is the actual playing time that matters.

We know the AFL is 20 minutes of playing time, SANFL is 20 minutes less the amount of time the ball is in the umpires hands bouncing the ball at a stoppage. So then the SANFL has less opportunity to score, ok fair enough, but isn't that then part of the problem? The ball is spending too much time in the umpires hands. And I don't find it particularly entertaining (some may call it tough or brave) for a player to drag a ball in under the bottom of the pack and just sit on it.

In event the actual numbers are irrelevent, it is how entertaining you find the match and if you find it enjoyable then keep supporting the SANFL.

The SANFL just use the rule that the AFL used to use up until 3-4 years ago where it was at the umpires discretion when he called time off. Youll also find that there have been many complaints with the length of quarters in the AFL since time off is called immediately and there was talk earlier this year that they would revert back to the previous rule.

As for entertainment....i dunno....sometimes those ugly matches are the best to win.

 

[Dandy_GO]

The prelim was definitely an ugly game (though the finish was awesome, even though I'd have preferred the eagles to get up), but I don't feel that's true for the competition as a whole.
I really enjoy watching SANFL footy, and if I had more time to spare I'd head along more often. I have no problems with the way it's umpired - in fact I prefer it to the AFL in this regard. ****ing hate seeing all the bullshit 50m penalties and ridiculous HTB interpretations. I would still rather watch AFL simply because the skill level/athleticism makes for a better spectacle (though there are certain gameplans floating around that negate that), but I love the SANFL and rarely find myself as disillusioned by the officiating as I do at the top level.

 

[pjcrows]

The SANFL interpretation of holding the ball, namely not pinging the 'dragging it in rule', is absolutely perfect.

 

[smoovy]

The SANFL interpretation of holding the ball, namely not pinging the 'dragging it in rule', is absolutely perfect.

So you believe you should be able to just grab the footy and kill the contest without any fear of retribution?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

We complain about soft 50m penalties that are played but what it does allow is for someone to take a mark and to actually play on quickly. In the SANFL that doesn't happen. They get scragged, stopped, slowed down. Sometimes you might give up a 25m penalty but that is like a professional free kick. The time for your defence to flood back is what you were after, mission accomplished.

The hands in the back rule again cops heaps of criticism. Yet we now have some key forwards kicking bags of goals again after it was feared that the 100 goal forward was a thing of the past. The 'soft' frees that are paid in the AFL means that AFL defenders can no longer scrap, scrag, wrestle and hold a player down. In the SANFL they can... so the Ken Farmer Medallist finishes with 42 goals if he kicks straight.

Sometimes we see a tight tustle in the AFL where there are very few free kicks paid and the umpires let it go. These games often draw high praise from fans and commentators for getting back to the good ol' days. What people miss though is that these games are always close finishes. It is the result of the game that makes it exciting.

The games where Geelong or Collingwood (or even us last year) hit their straps are great to watch whether the game is close or not. They don't rely on a close game to retain interest. The SANFL does big time. It helps that teams only kick 7 or 8 goals per game. It means the games are always close. So it must be exciting, right? Great umpiring?

 

[feenix67]

The 'soft' frees that are paid in the AFL means that AFL defenders can no longer scrap, scrag, wrestle and hold a player down. In the SANFL they can... so the Ken Farmer Medallist finishes with 42 goals if he kicks straight.

Not one to let facts get in the way of a good story are you?

2000 A Richardson West 72
2001 A Richardson West 81
2002 D Hargraves North 68
2003 D Bradshaw West 88
2004 D Schell Central 63
2005 D Schell Central 67
2006 M Passador Eagles 79
2007 B Chambers Sturt 106
2008 B Chambers Sturt 97
2009 B Chambers Sturt 80

You need to go watch more games live. The game is about physical contests and the SANFL has plenty. Too many AFL games are played by teams intent on eliminating 50/50 contests. It's great to watch a game of SANFL footy and see the game played as it was intended. The umpiring's not always great, but at least they're not a bunch of princesses like many of their AFL colleagues.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Not one to let facts get in the way of a good story are you?

Ok... there are some good total there

Stand alone anomalies or am I just way off beam? How were the runners up / third goalkickers placed in those years? I had a quick look then and couldn't find the stats but I wouldn't imagine there would be too many goalkickers who had much more than 50 goals during an SANFL season.

You need to go watch more games live. The game is about physical contests and the SANFL has plenty. Too many AFL games are played by teams intent on eliminating 50/50 contests. It's great to watch a game of SANFL footy and see the game played as it was intended. The umpiring's not always great, but at least they're not a bunch of princesses like many of their AFL colleagues.

Granted that the physical contests are more prevalent in SANFL footy. And if you go down a grade again to the amateurs then there are even more 50/50 contests. If you go down again to primary school footy there are even more contests, basically just a pack of players following the ball.

 

[jo172]

The AFL is fast becoming the Hahn Super Dry or U2 of Australian Rules Football.

Football for people who don't really like football.

 

[MarcusP2]

Ok... there are some good total there

Stand alone anomalies or am I just way off beam? How were the runners up / third goalkickers placed in those years? I had a quick look then and couldn't find the stats but I wouldn't imagine there would be too many goalkickers who had much more than 50 goals during an SANFL season.

This year Grima, Chambers and another from Glenelg (Kirkby?) were duelling for the Medal until the last couple of rounds.