Opinion Shorter quarters

[rubbers0ul]

Why do scott and dangerfield keep banging the shorter quarter drum?

No other clubs and individuals have been so vocal.

The spectacle of the 16 minutes last year absolved any interest I had. Blink and it’s 10 minutes to go. Get a lead, hold the footy and milk some time off the clock.

Scott complaining about having to play games close together, he was obviously never selected for state teams in the 90s when they would play a tues/wed then a Friday/Saturday; 2 games in less than 5 days. Otherwise for once, Eddie makes sense by starting the season earlier.

Do we fear shorter quarters are a formality when the perpetual complainers twin brother is the incoming chief of the rules committee?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[g_TRAIN]

Wish they would * off. The fans don't want it

On Pixel 4a (5G) using BigFooty.com mobile app

Edit:

Saw this on Reddit:

They are looking to gather enough data to petition the AFL not to change the length of quarters.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1S0T9XlxpZZ_qbvFpDvCPUheuMpsdeW3pAyyosR5uzb4/edit

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Because they're too sh*t to actually win a full length game?

Won 75% of full length games we've played this season.

 

[deck]

Dangerfield is all about extending his own career with short quarters and less games. As for Scott look at his list and there is your answer.

 

[WestCoast05]

I think we would all agree Dangerfield is all about Dangerfield.
He would take a Brownlow over a premiership any day.
He would also tinker with the game for his own comfort and benefit too.
As for Chris Scott

Chris Scott

Age

47

Ht

182cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.6

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.2

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

, the needs of his Dad's Army squadron are more important than the game itself.

Shorter quarters would suit my ageing/aged team right now also - but for the sake of the game I hope it never goes ahead.

 

[Jed Clampet]

Didn’t the dockers game finish 3 hours before Geelong’s game. So Freo are getting a whole 3 hours extra rest and have to fly back to Perth as well.
Where’s the problem

 

[schmuttt]

Has anyone ever asked Danger if he should be paid less for shorter games?

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

As we have all mentioned, it suites the cats and Scott with their age demographic for shorter games.

It’s not for the AFLs benefit or the fans and has never been an issue before. It’s purely an agenda for the cats hierarchy to push for their benfits.

Short games should only happens if the season is extended to 34 games (Still then I’m strongly against it). Home and away against everyone or keep it how it’s always been and stop complaining.

They will complain if the season is extended and continue to currently complain with the length of games.

Simple, don’t want to play or coach that many games, don’t play.

 

[Madas]

No way to shorter quarters !
Last year was s**t !
Get 3-4 goals behind and your done .
That’s not footy , it’s about the grind !

 

[PetterdHoisted]

So the AFL puts chip-mark-happy possession teams in the box seat with the rule changes this year, now Geelong want shorter quarters too?

they are just players and coaches, they do not own our game. Do your job, take your money from the game, move on.

 

[the harry]

People that get paid to watch games want it shorter, likely because it's less work.

I can't imagine too many fans want them changed.

 

[jpmelb7]

I posted this on other forum also - I'm actually gonna go against the flow & say shorten the quarters. My reasoning being the average winning margin last year was 26.22 points. The lowest it's been in over 50 years. Hence, shorter games = closer games. Less blowouts. I'd say 18 mins or 17 1/2 like they play for pre-season is ideal.

 

[Lsta062]

Has anyone ever asked Danger if he should be paid less for shorter games?

And the AFL + club membership departments charging less for access to shorter games? Pick the percentage to shorten games by and apply that to all prices and incomes relating to the game.

Let’s see if they are still willing to go with that. Not saying that they can’t keep everything the same price when reducing game length, but what‘s in it for the fans if there’s no change to access prices and what do the clubs + AFL + players give up?

 

[Lsta062]

I posted this on other forum also - I'm actually gonna go against the flow & say shorten the quarters. My reasoning being the average winning margin last year was 26.22 points. The lowest it's been in over 50 years. Hence, shorter games = closer games. Less blowouts. I'd say 18 mins or 17 1/2 like they play for pre-season is ideal.

But I like blowouts (except if it is against us of course). The games that get me interested to watch when I’m not already watching are tight games in the 4th quarter when the ramifications of the results are significant enough, and when a team dominates a match so much that the margin blows out to 100+ points. It’s like watching a team overlap another team in a race.

Shorter quarters ruin one of the elements I like about the game. The highest margin we saw last year was 75 or 76 points I think by Port Adelaide against Adelaide. Much more fun when we see teams score more in games IMO.

 

[juss]

I posted this on other forum also - I'm actually gonna go against the flow & say shorten the quarters. My reasoning being the average winning margin last year was 26.22 points. The lowest it's been in over 50 years. Hence, shorter games = closer games. Less blowouts. I'd say 18 mins or 17 1/2 like they play for pre-season is ideal.

10 minute quarters would make the margins even closer. How exciting!

I'm sure a lot of passionate footy fans want to see less goals, less highlights, less of the game they make an effort/pay to attend/watch.

 

[juss]

And the AFL + club membership departments charging less for access to shorter games? Pick the percentage to shorten games by and apply that to all prices and incomes relating to the game.

Let’s see if they are still willing to go with that. Not saying that they can’t keep everything the same price when reducing game length, but what‘s in it for the fans if there’s no change to access prices and what do the clubs + AFL + players give up?

You'd see a drop off in attendances, membership, paid subscriptions and enormous fan backlash.

No way can you cut 10-20% of the product and justify not cutting associated costs to the fans in some way.

 

[Sttew]

I think we would all agree Dangerfield is all about Dangerfield.

He is president of the AFLPA

 

[LordLucifer]

Why do scott and dangerflog keep banging the shorter quarter drum?

No other clubs and individuals have been so vocal.

The spectacle of the 16 minutes last year absolved any interest I had. Blink and it’s 10 minutes to go. Get a lead, hold the footy and milk some time off the clock.

Scott complaining about having to play games close together, he was obviously never selected for state teams in the 90s when they would play a tues/wed then a Friday/Saturday; 2 games in less than 5 days. Otherwise for once, Eddie makes sense by starting the season earlier.

Do we fear shorter quarters are a formality when the perpetual complainers twin brother is the incoming chief of the rules committee?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I have no problem with shorter quarters as long as all of the players & coaches have their annual salary reduced by the same percentage margin and the cost to go to a game is also reduced.

 

[Xtreme]

Hell to the NO

Shorter quarters makes the game worse, not better.


Just like Brett screwed Brett, Dangerfield is screwing Dangerfield by being a serial whingebag

Chris Scott just loves having a sook doesn’t he.

Loves an excuse too.
“we would have won if we didn’t have to play full quarters every week! Roof was closed too!”.

Wrong Scott brother!!!

 

[BF Tiger]

Until at least eight other coaches, nine presidents/boards and 400+ players agree this should go nowhere.

 

[beema limapep]

He is president of the AFLPA

An inherent blight on the game.

 

[Lsta062]

You'd see a drop off in attendances, membership, paid subscriptions and enormous fan backlash.

No way can you cut 10-20% of the product and justify not cutting associated costs to the fans in some way.

That’s going to be the big issue they’d have to deal with if they go down that road. I don’t think the average AFL community member will stand for that

 

[Madas]

Until at least eight other coaches, nine presidents/boards and 400+ players agree this should go nowhere.

Even if that happened, fans will / should cancel their membership.

 

[jwikked]

Only cucks and manlets want shorter quarters. If Dangerfield and Chris Scott

Chris Scott

Age

47

Ht

182cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.6

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.2

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

don't like the game they're involved with, they're welcome to leave and find a sport more in line with what they want.
Sick of these overpaid flogs trying to shape the game in their image.

Also, people who argue for a shorter season are scum just like those who want shorter quarters. What kind of bozo wants to advocate for less footy?

 

[Ticky009]

He is president of the AFLPA

But is Dangerfield speaking as president of AFLPA or is he speaking as a Geelong player? I can't find any clarity on whose behalf he's speaking for here. By omission, it seems to be Geelong.