Opinion Shorter quarters

Remove this Banner Ad

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, 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.

Dunno man, the Dad's Army had no problem belting West Coast by over 15 goals a few weeks back.

Adam Simpson would have been praying for shorter quarters at half time

There are some games that just seem to drag on forever - shorter quarters would save us from a few borefests.

I'd certainly support shorter quarters if it meant more games and fairer scheduling.
 
Because they're too sh*t to actually win a full length game?

Dangerfield is making stupid anti-sport demands? Been doing it for the last 6 years. Just ignore the idiot and his stupid statements.

Capture.PNG
Capture1.PNG

All the PEDs in the world ain't helping y'all
 

Log in to remove this ad.

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.
Crikey, you may be onto something here…..hmm, let me see so if there is less time to play the game then the games are closer? Could it have some thing to do with less time to score means less scores. Why, if we had 5minute halves then it would be closer still!!
 
Would rather our coach and chief pimpernel kept quiet here, this is not the view of most Geelong fans so who are they speaking for?
Themselves. Which is what most in here are saying.
 
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.
Ridiculous take.
 
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
geelong want their dads army's tired old legs not to get so tired. there is literally nothing else to it.
 
They need to stfu and just focus on their own club’s performances.

How dare they have opinions!


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.

Not sure about that. If there were shortened quarters yesterday, Carlton wouldn't have kicked any junk time goals and the result would have been more or a blow out 🤷

Makes me wonder if the proponents of longer quarters have a lot of junk time performers, perhaps?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

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.

Problem solved play 30 second quarters, every game will be a thriller!
 
Only cucks and manlets want shorter quarters. If Dangerfield and Chris Scott 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?
Nice to see you think your own coach is a cuck and manlet

St Kilda's Brett Ratten and Port Adelaide coach Ken Hinkley also favoured the middle-ground quarter length, citing concerns over player durability

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.
geelong want their dads army's tired old legs not to get so tired. there is literally nothing else to it.
lol your own coach even wantes short quarters

Richmond coach Damien Hardwick urged the AFL to find a "happy medium" between this year's 20-minute periods and last year's 16-minute quarters.

"This year is probably too long but last year was too short, so I think there'd be a better fit along the way," Hardwick said.

"We're seeing a growing injury toll but it's probably always prevalent at this time of the year.

"We hope that settles down for not only our club but for all clubs. We want to see the very best players available."
 
Nice to see you think your own coach is a cuck and manlet

St Kilda's Brett Ratten and Port Adelaide coach Ken Hinkley also favoured the middle-ground quarter length, citing concerns over player durability



lol your own coach even wantes short quarters

Richmond coach Damien Hardwick urged the AFL to find a "happy medium" between this year's 20-minute periods and last year's 16-minute quarters.

"This year is probably too long but last year was too short, so I think there'd be a better fit along the way," Hardwick said.

"We're seeing a growing injury toll but it's probably always prevalent at this time of the year.


"We hope that settles down for not only our club but for all clubs. We want to see the very best players available."
Am I meant to change my opinion because of my teams coach?
Why would fans back the s**t opinions of those from the team they support lol?
 
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.

If we shortened the games to 2x 10 minute halves we could probably get the average margin under 10 points. Every game would be a thriller!

And, to increase scoring in the shortened games, maybe reduce the size of the ground and the number of players. I'm thinking maybe a shorter, rectangle shape (more corridor play), and probably 10 per side. Also chuck in 10 point supergoals as well. Those are definitely fun.

This kind of X-TREME entertainment would probably need to be highilghted further in the branding, of course. Something like X-FL springs to mind as really getting the message across.
 
If we shortened the games to 2x 10 minute halves we could probably get the average margin under 10 points. Every game would be a thriller!

And, to increase scoring in the shortened games, maybe reduce the size of the ground and the number of players. I'm thinking maybe a shorter, rectangle shape (more corridor play), and probably 10 per side. Also chuck in 10 point supergoals as well. Those are definitely fun.

This kind of X-TREME entertainment would probably need to be highilghted further in the branding, of course. Something like X-FL springs to mind as really getting the message across.
For each goal you’re up you have to remove a player from the ground.

1 goal up - 18 v 17
2 goals up - 18 v 16
3 goals up - 18 v 15
4 goals up - would never happen.
 
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
They want it because they're an old team and time is running out.

They got to a Grand Final in 2020 thanks to shortened quarters, it's only natural an old team would be desperate for them to come back.
 
Scary part of Chris Scott whinging about this is that his brother is a good chance of taking over Hocking's job
 
For each goal you’re up you have to remove a player from the ground.

1 goal up - 18 v 17
2 goals up - 18 v 16
3 goals up - 18 v 15
4 goals up - would never happen.

You seriously underestimate Carlton if you think that is the case.

Would be interesting though. Would Richmond keep Nankervis with Dusty when they hit 16 goals in front, or go with Riewoldt so Dusty has someone to kick it to out of the middle?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top