Tasmania Congratulations on Tassie License. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5

[Chief]

---

GO TO PART 2 of this thread:

Tasmania - Tasmania Devils, welcome to the AFL. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5 (Part 2)

Continued from Part 1: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/congratulations-on-tassie-license-mens-team-to-enter-2028-womens-team-tba-other-details-tba-3-5.1226653/ Was going to draft up a Summary but this is pretty good...

www.bigfooty.com

---

 

[madmug]

Does that have ANY relevance to modern AFL footy?

You just said about 16 a side!

VFA footy was 16 a side.

Didn't you know?

It was more open footy, good to watch.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

What if 16 per side makes the game worse?

Then we change back. But with a change of that magnitude, I'd trial it out in the state leagues first before adopting it at the top level. Maybe in the TSL or QAFL to begin with since it won't affect AFL reserves that way.

 

[The_Reaper]

Then we change back. But with a change of that magnitude, I'd trial it out in the state leagues first before adopting it at the top level. Maybe in the TSL or QAFL to begin with since it won't affect AFL reserves that way.

The state leagues deserve more respect than that.

 

[Kappa]

You just said about 16 a side!

VFA footy was 16 a side.

Didn't you know?

It was more open footy, good to watch.

So? Comparing vfa footy to modern afl is like comparing apples to Ferraris. The fitness, speed, kicking penetrstio, tactics, positions ect are so different its a completely different game

 

[Johnny Bananas]

The state leagues deserve more respect than that.

No they don't, unless they're the SANFL or WAFL.

 

[madmug]

So? Comparing vfa footy to modern afl is like comparing apples to Ferraris. The fitness, speed, kicking penetrstio, tactics, positions ect are so different its a completely different game

The difference then was more space, less packs, more one on one.

Its worth a preseason game or three doing this.

 

[Kappa]

The difference then was more space, less packs, more one on one.

Its worth a preseason game or three doing this.

The difference was you're comparing slow unfit amateurs to elite athletes who run over 10kms a game at very high speeds...

 

[madmug]

The difference was you're comparing slow unfit amateurs to elite athletes who run over 10kms a game at very high speeds...

No, I was comparing VFL to VFA style footy of the time.

I'm not sure it could make the game 'worse'.

It'd perhaps be something that could be trialled in a preseason comp.

 

[Dogs till i die]

The difference was you're comparing slow unfit amateurs to elite athletes who run over 10kms a game at very high speeds...

Those elite athletes you talk about are perfect types to exploit the space 16 a side footy provides.

 

[Kappa]

Those elite athletes you talk about are perfect types to exploit the space 16 a side footy provides.

Yea and the elite coaches will still find a way to stop scoring. Everytime a rule change comes there are unexpected outcomes, no one knows what will happen if the game becomes 16 a side.

 

[Rob]

Those elite athletes you talk about are perfect types to exploit the space 16 a side footy provides.

In theory maybe, but it also might mean more defensive flooding and with less players there's less ability to attack. AFLW is 16 a side and it can be almost impossible to transition, the ball just gets perma-locked inside 50. Coaches would rather drop all their players back and prevent scoring instead of opening up gaps inside their defensive 50 by moving players up.

Not saying it's not worth a go, but it's not like it's a no-brainer. The game could easily end up worse.

I remember Whateley crapping on about how 16 minute quarters will mean more scoring because in theory players will be able to run harder and score more easily. How wrong he was.

 

[Les Malone]

I remember Whateley crapping on about how 16 minute quarters will mean more scoring because in theory players will be able to run harder and score more easily. How wrong he was.

Less players over a longer time frame would see more scoring i would have thought, no idea how he came to that conclusion.

Or the same amount of players over a longer time frame.

shorter time frame means taggers stay closer for longer, more people able to get to the ball.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

In theory maybe, but it also might mean more defensive flooding and with less players there's less ability to attack. AFLW is 16 a side and it can be almost impossible to transition, the ball just gets perma-locked inside 50. Coaches would rather drop all their players back and prevent scoring instead of opening up gaps inside their defensive 50 by moving players up.

Not saying it's not worth a go, but it's not like it's a no-brainer. The game could easily end up worse.

I remember Whateley crapping on about how 16 minute quarters will mean more scoring because in theory players will be able to run harder and score more easily. How wrong he was.

What's the alternative? Going to zones? Minimum number of players in each half at all times?

 

[Tasmanian saint]

No they don't, unless they're the SANFL or WAFL.

What a ridiculous statement shows how long you have been following football for !

 

[Johnny Bananas]

What a ridiculous statement shows how long you have been following football for !

Well they don't, every other competition is a Mickey Mouse league, whether from the lack of money involved or their own infighting. Do I need to remind you how the TFL tore itself apart?

 

[BringBackTorps]

The NRL Penrith Panthers in 2017 established Academies (Bathurst, Dubbo, Forbes); allGR RL teams in the Central West have become Penrith-branded; & new, Penrith-branded, elite pathways etc. in the Central West of NSW, played NRL games there etc.

A Third Team In Sydney - It's Only a Matter Of Time !!

It would be nice if you don't try to enforce your standards on other people regarding playing poker machines and on the millions who play them responsibly within budget and means. My advice - don't go to a club that has them or support them if you don't like them and when you do manage to get...

www.bigfooty.com

(Go to my post #3375)

Penrith's move has widely been regarded as a major success, a template, for elite jnr GR RL development- & Penrith has begun to recruit into the NRL many more local (inc. Central West) jnrs.
(Previously, their local NRL recruitment was very poor- despite the Penrith District JRL having, by far, the most Regd. GR contact RL players in the world).

P. Gould was a major force behind the Central West Program, & improved pathways. P. V'landys wants him to join the NRL HQ on a part time basis- & adopt similar strategies, as an advisor, for the NRL Warriors in Auckland ie to increase NZ players in the NRL.

The AFL can learn a lot from Penrith's jnr successes (it obviously knows GWS' success re Draft nos. from NSW & ACT)- which would apply equally to Tasmania, & be even more successful, if Tas. had its own, 19th team. More Tas. Draftees- quality & quantity!

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Well they don't, every other competition is a Mickey Mouse league, whether from the lack of money involved or their own infighting. Do I need to remind you how the TFL tore itself apart?

I don’t think you would know a great deal about the tfl champ the reason it failed in the end was through continued gross mismanagement buy Afl Tasmania it was a powerhouse competition up until the mid nineties a couple of our bigger clubs at the time Glenorchy and Clarence were trying to leave and join the vfa due to the continued mismanagement

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I don’t think you would know a great deal about the tfl champ the reason it failed in the end was through continued gross mismanagement buy Afl Tasmania it was a powerhouse competition up until the mid nineties a couple of our bigger clubs at the time Glenorchy and Clarence were trying to leave and join the vfa due to the continued mismanagement

Right, and so they decided the better option was to tear themselves into 2-3 smaller leagues. And yet you still want the TFL to be taken as seriously as better leagues? Okay.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Right, and so they decided the better option was to tear themselves into 2-3 smaller leagues. And yet you still want the TFL to be taken as seriously as better leagues? Okay.

That was afl Tasmania’s decision to end the original tfl and put a state team in the vfl instead none of the clubs wanted it at the time our current state league is massively underfunded buy the afl who now run every thing down here they have put heaps into running that ridiculous obortion of a comp called the Neafl while we have been running on fumes the standard of the tsl is actually quite good considering our top team the northern bombers who have one the last five years would be competitive in any state league in Australia

 

[Walshawk]

Watching Footy Classified tonight both Caro and Ed spoke of the AFL Commission/Presidents meeting today and the opportunity for North to play between seven and 11 games in Tassie. Also said Saints are looking to play there again.
Assume the AFL will push hard for Hawthorn to exit, which explains why Kennett want to stay on as President to fight this. Does not sound promising for Tassie getting their own team.

 

[fargothegreat]

Watching Footy Classified tonight both Caro and Ed spoke of the AFL Commission/Presidents meeting today and the opportunity for North to play between seven and 11 games in Tassie. Also said Saints are looking to play there again.
Assume the AFL will push hard for Hawthorn to exit, which explains why Kennett want to stay on as President to fight this. Does not sound promising for Tassie getting their own team.

Nope not good at all. There seems to be a bit of a push now for less teams, so expansion is definitely off the table.

 

[Walshawk]

Nope not good at all. There seems to be a bit of a push now for less teams, so expansion is definitely off the table.

They also said that some clubs are looking at a review of the comp structure - Swans want less teams and are leading the charge - GWS, North and Saints mentioned.

 

[Kwality]

Nope not good at all. There seems to be a bit of a push now for less teams, so expansion is definitely off the table.

Within Melbourne footy circles, the AFL seem to think they will tell Tas where the sponsorship money will go.

Tas is in the box seat, its Tassie taxpayer money, they need to use the opportunity wisely to get whatever Tas wants.

 

[fargothegreat]

They also said that some clubs are looking at a review of the comp structure - Swans want less teams and are leading the charge - GWS, North and Saints mentioned.

I don't get the logic in having North coming down here to play 7 games and St Kilda maybe playing another 4. Between them, they'd be playing one team's worth of home games in Melbourne and one team's worth in Tas, so why don't they just merge and let Tassie have own team? They'd get bigger crowds in Melbourne for the same amount of games and Tassie would have a team they actually gave a s**t about.

 

[Tackle Bag]

In theory maybe, but it also might mean more defensive flooding and with less players there's less ability to attack. AFLW is 16 a side and it can be almost impossible to transition, the ball just gets perma-locked inside 50. Coaches would rather drop all their players back and prevent scoring instead of opening up gaps inside their defensive 50 by moving players up.

Not saying it's not worth a go, but it's not like it's a no-brainer. The game could easily end up worse.

I remember Whateley crapping on about how 16 minute quarters will mean more scoring because in theory players will be able to run harder and score more easily. How wrong he was.

There is very little to be learned from AFLW Match day tactical evolution that can be applied to AFL games. The ability of the players makes it virtually a different game (kicking length etc). I do not mean that as an insult to a AFLW. It’s just a fact that the ball movement is different.